It’s taking away a cheaper option for users to get results for their complaints. Now you have to pay legal fees and go through a court, making it less accessible to the average user.
Calling arbitration a kangaroo court will just insult australians. Compared to arbitration even judge Krivoruchko will be more fair it. And he is Putin’s pocket judge.
Arbitration is overwhelmingly resolved in favor of corporations. The company pays the arbitrator, which means they will generally rule in their favor if they want to continue to be hired. Complainants get a fraction of the amount of money they’d get from a court case from arbitration, and it keeps the public from knowing what the company did. That’s why so many companies are trying to force arbitration clauses on consumers.
It’s speculated that the reason why Steam backed down from their clause in this case is that it was getting too expensive for them. Paying so many individual arbitrators and lawyers was costing them way more than resolving a single class action lawsuit. Hopefully more companies are forced to come to this realization in the future.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
This is bad, no?
It’s taking away a cheaper option for users to get results for their complaints. Now you have to pay legal fees and go through a court, making it less accessible to the average user.
Calling arbitration a kangaroo court will just insult australians. Compared to arbitration even judge Krivoruchko will be more fair it. And he is Putin’s pocket judge.
Arbitration is overwhelmingly resolved in favor of corporations. The company pays the arbitrator, which means they will generally rule in their favor if they want to continue to be hired. Complainants get a fraction of the amount of money they’d get from a court case from arbitration, and it keeps the public from knowing what the company did. That’s why so many companies are trying to force arbitration clauses on consumers.
It’s speculated that the reason why Steam backed down from their clause in this case is that it was getting too expensive for them. Paying so many individual arbitrators and lawyers was costing them way more than resolving a single class action lawsuit. Hopefully more companies are forced to come to this realization in the future.
Edit: Article about why they may have removed the clause TL;DR Valve doesn’t want to deal with 50,000 separate court cases at one time