Forced Arbitration On SOCKS! Purposely Difficult Opt Out Scam Explained
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 тра 2024
- 👉 www.smartwool.com/customer-se...
• How ABC Fitness & Best...
• LA Fitness' cancellati...
• Roku's Ransom: Agree t...
👉 techcrunch.com/2024/03/05/rok...
• Blizzard locks you out...
👉 Merchandise: store.rossmanngroup.com/memes...
🔵 Cheesy mugs & t-shirts: bit.ly/rossmannstore
👉 Rossmann chat: matrix.to/#/#rossmannrepair:matrix.org
👉 Equipment used:
🔵 Chair: ebay.us/uYLTzn
🔵 Chair: amzn.to/49ldfme
🔵 Blue Microphone: amzn.to/3g1hsok
🔵 Headset microphone: amzn.to/3TEO3BR
🔵 Mic stand: amzn.to/3Vg47ZI
🔵 Audio interface: amzn.to/3VuKihx
🔵 Camera: amzn.to/3CTk1Av
🔵 Lighting: amzn.to/3RSriGC
👉 Stream FAQ: store.rossmanngroup.com/faq.txt
👉 Affiliate:
› Buying on eBay? Support us while you shop! www.rossmanngroup.com/ebay
› Rossmann Repair Group Inc is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com
👉 Leave a tip for us via cryptocurrency if we've helped you out:
› Credit card: bit.ly/postamessage
› Bitcoin: 1EaEv8DBeFfg6fE6BimEmvEFbYLkhpcvhj
› Bitcoin Cash: qzwtptwa8h0wjjawr5fsm0ku8kf40amgqgm6lx4jxh
› Dash: XwQpZuvMvU44JT7C7Uh6xHvkSadzJw9fMN
› Dogecoin: DKetsoCvwa2hF29ssgUA4Wz4hxT4kj3KLU
› Ethereum: 0x6f6870feb48f08388ee345cf0261e2f03d2fa310
› Ethereum classic: 0x671bfd61ba87edf6365c97cea33d66ba73645510
› Litecoin: LWnbTTAjojZQt68ihFJFgQq3cYHUsTcyd7
› Verge: DFumZ5sMhi3JktLQpsTVtV9xUt3zKDrcZV
› Zcash: t1Ko3FkphQYoQroQc8k2DVk4WKMAbmNR8PH
› Zcoin: a8QdvArHmdRYe1MjiqtP6jDNe6Z4JgnRKZ
Timestamps:
00:00 - Intro
00:37 - It's not just the terms - it's how they're delivered
01:53 - AUTO OPTED IN TO CONTRACT VIA EMAIL!
02:35 - Must provide PRIORITY MAIL written notice - not just normal mail - to opt out
03:00 - They think they can opt you into a contract via unsolicited mail
03:18 - WHY THEY'RE DOING IT THIS WAY
04:05 - A term I want to become more popular
04:13 - Gyms do this all the time.
04:45 - Gym let me sign up online, but have to send certified mail to cancel.
06:44 - Continued ranting about CONSENT.
Why don’t you just email them something back and tell them they have to send you priority mail to opt out otherwise you’ve got 10% of their company shares
I am baffled how it can even be considered legal. In this country we have to have positive engagement of ANY changes to financial matters.
primo idea :D
If companies were required by law to do this, it's 100% guaranteed that an idea like this wouldn't have even been entertained.
Yeah sadly the courts just keep siding with the most draconian policies as it relates to arbitration and consumer rights in general. It's a joke@@saanon9334
@@saanon9334 its not legal and was probably written up by an idiot. In court this sort of waiver would get thrown out as there is no trackable way of verifying acceptance, it violates many anti trust laws. Terms and conditions must be negotiated between two parties, changing them requires acceptance by the other party unless you specifically granted them the ability to do so, but even then it must be a very narrow and specific amount of reasons which must be stated in the prior negotiation. For example business write up renewal or pricing terms which automatically give businesses the ability to perpetually charge you or modify the price of a service.
Forced arbitration should be illegal, I'm just going to say it
In many cases, they are.
@@wingracer1614 Indeed. Most people do not have the resources to fight corporations.
I guess not even half their agreements would hold up in court. They're just not getting sued with enough moneyyyy
Agreed but the government doesn't work for us!
Otherwise a lot of the things they do in EULAS wouldn't be legal period.
Nobody is willing to enforce it, just like illegal non-compete, non-disclosure, etc.
People seem to be concentrating on "difficult to opt out". Why not concentrating on "I never opted in. Show me evidence I did."
"Your email must've gone to my spam box and gotten deleted. I was never informed."
in the terms, using the app is an opt-in. stupid but it's how it is.
Yeah, they're socks, so it doesn't really matter. But if it doesn't matter, why'd they feel the need to put it in the contract in the first place? And if it doesn't matter, why make it so hard to opt out?
They gotta start somewhere, even if it's """just""" socks. Don't give them an inch, don't give them your damn socks.
Sure, they're socks, but what happens when the Sock Company starts spraying their product with DDT to stop insects from eating them in the warehouse and someone gets cancer, or its discovered that waste runoff from washing the socks poisoned the water table? Stranger things have happened, and when you try to sue them they try to force you into arbitration.
id bet the lawyers were like 'hey lets throw that in there too'
@@samtinkle9076 I'd argue that the fact that it's "just" socks makes it even more egregious. I once had a pair of socks where a loose thread started to cut the circulation to one of my toes. Thankfully, I'm not diabetic and could feel the circulation being cut and addressed it before I needed medical treatment, but somebody with poor circulation or neuropathy might have lost a toe.
No no, that's the wrong thought process. Why is there terms of service for SOCKS???????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's SOCKS!!!!!!!!! I'm too busy being SHOCKED by terms of service for SOCKS!
Forget the change in terms of service.
THAT is the problem with the world today and I don't know who is right or wrong here. Are there so many legal cases against clothing companies that they feel they HAVE to have terms of service?. I mean I guess I could see this for a company that's selling you very expensive clothing online where they make custom fit clothing.
So who is right or wrong here? Is it a consumer base that sues whenever they possibly can or a clothing company? If the consumer base gets SO crazy that they all have their own personal lawyers looking for ANY opportunity to sue, well, get used to a world where you make your own clothes because at some point companies can't make money.
What is a term of service for socks? I can only wear them for 12 hours/day 1x/wk?
Now, on the other hand the issue of having memberships or services such as TV services, gym memberships, etc..... where there are real reasons to have terms of service is a REALLY valid point. People ARE paying a bit of money on a continuous basis.
This is fine, but the buyer should be able to change their terms after the fact as well!
If I pay $100 for something, I should be able to decide 3 months later that a better price would be $70, and deduct 30 bucks from the company's bank account. It's only fair!
Yeah to bad we dont have an army of lawyers to fight said legal cases that will inevitably result from this kinda shit.
@@joelluedtke8680 What lawyer? Didn't the company get that email you sent that said all disputes were now being handled by the arbitration firm of "My friend Steve"?
@@MonkeyJedi99 yeah i even included "if you don't agree, signal it by refunding my product fully in 2 days. else it is considered accepted."
Yesterday I was on a news website (unfortunately forgot the name), and it stated that they had changed their privacy policy. There was only an Accept button and no link to read the privacy policy. This shit is just becoming too common.
It's EVERYTHING. People don't know. You've agreed to HUNDREDS of these terms changes in the past few years. Your car, your phone, your utilities. Check the contract. It's already there.
A website does that shit to me and I'm gone. Ain't nothing in the news I can't find elsewhere.
isnt that literally illegal?
@@KevinJDildonik It's worse than this - those agreements extend into third party contracts that you never even knew existed. Two examples; I got an email from "Stripe" that they changed their terms of agreement. Never heard of them. Emailed and asked who they were and what I had agreed to when - well, they tell me they are involved in all sorts of financial transactions with all the big players and in overly cheery PR speak, "have you ever used Paypal, Patreaon, Visa, etc. etc., you've probably used Stripes fantastic financial processing products with some company that interacts with us!" The second, when Adobe tried to tell everyone they couldn't use their Photoshop software anymore because ADOBE's agreement with a software company that made a component ran out; so you can't use your Photoshop anymore.
Not allowing you to read the terms before accepting is 100% illegal. And in fact because they do not allow you to see them, even clicking accept would be null and void, because the contract as not presented or available.
These companies still have to watch before they do some things, I think they are fucking up in a lot of ways.
Small nit - "implicit consent" is what they are currently doing. "Explicit Consent" is what should be required.
and whether there was a consent(even implicit) or not is debatable
I came to say this. Good catch!
implied consent is really just a fake idea fabricated by the courts to justify the rapey practice of allowing drunk people to "consent" to fake sobriety testing.
If I have to mail them anything, I'm probably just going to mail them all of my dirty socks.
God that's actually funny. 😂
I bought boxers from them last year... I should include them with the opt-out letter lmao
Why the hell does socks need forced arbitration? Judges are gonna be put out of work in ten years if this keeps up.
At least the court cases will be hilarious to watch.
Your crusade against all of this bullshit (Eula Roofie, Opt Out Scam, Forced Arbitration etc.) is needed and appreciated
This is extortion.
Change my mind.
Next time I need socks or a shirt I'll have to consult my brother who is an attorney.
Or purchase through a reseller as when I bought my socks a few weeks ago they didn't come with ToS or any of that BS. I simply paid my money and got my socks. And whatever happens if you buy socks and then donate them to a homeless shelter? Are you on the hook for their unauthorized uses?
@@SmallSpoonBrigade "unauthorized use of socks" my God wow.
it's absolutely crazy that that isn't even a joke anymore...
Extortion is obtaining money through threats. This is just large companies taking advantage of busy people by means of unethical business practices. Extortion is a crime. This isn’t a crime, unfortunately. It should be but it’s not. It’s just a gray area that no legislative body cares about so no law will ever be created and no judicial body will touch therefore no precedent can be established.
@@DragoNate It honestly is scary that we live in a world where a company has the chance to sue you because you sold your purchase to someone else.
@@JamesTDG no joke.
Honestly I thought "Socks" was some new fangled piece of electronics called "Socks." This literally is just about socks. Corps in the USA have literally decided to go scorched earth on the citizens. Citizens need to tell these corporations how it's going to be going forwards. I'm currently trying to get the opt-in features on my new Honda Vehicle turned off but all I keep getting is the run around by Honda and its dealers telling me they don't know anything about opt-in features in the car despite their EULA listing what they are. My last call to Honda I was on the phone for an hour. I am so sick of this nonsense,
Buy a car thats 10 to 15 years old
I thought it was the name of a company not literal socks 😂!
@@nobodykayaks1041 I had an 18 year old Subaru that I bought from new I was going to keep but unbeknownst to me the car had been slowly rotting away on the underside - its a known problem with Subarus unfortunately. The interior and doors, everything, looked awesome. I still decry every day I had to trade it in for this spying privacy invading pile of junk.
These TOS changes aren’t just scummy, but already open a wide range of legal problems: They undermine the principle that contract changes cannot happen unilaterally or retroactively. Depending on your jurisdiction they render the whole contract voidable because the other party can claim that they wouldn’t have concluded that contract in the first place under these conditions (regardless of any TOS paragraph that allows the company to change the EULA at any time as they please), which is why in countries with proper consumer protection laws you always have a special right of cancellation for long-term service contracts after every TOS change, regardless of the contractual period of notice. Furthermore, depending on the consequences you suffer from not agreeing to the new TOS we might be talking about actual crimes. Coercion is an indictable offence in many countries, and I’d say that patching the property of a customer they purchased and legally own in a way that it becomes completely unusable unless they “agree” is more than the “threat” required for it to be an offence.
In my country, forced arbitration by itself is unconstitutional because our constitution guarantees the right to not be removed from the jurisdiction of your lawful judge. While the constitution is primarily binding for the state and not for private companies or people, the state does have the obligation to create conditions so that constitutional rights are preserved, which is why e.g. anti-discrimination laws for employers exist. Forced arbitration does remove people from the jurisdiction of their legal judge, and by allowing that, the state would act in an unconstitutional way. That’s how several EU states view forced arbitration, and that’s why whenever I go through any TOS, there is always a big note above the forced arbitration paragraphs that this is “ONLY FOR US CITIZENS”.
What the hell is smart wool? I don't need my socks spying on me, they know too much already.
SmartWool, made by SmartSheep. (Logo is a sheep with a graduation cap and round glasses) "We specially pick the sheep we gently extract wool from by the results of hours of quality testing per candidate." (shows sheep being gently herded down a Temple Grandin chute, sheep at desks writing answers to tests, sheep endurance runs on treadmills with breath collectors over their snouts as coaches and white coated scientists hover nearby, sheep ascending steps to receive diploma...
now its called wokewool created by migrantsheep.
@@marckyle5895 LOL. There is something satisfyingly ironic about the mental image of well informed _sheep!_ BTW, I'm aware of Temple Grandin's work... nice touch.
@@likebot. I met her once :-) way back in the late 80s
@@marckyle5895 When I first heard of her, the person who told me about her didn't know her name. All he knew was that she learned drafting in an hour by just watching an architect make plans once. At first I thought he was making up stories, then a couple of decades later I saw a biography on Temple. He sold her short!
Not just mail, priority mail it to them. Like what kind of next level bs is that?
Send the email anyway and when you go to sue, bring this up as an objection when they try to get the case dismissed due to the "new" terms. Let the courts have some fun with this nonsense. I'd also email them and send a NEW updated terms that you create and say they can mail you a Priority mail letter (using the same verbiage) and see what happens. "Your Honor, I changed the terms - using the same methodology they did - and they didn't opt out in a 'timely' fashion."
It will be an expensive kind of court fun: people always agree to having the terms bait-and-switched on them - the companies never do.
Thank you Louis for giving us a list of companies that need to be boycotted.
Wake up. Check your inbox. Know how every company you've ever interacted with has sent you an update to the terms of service recently? It's all of them. Your car, your cable, your phone, EVERYTHING. Wake up fast. You're behind.
@@KevinJDildonik
I decided to check and found Life360 updates their terms of services on april 4th that includes:
"mandatory arbitration" and "Class-action waiver"
To their credit, they mention it in the 6th paragraph of the first page in capital and bold letters
Might be easier if he gives a list of companies which are still okay to buy products from.
@@sazikanebaldimor2386this is a really sad reality we live in is it not?
I really wish there was a site keeping track of these. It might get huge, but it is still there. We could at least bypass the most recent abusers.
I’m getting so fucking tired of companies holding my PAID FOR items hostage, until I agree to something I don’t want to agree to.
Corporations are completely out of control in this country and I’m not even sure how they can be reigned back in.
Write your congressman.
i think it can be done with enough people in positions of power wanting to truly do their jobs to the best of their ability, who can't be bought or fooled, but it takes so much longer to fix things than it did to frick them up, even if/when we do have those kinds of people around.. i guess be good politicians ourselves is the solution, or raise them ourselves.
Don't give 'em $$$ & let them go bqnkrupt.
With *this* administration?? They couldn't care less about consumers. In fact, they loathe us.
@@pavman42 They're not any better.
They call it an "agreement"? An agreement among whom?
Isn't opt-in reliant on explicit permission? Implicit permission is always nebulous
Wrong word, my bad
How many Nebulii have there been, in all the original Star Trek episodes combined ?@@rossmanngroup
@@rossmanngroup what is wrong is you should not trim the beard especially not like that because it doesnt follow the jawline you did it wrong and you need to do it again or better yet cease to do it other wise it peaces me off
@@alainportant6412 You better be either a barber or a man with an awesome beard to be saying this. LOL I've been called santa a few times now, so beard up. G'Day from western australia
@@rossmanngroup- Instead of reading a good book, Louis cuddles up with with a stack of TOS documents every night transporting him into the magical world of Forced Arbitration. hehe Man these companies SUCK balls!
This is literally criminal...and they keep getting away with it.
The laws are for the poor.
Behold the power of our legal system and nonviolence.
I had a dumb gym do the same "you have to cancel in person" when I called to cancel my membership after not going for a year because apparently using the phone or giving an online option wasn't allowed. In general I have social phobia issues and it's difficult for me to get out anywhere, also part of the reason I hadn't been to the gym, but this made me angry. Luckily at the time I was able to get a ride to cancel it and come back home even if it was a waste of time. It shouldn't be allowed.
*OLD MAN YELLS AT SOCKS*
LOL! In all seriousness, love you bro, you not old, you a sexy mofo, deal with it!
In germany, such a thing is actually not legal. You have to actively accept the new terms of service for them to be legally binding. If you do not do that, the previously agreed upon tos apply to you. In addition, Companies are required to allow the cancellation of a service over the same way, you initially obtained it. So you subscribe over a website, you have to be able to unsubscribe using the same website AND within a reasonable amount of clicks. They sent you the contract confirmation by e-mail? You can now cancel by e-mail.
This is something that happened recently in UK. Everyone was opt-ed in automatically to share all your private data with private companies "for research purposes".
Fortunately you just had to go on a website and opt-out by filling up a form....which probably stored your data for another research....
Many, many, many people do not understand or do not want to understand that PRIVACY is not SECRECY and they would just give it up for the mirage of convenience.
Scammy EULAs are more difficult to remove (near impossible) than labels, which is a disgusting practice of complete disrespect for your customers.
It makes me incredibly, *intensely* aggrivated.
I literally threw my Roku TV when I saw this garbage in front of me. Good luck trying to get me to agree to anything, Roku.
I strictly remember a legal case stating that doing nothing to be consent, but to disagree is to mail them in time, is not a valid method of consent. They would be legitimate grounds to sue because you cannot considered to have consented by doing nothing to object.
Louis: Just got a Terms Update on my HP Printer. My printer is blocked until I agree. Get this: Can't even *get* to the agreement I have to agree to through their link.
That's next level shit, now you have to go out of your way just to be able to agree to shitty new terms to continue using your product
Another reason to never use HP.
@@sneedchuck5477 Get your printers at the secondhand store. If they break, go all Office Space on it and buy another. Be sure you can still get refills.
Another reason to avoid HP like the plague
If you must use hp, do not connect it to the internet. Firewall the hell out of it. Replace as soon as possible.
This is reminding me of the whole Acerthorn nonsense that went down a while ago. At one point he mailed some important government figure a singular dollar, and in the accompanying letter stated that if the person kept the dollar and didn't mail it back then they agreed that they owed Acerthorn $1m or some nonsense, and when the million dollars inevitably didn't show up Acerthorn sued the person like he planned to. The case got thrown out because of course it did, but the fact that these companies are adopting the same mindset and actually getting away with it is ridiculous.
Blame the Supreme Court. They misinterpreted the Federal Arbitration Act to mean "corporations can just demand you not use the court system on pain of cutting you off from everything they own". This happened around the same time they were also defanging the Federal Elections Commission so that lobbyists could pour billions of """free speech""" dollars into elections.
I had LA Fitness sub in Saugus, MA back in early 2000, that I had to get a doctors note to opt out sent via certified mail. But back then we signed up at the gym not online! This has been a tactic used for a very long time. Now it's just gotten more sophisticated and easier to onboard.
Master plan:
1. Create any service
2. Manage to get influential people signed up.
3. Send them a notification each day that the policy has changed and that they can opt out of it if they certified mail you their rejection within 30 days, via certified mail mail to your non-existent office in Sudan. The change, just happens to contain the legal language of them consent to giving you 51% of all their fortune and give you the legal right to represent them in a court of law, together with a forced arbitration agreement.
4. Now they can't sue you, because your represent them, can't opt out, because your office is in a war thorn country and you can since you represent them, you can give yourself whatever else you want, because your good friend is also the arbitrator and doesn't see anything wrong with all this.
Step 2.5, buy stocks in some certified mail service since you're about to give them a ton of use.
Simple law: By any method used to change terms of service the same method must, at least, be used to reject such terms of service or respective changes. Additionally, a change in terms of service cannot prevent the user or purchaser from maintaining access to the service or product.
I'll agree. In addition:
1. If the company changes their ToS and the customer doesn't agree to it, then the customer should by law have the right to immediately cancel the subscription, and in the case of purchased software or hardware, get a refund from the company - *without* having to hit an "I Agree" button. (The refund is punitive to the company, with the knowledge that hitting them in the long-term finances - where it actually hurts - is the only way to get them to stop it.)
2. Summaries/lists of changes should be required to be available on the notification that the Terms of Service were updated, *without* having to open the whole 100-something page document, so they can't just go back to sneaking it in there.
3. Forced arbitration clauses in general should be required, by law, to include stipulations that the *customer* has a say in who gets to arbitrate. Or they should just be null and void by law across the board.
Yes, simply requiring the same components for any changes, additions or deletions from a contract to apply to updates and statutory damages would stop this rather quickly. This whole thing is a bit of a backdoor to being able to arbitrarily change the terms after the contract has been agreed to when the original contract was probably not even properly agreed to in the first place.
it's not quite perfect, because they can send you certified mail with the terms change in it, and you'd have to send them certified mail back. The cost of this might not be significant for a business like a gym to mail every customer, but many of them would still put it off because they'd have to pay to reply.
Companies need to provide methods to opt out or cancel that are cost-free to the user if they change the terms (either allow email, or send a pre-paid return envelope, or both) - nobody signing up to these services does so under the assumption they'll have to pay extra to cancel.
@@Ahdok1True, but then they would have to actually get your address for that and funny thing with registered mail: they cannot prove it was delivered if the address you give them is incorrect. But that can be alleviated by adding "..and the option to reject changes or alterations to terms and agreements from within a user's account management must be maintained and easily found regardless of method said changes were informed."
In some countries a term that is unfair can be challenged irrespective of the terms of the contract. In the UK we have The Unfair Terms Directive which was tested in courts and put into law via the Consumer Rights Act 2015, section 62 (plus s64, which gives some clarification). The main points of s62 state;
(1) An unfair term of a consumer contract is not binding on the consumer.
(2) An unfair consumer notice is not binding on the consumer.
...
(4) A term is unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations under the contract to the detriment of the consumer.
Yep, we can actually rely on good faith in a court. Who'd have thought!
Also find it funny when large US companies put out generic US t&cs in other countries. Probably wouldn't survive the first test case!
This needs to go viral. Many of Louis' videos need to go viral but this is short enough and on point enough to get the point across.
I think someone has to be doing something retarded in the video for it to even have a chance to "go viral", not to mention span over 10 seconds or so. We're hopeless as a society. :P
Thanks Louis for keeping everyone aware of the forced arbitration clauses.
I verified in the jurisdiction I live (Alberta) and the "Consumer Bill of Rights" clearly prohibits the forced arbitration. Now I know.
Still, there should be clauses forcing an easy process for consumers to get a full refund when we disagree with any changes to the terms and conditions. If it's easy for them to change the terms, it should be easy for the consumers to get a full refund.
If a company emails you any kind of contract and expect it to be legally binding that means that email IS legally binding. That means that if you send them an email instead of paper mail they should accept it, regardless of their demand. Any court should look at it that way.
Of course court process is even more expensive than certified mail, so fck it... But somebody should try it.
Also, terms of service are binding to both parties, right? So if company thinks they can modify them after the fact, shouldn't a buyer be allowed to do the same? I mean even before company initiates it? Like you buy a WiFi fridge and accept terms of service by setting it up, but immediatelly next day send them new terms of service with new terms. Like "if you use my data ill fck you up" or something...
My favorite forced arbitration is:
"Terms and conditions"
-"Yes."
-"Yes, but in yellow."
This kind of shit needs to be made illegal! The FTC needs to get their collective heads out of their asses and start doing the Jobs they're paid to do and Protect Customer Rights.
This is informative but unfortunate.
Most of his videos are!
Really, the thing is to avoid buying any of the products that are listed until the companies do better. That being said, sometimes going to a store you despise and only buying loss leaders can be even better.
Personally, I'm not sure that I'll buy another Roku as a result of their heavy handed ToS update, I don't really need to as there are a bunch of SBCs out there that can do more or less the same thing these days.
Tell them that to invoice you every month they have to agree with your term of service.
Heads up - Discord sent a Forced Arbitration update. USA only.
Makes me wonder if this is a USA problem that should have its law overturned.
I've had to opt out of their damn arbitration 3 times already.
It honestly should be illegal. And is a law loophole that should 100% be patched. Forced arbitration is really predatory.
I ordered a musical instrument the other day and they had the same non-disclosure type agreement. Socks and violin's Outrageous!
Contracts and EULAS are only for rich people. Contracts are ways to abuse poor people.
Think about it, a guy working as a manager at a grocery store can't enforce a contract in his interest, but the other party with money can breach the contract and enforce their interest because they have the money to sue.
So, with this opt out letter, just send them a letter to opt out via certified mail, then, in the letter saying by accepting this letter, signing for it, they agree to pay you 20,000 dollars a month for the next 80 years.
Then send them a bill.
Then send them to collections.
Oh and give them an opt out option that requires them to physically show up at your house only on Sundays during a specific time. Make sure you aren't home, but if you are, require extremely complex rules like dress, where they must step in your house, how many steps they can make in your house, let you imagination run wild, and if they fail at any one of the rules, they void their one time chance to opt out and now owe 100,000 a month.
In court, tell the judge if they can opt me into things like this, we can do it as well.
Nah, stick to the same requirements that apply to them, so that way you can tell a judge "They should not be allowed to get out of something that they themselves said is a legitimate binding contract."
The price of the priority mail could be more expensive than the socks.
You’ve obviously never bought a pair of SmartWool socks, they’re far and away my favorite socks, but damn they’re pricy
@@_wanderingrocks_ weird flex but ok
@@_wanderingrocks_dumb. Smartwool socks cost like $10-12.
Also darn tough is better in every way.
@@spartanboostswasn't meant as a flex, just a joke about how pricey those socks are, but they're so dang comfy (and I'm on my feet all day so it makes a big difference
@@_wanderingrocks_ Try Minus33 socks. I'm not an employee, just a happy customer who switched from Smartwool.
I lost it when you said "Forced Arbitration with... socks!" 😅 Your face tells it all . This shit is ridiculous.
I agree with you 100% EXCEPT, just for people who ever want to mail things: you don't need special stamps to send Priority Mail or Certified Mail. You can simply use multiple normal stamps, enough to reach the necessary value. (You DO need a Certified Mail slip, or you need to use the self-service kiosk for Certified Mail). Again, this is no way invalidates all your other points. I'm just writing this because people who aren't as old as dirt like me don't know the various ways to accomplish things with the USPS without waiting on line for 30 minutes while someone at the counter tries to decide which pretty stamp to use for their wedding invitation.
They probably do it because they know zoomer normies like me will never step foot into a post office unless a receiving shipment gets lost
Saving this
And that's the problem right there: if it cost you nothing to change the terms, it shouldn't cost me a single penny to opt-out! I don't care how much the USPS charges; I did not agree to THOSE charges in your prior policy!
@@commentinglife6175 Again my comment has NOTHING to do with how wrong this all is, it has to do with educating people about easier ways to deal with the USPS in everyday life.
@@ventilate4267 I have to get on line monthly for a particular thing that cannot be done any other way. I DREAD it, less because of the staff and more because of the other customers who - due to not being experienced in decades of mailing - go to the window with what should be a simple task and having it take 20 minutes.
Gyms are required by law now to accept cancellation requests by email in NYS. I canceled my Planet Fitness membership this way.
This law was passed in 2020.
wtf is in the EULA for socks? It's a piece of fabric ffs!
limited license to wear fabric purchased from me lol
Gotta repair them at an approved service center; it is illegal to transfer them another person; you agree to "news & exclusive offers" being sent from their "partners" on a daily basis!
I had music playing in the background and it fit almost perfectly. how did society end up where socks have a T.O.S.? oh... right.. the "who cares? if you don't agree, don't use the service" argument
ive discovered what i want to do if i ever won the lottery.... sign up to a bunch of these services, and hire some high powered lawyers to start costly lawsuits proceedings when they inevitably send me these terms and conditions changes.
both for the companies AND any agents of the companies i might be dealing with (like the gym desk officer that signed me up to the gym, who would have said to my face that i can quit any time but failed to mention that it had to be in 30 days of my membership expiring via registered mail, there is an exit fee and if i don't i will be automatically signed up for another year)
my aim would be to become the worst and most annoying legal speed trap.
I was crossing my fingers that the company wasn't going to be Darn Tough. Great socks! I'm not surprised Smartwool pulled this move.
i love darn tough.
I've gotten so many emails from several companies about this thing. It's getting really annoying, man. Thanks, Roku for starting this garbage.
Also, WHERE IS OUR GOVERNMENT????
I'm sorry you're having trouble with US GOVERNMENT. Your GOVERNMENT is currently busy campaigning, and can't make it to the REAL ISSUES right now. Please realign your priorities to whatever the media distracts you with until each of the 2 real candidates get done blowing like $4,000,000,000 each to become the most powerful human on the planet.
Thank you for your patience, I hope you have an indoctrinated day.
Corporations: "I believe you mean OUR government."
@@spacedbro Our? You act like us paying thousands of dollars for communital ´taxes´ and them paying politicans to rape children gives us equal share in government
Our government hates us. Which is specifically why we don't have any real consumer protections in this country.
The government is in the pocket of capitalist mobsters, ready to pounce on you if you abandon nonviolence
Hi Louis. At 6:56 the word you were looking for was explicit 👍 Have a nice day
that meme came from your phone call with nyc "very important government official who 1000000% knows what he's doing and what his job entails"
I would love to see a lawyer react to this video. I highly doubt this is legal. If it is then sh*t is broken.
🇺🇸
why are we not able to link a petiton to the govt to make a law or amendment to stop this kind of nonsense im sure it would be heard thoughout the tech world alone
Nonviolence will not work in this era of mobster capitalism.
To me, the thing that makes this even worse is that it is completely obvious from a legal standpoint that these "binding" agreements are not at all valid contracts. If you had the time and money to go to court after violating something in these agreements, you should win.
The problem is that these companies know that absolutely no one will ever, ever try to go against them in court. The are abusing the expense of the legal system.
Bad socks can shred your feet, fyi. The reason we use wool socks in boots and not cotton is boots do not breathe as well as shoes and when cotton gets soaked it will actually start shredding your feet like sandpaper. Not necessarily an issue all the time but an issue for hiking, military, etc.
If 'terms of service' are considered a contract, then one party to that contract cannot change the terms without consideration to the other party. Without that, the change in the contract isn't valid and the original contract holds. If 'terms of service' are not a contract, then it seems like none of the terms can be enforced, including forced arbitration. Given this, maybe the companies are trying to give the impression of a barrier to lawsuits where none actually exist.
Louis, perhaps getting a contract lawyer on your channel to discuss this might be useful and/or educational.
To be fair, socks, or literally anything for that matter, could contain nasty chemicals if the manufacturing company decides they don't give a shit. It's still a potential health hazard, not just principle.
@GHOSTSTARSCREAMM
But then, any company selling such a product should go like: "Hey, everyone hates mailing lists. You know it, we know it.
But wouldn't you like to know if there is a safety hazard on your foot within the first n months of purchase?
You can opt in or out for our summer sale newsletter, but we strongly recommend to push that agree button, ok?"
Or something along those lines.
So everybody reading it knows what their data is used for...
Right?
This is a way for any business to get away from the law. The right to use the legal court system shouldn't be disposable by any means.
Please never change and never give up Louis! We need more ppl like you and you are one of the ppl who need to be backed up!
The Supreme Court needs to rule against forced arbitration and allow private citizens to sue any company that perpetuates that against their customers.
You know a man is going insane when he has been shaving for his entire life, but suddenly stops shaving.
When you discover that your razor manufacturer has an arbitration clause...
I had to factory reset a Google home mini yesterday and when trying to set it up again it hit me with the forced arbitration agreement. I looked into how to opt out and it requires that I go fill out a form that requires the serial number. The serial number is located on the box of the device that I've had for nearly 4 years. I can't opt out of the forced arbitration agreement.
Oh and also it's per device
Huh , that's weird. Usually the serial number is placed directly on the device itself - have you tried looking for it ?
PS. Google says it's located on the bottom of the device on the outer edge.
@@Cymes negative. That's the newer model of mini speaker.
More often than not, these ridiculous terms of service are not even legally enforceable. However, it will take a lawyer to get around them. That is their game. The average person does not have the patience and know how of putting them in their place. They will point to the TOS and convince you that you have no option (a lie). If you file suit, they will use the TOS to have the suit throw out. You can respond to that request, but you need to know how to. IN short... you need a lawyer and they are expensive. Often more than what your damages are.
Unless, of course, enough people are getting screwed that it reaches class action levels. Then those TOS get tossed out the window. Even the part about customers not being allowed to file class action suits.
I couldn't agree more! These companies need to lose customers!
SiriusXM does this shit, too. You can change plans, add vehicles, create an account all online. Wanna cancel a vehicle or service? You must call them. This is the era when disposable CC numbers are gonna shine...
Since the government allows it and consumers don't care enough, companies would be dumb not to do forced arb. Its going to take making laws against forced arb for it not to be part of everything we buy.
Mass arbitration is an effective counter-step. It doesn't matter if the payout is shit - they have to fork out over $2000 every time someone takes them to arbitration.
@@arthurwintersight7868 Do they? I thought this was the thing arbitration was meant to save them from.
@@GrumpyDerg - Arbitration stops class action lawsuits, and limits the payout per case to a level that it's not worth it for most people. That is, until a lawyer decides that 20,000 separate arbitration cases have near identical circumstances, so they slam the company with 20,000 separate arbitration cases at $2,000 a pop on their end, and then they have to pay out attorney fees and the verdict itself on top of that.
Lets see if their forced arbritration holds up after i file my lawsuit in a real court.
Love what you do man please never stop. Love the south park reference also 👌🏽
I'm not agreeing with forced arbitration at all, and in a perfect world this would be illegal. However, the wheels of justice move extremely slow, and the absolute bare minimum that should be enforced is - if a company can enforce a policy thru email, their website, their software, etc., the end users should ALSO have the right communicate and deny agreement using the same mode of communication. So if a company can send an email with updated terms of service, the end user should have the right to reply to that email and opt-out.
This should be the absolute bare minimum allowance by law. At what point do lawmakers actually side with the people who vote them in?
I'm going to go out on a limb and say it, it's not about someone suing them for the socks, lack of quality, etc. Give it a few weeks, and I'd bet they come out with a story of a data breach, and they weren't storing personal information securely, just my opinion, but would not surprise me in the least bit.
So timely ie USPS doesn't deliver it on time or they don't open it on time no luck?
Remember the McDonald’s hot coffee lawsuit? Yea companies want to avoid that
What they are doing in their legal agreements is like hiring a security guard to protect your Chasity only to disappear when a bad person shows up and you get screwed
Its also in some cases like they are wearing a special toy and begin servicing the account only to leave once they are done
Nothing more annoying than buying socks only to find out they are all left feet when you get them home.
Beard is back lol
In order to opt out please solve the following math equation:
y=limn→∞(∑m=1n1m−log(n))
Welp, time to divide by zero.
Funny. At first I thought he spent $1500 bucks on an exotic pair of Vicuña or Cashmere socks from a bespoke 'made to measure' atelier on Savile Row... now I understand that "complication" is no longer reserved as a description for expensive watches.
The tides will turn when these companies realize their future sales start to decline and they can't figure out "WHYYYYY"?
To be fair, it's too soon for their behavior to be this way. Small businesses still exist.
Right now the best way to cancel your gym membership is to complain that a man is in the women's bathroom and that you don't approve of it. Planet Fitness will instantly delete you.
Thats gold right there...😂😂😂
But I'm SURE they'll keep right on charging you..
@@lvsluggo007 sounds like an easy lawsuit to win
I used to work at a gym. Let me tell you a horror story. I was in the laundry room when the assistant manager arrived giving a new employee a tour of the gym. Within 30 seconds later, a front desk worker showed up telling her a customer wanted to cancel her membership. I offered to continue the new employee's tour for her and she told me she'll continue it. 30 minutes later, she told me to give the new employee a 2nd more detailed tour. "The cistomer is never right" -my narcissistic psychopath manager
To be fair. She chased and imprisoned me on my last day I worked there. If you ever sign up for a gym membership, check for manager narcissism and psychopathy. My God, that assistant manager I worked for is the most vile person I've ever met. She has no remorse for lying and a salting
Just workout at home. Gyms aren't even needed
@@philosopherkingzant2037 Try again, your comment made absolutely no sense whatever. What was the point, in one sentence please.
Nothing stops a customer from sending a notification to the forced arbitration company expressing their rejection of forced waiver to their right to counsel and right to litigation.
6:28 Wow, blast from the past. Wasn't that the guy that got all bent out of shape because you used an easily removable sticker to keep track of which device belongs to which customer and on this one occasion someone forgot to remove that sticker before sending back the repaired device?
This is absolutely absurd. Corporations get away with daylight robbery in the USA. None of this is legal in Europe, consumers cannot be required to surrender their statutory rights and any contract term which claims this is automatically voided.
Thank fuck that I don't live in the boring dystopia that is the US.
I'd tell them that I, from now until the end of time, wholeheartedly, unequivocally and irreversibly disagree with all their terms, codes and licenses including their forced opt-in and give them the ultimatum:
1. *Delete my account and everything attached to it and never speak to me again* OR
2. Face legal repercussions for forcing upon me a forced arbitration clause.
Remember: these forced arbitration clauses only apply *if you agree* : They may say that you automatically agreed to these new terms and services, but unless you directly and unequivocally agree to these new terms, you have *every right* to have your account erased.
Also, consent can be revoked, as can agreeing to an EULA. If, at any point, you change your mind and disagree to an EULA, you have every right to have your account erased, and for this EULA to no longer be binding.
Also, when I say you have every right to have your account erased, I mean *only you* have the right to have *your own account* erased. No-one else can erase it unless it's stated in the EULA and you agree to it.
This video made me realize a good counterpoint. My family uses a HP printer, I have offered them alternatives, given them reasons as to why their business model is scummy, but to them it’s convenient. This stuff is only convenient when signing up. 2 minute sign up, 4 hour cancellation. This is bull
Keep em coming my dude!!!
THIS DEALS GETTING WORSE ALL THE TIME!
Pray the suits don't alter it any further.
Somebody get this man a razor! Or a cowboy hat...
6:28 The super-glued “impossible to remove” catastrophicly sticking stickers.
They are Vogons! "Vogons are one of the most unpleasant races in the galaxy - not evil, but bad-tempered, bureaucratic, officious, and callous." They won’t honor a request without it being sent in triplicate, queried, sent back, buried in soft peat, and recycled as firelighters. Oh, and then there’s also a bit about "finding it in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.’"
"well, i mean... She didn't say no, your honor."
Me just walking down the streets of Whiterun... City Guard: "Let me guess-- someone stole your Smartwool®"
Louis telling it like it is with no words held back
This is why I subbed you!
They want you to mail it so they can say it got lost in the mail.
The FIRST person that sues, negates all of the money they saved
Come from a family of Smartwool fanbois. We have subsequently left the reservation on account of declining quality. My newer Smartwools are more worn out than some of my older pairs. We switched to Darn Tough in case you're still in the market for high quality hiking socks.
This is the answer, switched to darn tough years ago, the only smartwool stuff I buy is through 3rd parties when it’s over 50% off.
1:53 Apparently that's okay? No, it is not. People need to stand up to this crap.
Right on!
Thanks for reminding me. I'm out of stamps.
I think I remember something that sounded like this when I was a kid. You would get some junk mail in your post, something like "jelly of the month club" or something stupid. It would say you have been signed up and need not do anything and to reply back to cancel. Most people would throw the envelope in the recycling without looking at it. Then months later they would get a bill. I think they passed a law against that.