So, the play here is to get everyone who agreed to the app to file a binding arbitration suit against McDonalds for wedging a binding arbitration clause into the app.
They have to respond to it and it will cost them a lot of lawyer time and money.
this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2023
882 points (100.0% liked)
196
18049 readers
1054 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
Other rules
Behavior rules:
- No bigotry (transphobia, racism, etc…)
- No genocide denial
- No support for authoritarian behaviour (incl. Tankies)
- No namecalling
- Accounts from lemmygrad.ml, threads.net, or hexbear.net are held to higher standards
- Other things seen as cleary bad
Posting rules:
- No AI generated content (DALL-E etc…)
- No advertisements
- No gore / violence
- Mutual aid posts are not allowed
NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.
Other 196's:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Omg I dream for a day of class actions bringing down companies and I'm not in law I promise
Ain't no way something like that could actually hold up in court. But I guarantee McDonald's lawyers could fucking use it to delay shit and just hold up people for way longer than people want to invest time into.
“It’s a simple, but powerful, spell”.
Could never hold up in court... If you pay for a decent lawyer
You'd be surprised
Ain't no way that shit is legal, right?
In the United States, multi-national corporations have try really hard to be on the receiving end of consequences.
Like maybe kill more children than the Joker via contaminated food. And then, still, it'll be a meager fine.
load more comments
(2 replies)
I wanne see them try that in Germany so they get fucked even harder than if they normally had a lawsuit on their ass
If something in a contract is in violation of federal law, then that section of the contract is null and void.
It's a big reason why my boss is free to have me sign a contract saying that he is allowed to execute me if I don't clean the floor well enough to his liking, but if he actually tries it he's not only doing some time, but this contract means that he is absolutely the primary suspect.
Exactly! In-alienable rights
surely not even an American judge would uphold that, right? Surely
Brett Kavanaugh: "Hold my beer."
I don't think I was more disgusted by Donald trump, then when he apologized to Brett Kavanaugh for the allegations, and stated, falsely, that an investigation was done and his name was cleared. When no such thing happened.
Again it's amazing, the world would be such a wonderful place if the same standards the poor were required to live up to we're all so the standards that the rich were required to live up to.
If during a job interview, I cried and started ranting incoherently about how much I love beer, they would likely have me escorted out by security and be left wondering if they should call the cops.
Actually this is one of the instances where America law proves that Justice is at least somewhat of a concept, I mean holy shit we're not Japan. No seriously look at how they do Court over in the Land of the Rising Sun.
Japan has a 99.9% conviction rate, how many of you people knew that the Phoenix Wright series was actually intended as a scathing critique of the legal system of the country it was made in?
If something in a contract is in violation of state or federal law, then that provision of the contract is null and void.
There have been many instances of companies saying that you don't have any rights because you sign them away in the licensing agreement, only for a judge to turn around and call bullshit. The preceddnt is basically cemented in stone at this point.
Let's recall that the SCOTUS overturned a major precedent not so long ago. Precedent is not rock solid anymore.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
This would make they pay more for a lawsuit in a country that takes consumer protection seriously, lol. Samsung had to pay me 5k(35% to the lawyer) because they refused to deliver a fridge on my apartment. They delayed the delivery, had me hours on hold, insult and tried to fright me whenever they talked to me. The fridge was 4,5k and it got done within 10 months. So good luck to Mac Donald's.
Wtf was their problem to begin with?? What was their business plan? Sell an item and keep it?
Something something they don't go past the 3rd floor, but my address the whole time was 5th floor. The delivery was 2 weeks late and the delivery guy knocked on my door asking if I was going to carry the fridge, even though I had paid them to do that.
To anyone else reading this, avoid Samsung appliances because they are total shite
Here, the government has a service that you go to and somebody tries to solve the issue for you (like a costumer support). The lady called Samsung, they had her on hold, and then returned basically saying "sue us". She was surprised because the companies tend to reason when the government service calls to solve the issue, because the next step to solving it is a lawsuit. It was a journey with Samsung.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
How are they even going to prove a specific person agreed to these terms or even used their app?
Using the app forces you to log in (via email or similar). And that can be backtracked to you if you're not careful!
The last time I checked, they didn't even require clicking any confirmation email. Every time I visit a McDonald's I reinstall their app and just create a new bullshit account with a temporary email which I don't even need to check. For all they know, you might have created an account with my email and agreed to the terms (just an example). It's unenforceable on so many levels I'm dumbfounded.
load more comments
(3 replies)
like how the fine print is that you also have to buy something to get free fries
Have you ever been a successful plaintiff in a class-action lawsuit? Those fries are worth more than you would have gotten.
Resident of Illinois here, I got $450 from Facebook, and $100 from Google for Biometric violations.
load more comments
(8 replies)
Imagine anyone unironically swallowing down that pig swill
Actually I used to and can confirm how disgusting and worthless it is. It's not even worth it for the free fries. You barely get any "meat" on the burgers; they're mostly bread and iceberg lettuce which is actually bad for you too.
Even the fucking donuts I eat are better than that disgusting trash. 🤦
Oh, and here's the kicker: the only demographic that eats there consistently is the extreme poor who are unlikely to understand terms of service and contracts, and these deals are designed to exploit them. They, I feel bad for. Anyone who has money and chooses to waste it on that lukewarm basura deserves the suffering they get.
Legally binding food. Cool and normal.
App is shit. Local store made a mistake told me to contact corporate. Corporate told me to talk to local. Eventually was told escalated to tech team. Crickets for two weeks. Had to file dispute with credit card to get my money back.
Uninstalled app and haven't been back to McDonald's since. Fuck em. They have shit support and a shit app.
Is getting people to forego their rights for some free chips bribery?
to certain low-socioeconomic peoples, i would say yes
That should be illegal to add this in the ToS
Nah man.
You can just add "If you agree to this ToS, then you are our slave forever" to get free slaves!
Works every time /s
click wrap isn't binding
Good luck against McDonald's legal team! This is America. The law is written on $100 bills.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Things like this make me think we need to change contract law to include some kind of requirement that whoever is entering into a contract have actually read and understood the contract in order for their signature on it to be meaningful. I'm not entirely sure how you'd go about setting up a system to prove this, so some compromise to practically might have to be made, but some possibilities I can see might be having the signer initial or check off each point individually, having a physical contract signing be accompanied by video of the person reading through the contract or having it explained to them, or having a neutral third party witness also sign to affirm that they witnessed this being done, or in the case of digital contracts, having each point be ticked off individually with a checkbox for a given section not made available until after a reasonable amount of time to read the section has elapsed since the previous checkbox was checked, and having a requirement that contracts made to be signed by people who are not lawyers must be written so as to be understandable by someone not versed in legal jargon.
It would be a massive headache I realize, since it would make anything where contracts are agreed to take longer and have more paperwork to document things or programming to be done for digital ones, but on the plus side, it would disincentise companies making huge terms of service contracts and end user license agreements that everybody knows virtually nobody actually reads, and make people more aware of what they're actually agreeing to.
Not everything should be a contract. Make the benchmark for contracts to be much higher, such as requiring two notary public or lawyer signatures for it to be binding. Casual contracts in "terms of service" should not only not be binding, but illegal with stiff penalties for trying to sneak in such terms.
So many words to say "shift responsibility to the consumer".
No.
How about instead, we demand companies stop forcing people to sign pages and pages worth of bullshit "contracts" (not even going in to how many are legal or in any way enforceable) for every simple fucking interaction because they're so desperate to cover their own asses and protect every cent they've extracted from their minimum wage employees??
Fuck, I wish people would shift their fucking focus to where it belongs already... 🤦♀️
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
Won't hold up in court, but more importantly, don't order from them because of the free meals they're giving to people committing genocide.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Yeah but like, fries
Do you want to know the terrifying truth... or do you want to see me sock a few dingers!?
view more: next ›