priceofliberty asked: What do you think of the recent claims by General Mills that 'liking' their online content, downloading their coupons, or entering their sweepstakes subject you to binding third-party arbitration in the event that you try to bring a suit against them? Do you see any merit to these claims?
I stopped “Liking” Facebook pages years ago. General Mills isn’t the only company to include policies into consumer behaviour and information involving their social media pages.
I would like to first place a disclaimer that I am unfamiliar with the legal position in the US. However, I think it’s a practice that should be struck down purely on a floodgates principle. It would set an unacceptable precedent allowing companies to deny their consumers the right to seek damages under contract law.
There’s also the question on the acceptance of these terms when “Liking” their Facebook page and whether it can be relied upon in Court. Regardless, going into the hypothetical legal arguments is pointless at this stage because the practical reality is that you will be hard pressed to find a lawyer willing to take on a case they view as unprofitable.
The kind of mail I get these days… Can someone please ask me normal questions?
"NAME ONE THING THATS BETTER IN AMERICA THAN IN BRITAIN"
Whenever people tell me that “Elementary” is better than “Sherlock”, I enjoy telling them that in the original stories, Sherlock never once said to Watson “Elementary my dear Watson.” That particular phrase was popularised by an American (no surprise) in a 1929 New York Times movie review.
Decades later, Americans continue to f**k up Sherlock Holmes.
Sorry not sorry.
What can I say? I like puns.