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.
Sorry not sorry.
What can I say? I like puns.
Law of Equity.
C’est all right pour some, quoi?
A reminder outside the law library…
“Right now, while you are still in law school, make the commitment – not just in your head, but in your heart – that, although you are willing to work hard and you would like to make a comfortable living, you are not going to let money dominate your life to the exclusion of all else…BELIEVE in something- CARE about something – so that when the culture of greed presses in on you from all sides, there will be something inside of you pushing back. Make the decision now that you will be the one who defines success for you”. – P Schiltz (1999).