TikTok requires users to "forever waive" rights to sue over past harms

arstechnica.com

38 points·rntn··7 comments

It seems like this probably isn't enforceable but is used to scare people out of their rights?

It seems like there should be some sort of consumer protection law against companies including clauses that they can't reasonably expect to be enforceable.

> there should be some sort of consumer protection law against companies including clauses that they can't reasonably expect to be enforceable.

The framework exists; see apartment listings. Add the caveat "no blacks, Jews or gays" and the government will step in to say Hell No.

It needs to be extended to any illegal contract. The burden of determining enforceability should not take civil action from the aggrieved; there's no consequence for attempting this crap in the first place. It's an abuse of process.

"TikTok requires users to “forever waive” rights to sue over past harms"

The clause can be rendered irrelevant at any time by government legislation. Such legislation could also be retrospective.

Reading this comment forever entitles me to small amounts of money to be spent on little treats, paid from your bank account. You must also act delighted that you are now legally compelled to buy my snacks and encourage me to have more.

Looks like an MTG card : "circle of protection against creatures summoned before this turn". Or something like that. This kind of card should be banned.

Another reason not to use TT

This does not hold up in any court.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com