Hacker News Reader

Comment by Telaneo | Hacker News Reader

That agreement can be filled with unfair terms, and often is. I'd call that fraud.

But the issue is those terms are laid out in the agreement, and you willingly agreed to those terms, so what are arguing for is to welch on the deal you accepted?

In terms in consumer protection, at least in UK and Europe (not saying not elsewhere, just don't know much), there is an amount of regulation that tries to help consumers not get screwed in the legalese of these agreements, and some basic protections that can't override.

> so what are arguing for is to welch on the deal you accepted?

I'm arguing unfair terms shouldn't be upheld, or really in the agreement in the first place. This is on paper how it should work in Europe, but we (apparently) haven't quite figured that out yet.

If the terms are unfair, then don't agree to them, that is a consumer choice, don't agree to agreements you disagree with!

People agree to fraud all the time. That doesn't mean people shouldn't get their money back.

Organize a class action then if you believe so. Fraud is illegal

Instead of a class action after the fact, what if we tried prevention... say, some form of regulation?

Class actions are often barred by EULAs in favor of arbitration. Even if they're allowed, they are prohibitively expensive because courts aren't growing to meet demand, meaning justice is largely pay-to-play.

> Class actions are often barred by EULAs in favor of arbitration.

Those EULAs often get overturned because the language is often more of a scare tactic against suing them than it is an actual legally binding position.

I would if I had money.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com