• sqgl@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    11 months ago

    IANAL But my understanding is that a contract cannot void basic rights.

      • derbis@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        11 months ago

        When those young people comb through the terms of service before opening an account, they’ll sure be in for some intimidation

  • Annoyed_🦀 @monyet.cc
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    11 months ago

    The terms now say that TikTok users “forever waive” rights to pursue any older claims.

    not a lawyer, but i don’t think a company can override a country’s law. If US failed to address this then the constitution is basically useless in the eye of corporation.

  • frog 🐸@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    11 months ago

    IANAL, and I get that this varies by country, but at least some of TikTok’s users are in the UK, where the courts have very thoroughly established that some contract terms are automatically unreasonable and are completely unenforceable even if someone agrees to them (the biggest example actually being most non-compete clauses in employment contracts!) This would seem to be one such case. This contract term is so blatantly unreasonable that I don’t see how a court would uphold it even if the users agreed to it.

  • hexloc@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    11 months ago

    From now on, if you see my comments, you automatically give me the right to murder you and your family.

    • clb92@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      If you read this comment, including fragments or subsets of this comment, even if not read to its full extent, not read aloud or not read willingly, you agree to waive your right to murder anyone, including but not limited to persons who have previously read your parent comment, and including said persons’ families, in perpetuity.

  • LainOfTheWired@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    11 months ago

    Easy solution don’t use it!

    Honesty though aren’t there laws to prevent companies from behaving like this, or are they paying the law makers too well.

    • jarfil@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      The trick is to add a clause saying something like “if any part of this contract were found to be unenforceable, that part of the contract will be struck out and the rest remain valid”.

      That way you can add all sort of weird requirements to a contract, and if in some country, circumstance, or at a future date, some of them turn out to be BS… whatever, you tried, and if anyone didn’t sue you because they thought it was valid, then so much better for you.

      • Overzeetop@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        Severability is standard boilerplate. As is waiving of all liability (essentially in perpetuity, even if not stated as such), incidental and consequential damage, and indemnification of the writing party against any and all claims. This is a mole hill on the landscape of click-through licensing fuckery.

    • 4dpuzzle@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      I don’t think such blanket waivers are valid under many jurisdictions. The companies are putting such clauses to get an upper hand, just in case some courts are willing to consider it. Honestly though, such clauses should be considered grossly exploitative and made outright illegal.