Technology

60082 readers

3365 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

777

Roku TV bricked until agreeing to new terms of service (programming.dev)

submitted 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) by DaleGribble88@programming.dev to c/technology@lemmy.world

300 comments fedilink hide all child comments

See title - very frustrating. There is no way to continue to use the TV without agreeing to the terms. I couldn't use different inputs, or even go to settings from the home screen and disconnect from the internet to disable their services. If I don't agree to their terms, then I don't get access to their new products. That sucks, but fine - I don't use their services except for the TV itself, and honestly, I'd rather by a dumb TV with a streaming box anyway, but I can't find those anymore.

Anyway, the new terms are about waiving your right to a class action lawsuit. It's weird to me because I'd never considered filing a class action lawsuit against Roku until this. They shouldn't be able to hold my physical device hostage until I agree to new terms that I didn't agree at the time of purchase or initial setup.

I wish Roku TVs weren't cheap walmart brand sh*t. Someone with some actual money might sue them and sort this out...

EDIT: Shout out to @testfactor@lemmy.world for recommending the brand "Sceptre" when buying my next (dumb) TV.

EDIT2: Shout out to @0110010001100010@lemmy.world for recommending LG smart TVs as a dumb-TV stand in. They apparently do require an agreement at startup, which is certainly NOT ideal, but the setup can be completed without an internet connection and it remembers input selection on powerup. So, once you have it setup, you're good to rock and roll.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] orclev@lemmy.world 48 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Most likely the terms say that you agree to go through individual binding arbitration rather than a lawsuit which the courts have found to be legal and enforceable. It's really shitty and has become corporations favorite weapon to use against people, particularly because the arbitration companies are usually fairly friendly towards whatever corporation is being challenged. Contractually mandated arbitration really needs to be invalidated. Arbitration is a fine alternative if both parties want to go that route but it should never be forced on someone, particularly because of some bullshit EULA.

[–] CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 34 points 9 months ago (2 children)

afaik even those terms would be unenforcable if you can only see the TOS after buying the product, which would be the case here.

[–] jkrtn@lemmy.ml 7 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I don't think so. I think in that case you would have to decline the terms and not use the thing. You would be entitled to compensation for the cost of whatever it was, like you can return it to the manufacturer or vendor somehow.

[–] You999@sh.itjust.works 19 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

No OP is mostly correct, you cannot enforce the terms of a contract that a side of the party cannot see until after the transaction was completed making arbitration clauses hidden inside products invalid. (Norcia v. Samsung Telecomms. Am., LLC)

However you are also somewhat correct as you are under no obligation to agree to the updated terms and conditions and will be govern by the originally concented contract until you do (Douglas v. Talk America). The company is allowed to stop providing their services to you however you might be entitled to your original purchase price depending on what the original terms and conditions said.

[–] WetBeardHairs@lemmy.ml 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

OK how do I go about getting Roku to refund me for my TVs? That sounds like an excellent approach to take.

[–] You999@sh.itjust.works 3 points 9 months ago

Contact their support and escalate up the food chain until you get to someone who is in the legal department. If that fails get a lawyer and sue.

[–] vodkasolution@feddit.it 17 points 9 months ago

I'm really glad to live in the EU

[–] gian@lemmy.grys.it 3 points 9 months ago

In EU they are unenforcable because they are illegal.

[–] Mic_Check_One_Two@reddthat.com 11 points 9 months ago

the arbitration companies are usually ~~fairly friendly towards whatever corporation is being challenged~~ being paid directly by the company they’re arbitrating for, and therefore have a direct financial incentive to rule in favor of the corporation.

FTFY. It’s way worse than just “being friendly” with corps. They’re on the corps’ payroll (indirectly, because the corp is paying for the arbitration,) and they know that if they continue to rule in the corps’ favor then the corp will continue calling them for future arbitration. There’s a tacit understanding between the arbiter and corporation, where if the arbiter favors the plaintiff then the arbiter won’t get called when the corporation goes to arbitration the next time.