Brunette6256I dont want to enter a contract when consuming your product..
That’s concerning.
Would love to see them try and enforce whatever EULA they wrote up.
They’ll drag out any legal challenge in hopes you won’t want to pay for months of legal fees fighting it, on top of whatever legal fees are incurred that caused you to challenge it in the first place…
Sometimes mandatory arbitration doesn’t work out so well for companies either as Valve found out. When they run into what are effectively class action lawsuits but they get forced into individual arbitration with hundreds of thousands of people that clause starts to look really dumb.
pressedhamsAnd fuck the American Arbitration Association.
Now that it’s opened slightly, return it “immediately”
all that jazz for a protein supplement?
Supplement purity is hard, yo.
You even get some heavy metals included for free! What a bargain
One full of toxic heavy metals.
It says you’re bound by “opening and using” the product, rather than “opening or using”. Have someone else open it for you. Then neither of you have done both.
undefinedI think it should be “and/or” because if it’s just “or” than the terms would only apply if you either open it or use it.
No, that’s xor
Thus is the kind of legalistic bullshit interpretation I can get right behind
TruscapeContractual malicious compliance let’s go
Yeah but just ro be clear, the terms are likely there for a reason and using this product probably has risks associated.
Apparently, it’s full of lead.
Why would a bungee cord have lead?
Weight makes you go faster
Limmys Show: Whats heavier a kilogram of steel or a kilogram of feathers
Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
bdonvrI think having someone open if for you still counts. You’d have to already find one opened.
Leave it in a workplace fridge with a clear sticker saying “MIKES DO NOT TOUCH”
Go one step further and have someone under 18 who cannot legally enter into a contract open it haha
Make your own opening elsewhere on the package.
Tuukka RYou’re still opening it.
But if you have your friend open it, then you are not opening and consuming the product.
Of course, with such draconian rules, one should not drink that stuff anyway.
Gradually_AdjustingAt the board meeting, I want to hear when they decided to broadcast that they’re expecting to get sued, but in a really cute way
return it after opening and consuming. the text does not say if you do not agree do not open. nor does it say you can’t agree, open, then disagree.
Some one should sue them for the maximum highest costs calculable for the travel time of having to return their products buying a new substitute brand, and going back home + legal fees.
Then that person should buy the product again to see if there’s still an agreement in place, and sue them again.
Did... Did someone MAKE you buy that?
[deleted] in lemmyIt sure looks like this is displayed after peeling back the very top layer that is still slightly attached at the top right in the image.
So they most likely did not know this was a thing when they purchased it.
“I went to the url but it was just a 404, honest. No terms, no conditions”
Open it. Return it. Repeat.
CosmicTurtle0 [he/him]Shit like this is rarely enforceable but in order to find out, you need to have money.
What I like to do is clap back and send them my own terms and conditions, with the stipulation that if they don’t write back, then they are accepting them.
𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘That’s actually legally binding, still do long as it’s ensured mail (or whatever your country calls it when a signature is required to accept the package).
Just fyi, a biased judge could hold you to even the tiniest loophole the company might find if you send them terms that you define without their input. Still totally do it (IANAL), but you might want to either use boilerplate language whose implications you fully understand or run it by a lawyer.
Ever had any replies?
Oddly no but I suspect that it’s either due to them not caring enough for one person doing this or them thinking their T&Cs will prevail in court.
For me, I don’t see a loss. Either my contract doesn’t hold up, which means that I only lose time and money or it does hold up in which case I lose time and they (and every other company that has clauses where you accept terms by continuing services) loses their contract terms.
If it ever came to it, I would bet the company would choose to settle rather than risk a president being set.
What is this ridiculous product?
An unregulated “nutritional” supplement. If it puts you on dialysis for the rest of your life - arbitration only and the best they can offer is a 25% discount on your next purchase. Limit 2.
I can't imagine that's enforcible. It is a reasonable expectation that when you purchase the product, you are free to use the product without further limitations being put upon you. They'd have to have you agree to arbitration before purchase, wouldn't they?
In the US it might stand-up unfortunately.
Might, but that article is in reference to digital products and not physical ones.
Exactly. There’s no license involved here. This is pants on fire levels of stupid.
The article is bad at explaining this, but the origin of the term is software that you would buy, you would then be presented with a EULA (after opening the shrink wrap on the box), then you would be unable to return it because it was opened.
CherryVital proteins take themselves a bit serious. I’d send it back. Terms and conditions my @$$.
Idiot behavior from self important companies should not be rewarded.
Lmfao protein additives (or whatever that is) now come with a EULA…? What a time to be alive 🫠
Interesting how we’ve all become accustomed to the notion that “agreeing to arbitration” has just become “waving your consumer rights” and no one questions whether this should be legal to begin with.
Because 98% of them are on the corporations’ side because they practice insider trading.
…wikipedia.org/…/Forced_Arbitration_Injustice_Rep…
Don’t be too lazy with your both sides bullshit.
no lawmaker is pushing to have that fixed.
…wikipedia.org/…/Forced_Arbitration_Injustice_Rep…
Was reintroduced several times, Passed the house once. Republicans keep killing it in committee.
There’s also the Justice for workers Act specifically for work l employee force arbitration, more recently
wizardbeardThis is Vital Proteins brilliant response to being taken to court over heavy metal and “foreign materials” contamination in their products.
This is Vital Proteins brilliant response to being taken to court over heavy metal and “foreign materials” contamination in their products. Do you have any supporting links? I saw a reddit post saying something similar but I cant find a real article or support. Either way I am returning the product.
oag.ca.gov/system/files/…/2017-02480C5316.pdf
Found searching ‘“vital proteins” lawsuit’
Sued by an environmental nonprofit for failing to warn about the presence of lead and heavy metals as required by CA law. They settled.
Found searching ‘“vital proteins” lawsuit’
that’s just cheating
In the ’20s tho? Not rly
Seems like a labelling issue due to california laws rather than legitimate ingredient flaws with toxic or heavy metals.
CatoblepasHonestly you should assume all supplements are toxic and full of heavy metals, because that shit is virtually unregulated.
To some degree I totally agree. If you don’t find 3rd party lab verified then I’d be skeptical. Not just any 3rd party. It has to be from legitimate Orgs and trusted vendors.
I’m unsure how much people look at labels now days, unless you have a health issue requiring it. The levels of say vitamins manufacturers add to even like biotin or other vitamins/supplements. Thousands and sometimes 10s of thousands more than a daily dose your body can consume. Which means your kidneys or liver have to process that out. Things are toxic in high doses.
Its all about balance. A lot of these supplements are way way out of balance. It’s a shame, businesses or people can’t be reputable.