Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday September 09 2017, @06:49PM   Printer-friendly
from the ignorance-is-bliss? dept.

Visiting Equifax's site to see if you're a victim of the recent data breach can require you to waive lawsuit rights:

By all accounts, the Equifax data breach is, as we reported Thursday, "very possibly the worst leak of personal info ever." The incident affects possibly as many as 143 million people.

But if you want to find out if your data might have been exposed, you waive your right to sue the Atlanta-based company. We're not making this up. The company has now published a website allowing consumers to input their last six digits of their Social Security numbers to find out.

Like most websites, at the bottom of this new site is a section called "Terms of Use." There, in paragraph 4, is bolded, uppercase text of note. It tells site visitors that you agree to waive your right to sue and instead must "resolve all disputes by binding, individual arbitration."

AGREEMENT TO RESOLVE ALL DISPUTES BY BINDING INDIVIDUAL ARBITRATION. PLEASE READ THIS ENTIRE SECTION CAREFULLY BECAUSE IT AFFECTS YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS BY REQUIRING ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES (EXCEPT AS SET FORTH BELOW) AND A WAIVER OF THE ABILITY TO BRING OR PARTICIPATE IN A CLASS ACTION, CLASS ARBITRATION, OR OTHER REPRESENTATIVE ACTION. ARBITRATION PROVIDES A QUICK AND COST EFFECTIVE MECHANISM FOR RESOLVING DISPUTES, BUT YOU SHOULD BE AWARE THAT IT ALSO LIMITS YOUR RIGHTS TO DISCOVERY AND APPEAL.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/09/are-you-an-equifax-breach-victim-you-must-give-up-right-to-sue-to-find-out/


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 10 2017, @01:17AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 10 2017, @01:17AM (#565828)

    I'd say it was intentional, because its a standard document meant to apply to disputes.

    Forced arbitration is a dick move no matter what, and it's an especially dick move to use the template without even recognizing what is in it.

    It is worse when the vendor doesn't even know what the hell their legalese actually means, and then they expect people to comply to it?

    I agree with you that the *intent* was not to intentionally enforce one into arbitration and giving up one's rights to sue in the event you checked to see if you suddenly had reason to sue, but it seems like their apparatus as a company has not put a lot of thought into various problems they have. I am not offended someone else called them to ask on this; I am hoping you understand why it seems odd you are defending them.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 11 2017, @04:06AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 11 2017, @04:06AM (#566115)

    Indeed, but until we stop having two corporatist parties that keep appointing incompetent jurists to court positions, that's not likely to change. It's astonishing to me that companies can force people to sign away their constitutional right to a trial when they need a service.