Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New eBay EULA Prohibits Class Action Lawsuits

Posted by timothy on from the what-are-they-the-tsa? dept.

First time accepted submitter dangthill writes "On August 21, eBay updated its end-user agreement by adding a binding arbritration clause. By accepting the new agreement, users forfeit their right to join class action lawsuits and instead must submit to arbitration. However, users may opt-out by mailing eBay a signed notice. eBay joins Microsoft, Sony, Electronic Arts, Valve and other companies attempting to prevent class actions after the Supreme Court of the United States ruled such tactics valid."

6 of 234 comments (clear)

  1. Ah, the good old days... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Does anybody else remember when kangaroo courts were something we associated with the commies?

    1. Re:Ah, the good old days... by cpu6502 · · Score: 5, Informative

      That sounds simple enough (opt out) until you realize that Ebay owns Paypal which was prosecuted by the U.S. DOJ for stealing customer funds.

      Under "arbitration" Paypal/ebay had decided that the customers don't deserve to get their money back. Why? Because Paypal was losing money through buyer fraud (credit card chargebacks mostly) and they had a right to take, not just the money lost but ALL the buyers' money, and never return it. They also took money from sellers. (You can read the thousands of stories at paypalsucks.com)

      Under the old rules Paypal/ebay was sued under a class-action lawsuit and forced to refund all the money to their customers. Under the new rules of forced arbitration & no lawsuits..... I guess you're out of luck. Paypal/ebay gets to take your money and keep it.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    2. Re:Ah, the good old days... by cpu6502 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      >>>forced to refund all the money to their customers.

      P.S. Most people including me sued as "Class 3" and got back $80. Class 2 victims received $500. The smallest was Class 1 which were refunded thousands of dollars (equal to the exact-dollar amount paypal had taken from them, plus their legal fees). I'm sorry you think Paypal/ebay is so fucking wonderful that they never deserve to be sued, but their past history shows otherwise. I fully expect them to go right back to their old ways of "suspending" account and keeping all the buyer's (or seller's) money.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    3. Re:Ah, the good old days... by Hatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

      1. Congress, and the US, have an interest in not clogging courts.

      The whole point of not clogging courts is so that people can have access to them. If you deny them access outright, what's the point of having a court system?

      If you have an issue with the law, talk to your Congresscritter.

      When money speaks louder than words, what good is that going to do? Why would my congressman piss off his numerous corporate donors and represent me instead?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  2. Re:Class Action Everyone looses except for the law by AF_Cheddar_Head · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You might be right about only the lawyers winning but the consumer has already lost if it gets to class action. In a system with forced arbitration the Corporation never loses and never has an incentive to fix a problem, at least with a class-action suit the corporation stands some small chance of losing and may attempt to fix the problem.

  3. Re:so? by waspleg · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Oh, and I forgot to mention that Al Franken has been trying to get the Fairness in Arbitration Act enacted by Congress for years now. It was filibustered the last time it went up for vote iirc.