Also how would they prove the owner even saw the notice they supposedly agreed to? This is probably them testing the waters for something worse.
Comment on Roku disables TVs and streaming devices until users consent to new terms
SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 months agoI’m pretty sure this won’t fly in court because this is a significant change to a product long after the product was purchased, which could potentially fly in the face of false advertising laws, since this “feature” was not advertised, and they’re not being denied access to a product they purchased. It’s clearly coercive.
However, this is the USA and stupider shit has happened.
dan1101@lemm.ee 8 months ago
fragnoli@lemmy.one 8 months ago
We have a couple of Rokus, but I haven’t seen the prompt yet. I’m thinking my 8 year old clicked through it. I wonder what situation that creates.
stoly@lemmy.world 8 months ago
You didn’t consent and your child can’t.
themeatbridge@lemmy.world 8 months ago
In general, those terms and conditions are not enforceable, but that’s not why they exist. Roku knows that if they are challenged, they will probably not win in court, but it creates that first hurdle. It costs money to go to court and hire lawyers to make those arguments. And Roku is willing to pay more for lawyers, so maybe they do win. So for you, the little guy, how much can you afford to spend on a case where you might lose?
xpinchx@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Same.
stoly@lemmy.world 8 months ago
The point is that few have the money to prove this.
ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Please do NOT change this. It is both accurate and delightful.
-chef’s kiss-
SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 months ago
Oh, to be fair, I stole that from someone else. Similar story, don’t know if it was on purpose or on accident. It’s fucking gold.
Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 8 months ago
Props for not claiming it anyways
Turun@feddit.de 8 months ago
“Roger Rodger”
“we’ve got clearance Clarence” “What’s our vector victor?”
From the movie airplane.