Dropbox just recently updated their terms of service and one significant change is the inclusion of an arbitration clause. Arbitration clauses are used by many companies to avoid the hassle and complexity of resolving disputes through the legal system. Instead, the two parties use a neutral third party (the arbitrator) and agree to abide by what he/she decides.
General speaking, arbitration clauses are not good for consumers. The arbitrators are almost always chosen by the corporations and most of the "rulings" are in favor of the corporations. If the arbitrator doesn't decide in your favor, you are without recourse.
Besides, don't we already have neutral third parties to settle our disputes? I think they're called "judges" and the entire civil legal system is designed to handle such cases. It can be expensive and time consuming and the issue of "how much justice you can afford" is real but in the very least it is unbiased and therefore more likely to be fair.
It may seem silly but the ability to sue someone is an important legal right. Civil courts are an expression of democracy, where social status or power are diminished and two parties are put on equal footing before a judge to resolve a dispute. Even a system like ours which appears at times to have serious flaws is better than the alternative: one where justice is truly up for sale and might equals right.
Dropbox has made this easy for us. If you don't want to go to arbitration to settle a dispute with them, you can opt out of this arbitration clause. You don't have to stop using the service and find an alternative. Just opt out. By doing so, you give yourself the option of settling any dispute you may have with them in front of a judge not some arbitrator.
Take it from me, a guy who was hit by a car, is glad he doesn't have to sue as a part of the settlement process, but is glad that the option exists.
No comments:
Post a Comment