Comment on Steam does the opposite of forcing Arbitration on its users

• moody@lemmings.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Most disputes most likely fall far below the limit for small claims, where a lawyer is not required, or even allowed in many cases.

  source
• hannesh93@feddit.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Isn’t it often in both parties to settle things out of court? For the one that’d sue it’s usually more money at less cost and the company gets around possibly having a bad precedent set and the bad publicity to potentially losing in court.

  This is probably aimed at people creating issues in the hopes of getting a settlement for something that has a slim (but Nonzero) chance to hold up in court.

  It’s a company - I think this aims at people only bringing serious claims and reducing the paperwork for them - but since it’s Valve people will glorify everything they do

  source

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    Usually it’s forced arbitration, you can’t sue

    It really favors the company. Steam is explicitly saying no arbitration which levels the playing field.

    Arbitration doesn’t save money. You still need lawyers.

    What’s bigger is this explicitly says it allows class actions. Something that most prevent and require individual arbitration, consumers are better off when they can pool resources for lawyers against a giant corporation, especially since most would require an upfront payment for a large class action.

    source

    • hannesh93@feddit.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      Arbitration doesn’t save money. You still need lawyers.

      of course - but usually it’s way faster than getting a proper court-ruling - and since lawyers are paid per hour that makes a big difference

      source

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        I’ve literally never seen any person argue that forced arbitration is a good thing for consumers…

        It’s always corporations

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • theneverfox@pawb.social ⁨22⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    That’s not what arbitration is. This doesn’t stop valve from reaching a settlement, it stops them from using fake privately funded bench trials

    Binding arbitration means the results are legally binding, non-binding arbitration means a judge needs to approve the arbitration results before it’s final. Sometimes it’s with an off duty judge, sometimes anyone can be the arbiter

    Regardless, on one side you have a repeat customer, on the other you have someone who will probably never be back - there’s a built in conflict of interest

    source