There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Roku’s Ultimatum: Surrender Jury Trial Rights or Lose Access to Your TVs

Did your Roku TV decide to strong arm you into giving up your rights or lose your FULLY FUNCTIONING WORKING TV? Because mine did.

It doesn’t matter if you only use it as a dumb panel for an Apple TV, Fire stick, or just to play your gaming console. You either agree or get bent.

kingshrubb ,

Are there any good 4k 65"+ TVs without smart features? All the ones I see from LG Samsung Sony or other top rated TV manufacturers are smart TVs.

Choosenewagain ,

Try look into the Samsung BEC-H. Its meant for signage so double check it has all the inputs you need but it comes in 65", 4k and no “smart” features.

not_a_dog ,

Don’t they all essentially require internet access to be ‘smart’? I have a LGTV (with WebOS, an app store, etc.) that I basically treat as ‘dumb’ by leaving it disconnected from our network.

baseless_discourse , (edited )

Nowadays there are TV that requires internet connection to use the HDMI ports, I hope this trend NEVER take off.

old.reddit.com/…/fire_tv_requires_an_internet_con…

normalexit ,

I have a Samsung S90, and I was able to disconnect from my network after the initial setup. I also set it to default to the last HDMI input at startup, so I never see the TV OS.

I feel like this is subject to change, but a smart TV without an Internet connection seems to still be an option until they take it away.

Thcdenton ,

“Dumb” TV + PC + 🏴‍☠️. life is good

5in1k ,

That’s what I have always done. I tried a Firestick once and found it terrible and tedious. Especially compared to M&K. I have a monster ass commercial quality smart tv and it will never access the internet on it’s own.

tty5 ,

There are no dumb TVs if you want e.g. OLED. The closest you can get is a smart tv that you never connect to the internet. If you like 4k HDR it will still be a major pain…

CosmicCleric , (edited )
@CosmicCleric@lemmy.world avatar

Sections 1(F) and 1(L) seem like the only ways out/around of this. (IANAL; the bolding emphasis was done by me.)

F. Small Claims. You or Roku may pursue any Claim, except IP Claims, in a small-claims court instead of through arbitration if (i) the Claim meets the jurisdictional requirements of the small claims court and (ii) the small claims court does not permit class or similar representative actions or relief.

L. 30-Day Right to Opt Out. You have the right to opt out of arbitration by sending written notice of your decision to opt out to the following address by mail: General Counsel, Roku Inc., 1701 Junction Court, Suite 100, San Jose, CA 95112 within 30 days of you first becoming subject to these Dispute Resolution Terms. Such notice must include the name of each person opting out and contact information for each such person, the specific product models, software, or services used that are at issue, the email address that you used to set up your Roku account (if you have one), and, if applicable, a copy of your purchase receipt. For clarity, opt-out notices submitted via any method other than mail (including email) will not be effective. If you send timely written notice containing the required information in accordance with this Section 1(L), then neither party will be required to arbitrate the Claims between them.

Any lawyers out there who can speak towards the three bolded parts?

stoly ,

This sort of thing isn’t new but I’ve seen this particular one all over the place. Was there something different from this experience compared to the times that people have agreed in the past?

Reygle ,
@Reygle@lemmy.world avatar

My Roku TV’s been reset to factory and not allowed on the internet for a few years now. It’s a TV. It displays shit that I give it over HDMI. If you desire more than that you’re part of the problem. I work in IT and that’s why my home has physical locks, a 30 year old thermostat, and cameras I own with recordings on a DVR I own.

sebinspace ,

In my experience, people that use the phrase “you’re part of the problem” so loosely are often the most miserable jackasses anyone ever allowed into society.

People just want neat things. It’s not wrong to want neat things.

gmtom ,

It’s not wrong to think people are stupid for wanting pointlessly internet connected things either.

sebinspace ,

Man, you are one angry fucker… You ever try weed?

Snowpix ,
@Snowpix@lemmy.ca avatar

Weed doesn’t magically make you less hostile of a person. If that were the case Canada would be a hell of a lot better than it is now, and it isn’t.

sebinspace ,

Shid, fair

gmtom ,

I do smoke, wierdly enough it doesn’t make me not care about privacy and practicality.

Vit ,

Well sure, but we’re not talking about a washing machine or a refrigerator. Currently most media we watch is over the internet, so I at least don’t consider a TV with an internet connection “pointlessly” online.

gmtom ,

Okay, well you are free to enjoy having your device bricked whenever the company you bought it from wants to.

Vit ,

And that’s incredibly unfortunate. Make no mistake, I’m not arguing in favor of the companies here. I was merely pointing out that TVs are not one of the impractical “smart” devices, which I believe you implied. There’s plenty of good use cases for an internet connected TV, and I don’t think users are stupid for wanting one. I too wish that we could have nice things not be ruined by corporate greed. That’s all. Have a good day.

namingthingsiseasy ,

It’s not wrong, but it’s just terribly short-sighted. You’re giving greed-crazed companies total control over a device that you own and nobody else should be able to touch.

Shiny things come at a cost. Sure, it may look convenient and super cool to have all these features, but it’s important to understand the trade-offs. And this is just the tip of the iceberg - we don’t even know what kinds of malice these companies will think of 5-10 years from now when these machines are even more widespread and probably come with even more invasive anti-user hardware capabilities.

It’s not wrong… it’s just very very naïve.

sfgifz ,

No ones asking you to stick some shiny thing up your ass and walk around to see how it fits. If you don’t like these services don’t use them, for most of us the convinience of an Internet connected device that let’s you stream content published to the Internet is a value.

Bahnd ,

The issue is that the market has spoken. People want cool neat things and they want them cheap. Companies were able to lower the price of major devices by including all the always-online stuff as it generated revenue after the initial purchase.

Now everything comes with smart shit wether you want it or not, and for those that dont, the product they wish to have dosent exist or is more expensive. So… the argument that the “naiveity” of the masses is making things worse is valid.

phx ,

Most people don’t get that this is even possible until it bites them in the ass like this.

Certainly my own parents wouldn’t think to try and find a “dumb” TV in this market or to not connect the damn thing to the internet like it tells you when you power it on. They bought a TV that lets them watch Netflix.

By the same token, I don’t except my fucking microwave to suddenly require that I accept a ToS in order to nuke a potato, or to suddenly start showing me ads in increasing amounts a year or more after I bought and paid for it.

Users aren’t the problem. Shitty companies and a lack of strong legislation against this (or legislators being for it) are the problem. Nobody should ever be presented with a 50 page ever-changing EULA for a product they’ve paid for to access common functionality.

They’re not a problem. They’re not even naive. They’re just not savvy on all things about a given technology especially when it comes up aspects of legal arguments on such.

Reygle ,
@Reygle@lemmy.world avatar

I agree. That was why I originally bought the damned thing. Once I saw what it was doing on my network I decided “nope, that’s enough from you” and reset it. I’m not saying people who also bought it and continue to use it as intended are dumb, I’m suggesting the device itself and what it does is evil.

gearheart ,

Interesting take… If we desire to use the full advertised features of a product we own we are part of the problem.

I suggest some self love and an open mind to learn and adapt. It’s okay though not everyone is capable of this.

chocosoldier ,

maybe try being less of a condescending ass

Reygle ,
@Reygle@lemmy.world avatar

Huh. I don’t actually think I said any of that. Sorry I made you feel that way.

I take it back- I guess I did.

csolisr ,

The problem with not being part of the problem is that, in many cases, it means no longer being able to be part of vast chunks of society. Take it from me - I’ve been boycotting Big Media and most entertainment platforms for about a decade, and now I genuinely can’t have any hobbies, besides of maybe activism, to share something with friends to begin with.

chocosoldier ,

same except i haven’t felt there’s a problem. get better friends.

csolisr ,

Yeah about that, I never really had any friends, and now it’s increasingly difficult to make any if you don’t watch movies or listen to music or follow sports or play the more popular video games. There’s preciously little to talk about if you don’t engage in popular culture out of ethical concerns.

Reygle ,
@Reygle@lemmy.world avatar

I’m sorry that you feel that way. I’ve got hobbies that may not interest you, but I feel un-hindered by being off the big platforms. Different generation maybe.

olafurp ,

If that’s the case, why not just go for a commercial display TV (like McD). They run virtually forever and you get them for very low prices.

vrozon ,

Happen to have any examples? The last time I looked into this (around 5 years ago) everything that existed in this category was substantially lower quality and substantially more expensive.

Reygle ,
@Reygle@lemmy.world avatar

Sure! I didn’t know when I bought it that I’d come to this conclusion, but I learned over time. Been about 4 years or so since I bought it.

NutWrench ,
@NutWrench@lemmy.world avatar

This is why I don’t buy “smart” TVs. They just want to data-mine you. And they can brick it whenever they want to, right over the Internet.

SpeedLimit55 ,

This is basically impossible unless you are buying commercial grade. Just buy whatever TV you want and never connect it to the internet.

kurcatovium ,

So how do you get stuff from internet (anything from Netflix to HBO) to the TV? Connecting PC? Not very practical and convenient. Connecting something like android/apple tv box? How does this differ from having the same built in? Just asking, because I’m really curious.

starman2112 ,
@starman2112@sh.itjust.works avatar

The same way you would with a dumb TV. Connect a computer, game console, flash drive, DVD player, etc. It differs from built in services because these TVs collect a truly unparalleled amount of data on you. Harmless, until a) bad actors get hold of that information—you might not care if Roku knows everything about you including payment info, but some russian hacker is a different story—or b) the increasing power that the advertising industry holds over our society turns Fifteen Million Merits into a documentary

Zengen ,

Just do a judge trial instead of a jury trial. Lol

Sami_Uso ,

I got this yesterday, as well. There’s no way this could hold up legally, right? Like my 7 year old could easily just click through that, no way this is a legally binding contract to forfeit jury rights and right to sue.

…right?

Jackie_meaiii ,

It’s not enforceable at all, but it’s an extra step of litigation that the average consumer can’t afford to wade through

Chocrates ,

Are you sure it isn’t enforceable? Forced arbitration clauses are very common and I think pretty solid legally.

NoSpiritAnimal ,
@NoSpiritAnimal@lemmy.world avatar

The FAIR Act prohibits mandatory arbitration agreements for employment, consumer, antitrust, or civil rights disputes. The FAIR Act also protects the rights of individuals and small businesses to participate in joint, class, or collective actions related to such disputes.

Chocrates ,

FAIR Act

badass, but I am not sure the FAIR act was signed into law. I am finding conflicting information www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/117/hr963

CosmicCleric ,
@CosmicCleric@lemmy.world avatar

www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/…/963

Chocrates ,

Yeah so it has passed the house but the Senate hasn’t voted on it and therefore the President hasn’t signed it and it isn’t law?

CosmicCleric ,
@CosmicCleric@lemmy.world avatar

www.congress.gov/bill/…/all-actions?overview=clos…

This is the latest entry …

Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

01189998819991197253 ,
@01189998819991197253@infosec.pub avatar

Dated 03/21/2022. It’s been almost exactly two years since this motion. It’s not going anywhere. Government sucks.

CosmicCleric ,
@CosmicCleric@lemmy.world avatar

Dated 03/21/2022. It’s been almost exactly two years since this motion. It’s not going anywhere. Government sucks.

You never know, but if you stay cynical, stay beaten down, then definitely nothing is going to change.

Call your house representative member. Let them know you know of the existence of this, and would like to see it move forward.

If everyone did that, instead of just posting on Reddit/Lemmy, they’d see change.

01189998819991197253 ,
@01189998819991197253@infosec.pub avatar

You are completely correct. Before I do that, I would need to read the whole charter, to make sure they didn’t sneak anything nefarious into it as they like to do. But then, yes, calling the reps should help some. Governments still suck, though. Most are no longer for the people en mass. Still, though, while governments may suck, they are made of people, and still have a people’s heart, even if it has to be helped to grow a few sizes.

CosmicCleric ,
@CosmicCleric@lemmy.world avatar

Before I do that, I would need to read the whole charter, to make sure they didn’t sneak anything nefarious into it as they like to do.

This comment has a direct link to the agreement that you can review, as well as the comment itself points out two clauses that might help you.

brianorca ,

There have been US court cases where arbitration clauses were voided if they weren’t prominently visible outside the box before purchase. Dang vs Samsung

phx ,

Before purchase seems to be the big thing. LG is also under fire for this regarding fridges as they put it on the box but typically that wasn’t seen prior to purchase (the fridge models on the floor are unboxed) and many people use delivery companies that do the unboxing before the item gets to the consumer.

ILikeBoobies ,

It’s meant to scare people from attempting anything

mctoasterson ,

Isn’t this equivalent to those trucks that have “stay back 300 feet - not responsible for damage” signage, when in reality they are legally responsible if their load isn’t secured?

reverendsteveii ,

it certainly hasn’t been tested in court yet, at least not that I’ve been able to find. These EULAs are often just corporate wishlists and until they go in front of a judge it’s difficult to know what provisions will actually stick. I hope that they don’t have the ability to bait and switch EULAs but this is America, some judge somewhere might take it upon himself to protect my freedom to have my TV remotely disabled after I pay for it.

namingthingsiseasy ,

These EULAs are often just corporate wishlists

Then I really wish there were regulations over what kinds of things you’re allowed to put in a contract. If there were punitive measures for putting things in contracts that anyone should know is not enforceable, then maybe companies would think twice before putting language like this in.

reverendsteveii ,

There are some regulations. A contract can be ruled unconscionable by a court, which is basically saying “no one in their right mind would ever agree to this so we’re not gonna enforce it”. Contracts have to give both sides duties (things they have to do) and consideration (things they get for performing the duties), so no court will enforce a contract that doesn’t materially benefit both sides in some way.

But I agree with you that there should be some sort of blowback to putting together purposely overreaching contracts and then counting on people not knowing their rights or not having the resources to enforce them in order to profit from an illegitimate contract.

namingthingsiseasy ,

Yeah, that second paragraph is more what I was thinking (terrible phrasing on my part). The issue is that fighting these contracts in court is risky - you might lose, and even if you don’t, it’s a big commitment to fight a legal case against a large company no matter which jurisdiction you’re in.

To put it another way, look at it from a game theory perspective - there’s plenty of benefit from putting these terms in, and no downside whatsoever. So the optimal move for vendors is to put garbage like this into the contact.

droans ,

it certainly hasn’t been tested in court yet, at least not that I’ve been able to find.

Arbitration is allowed in an EULA and has been sanctioned by courts.

Most agreements are considered enforceable as long as their content is reasonable, you have been granted sufficient notice to accept or decline the agreement, the agreement is not unconscionable, and it doesn’t violate the UCC.

reverendsteveii ,

The question isn’t whether arbitration clauses are legal the question is whether selling someone something and then, after the sale, presenting them with a take it or leave it EULA that disables the product if they dont agree, and also what recourse the consumer has if they don’t agree to a post-sale EULA. Brower v Gateway said that post-sale EULAs are binding but only because in that case the consumer had the option to return the product for a refund and didn’t. Klocek v Gateway ruled that any terms presented after a sale represent a separate contract beyond the one that was agreed to by both parties at the time of sale. It’s possible that either of these would apply to the OP. It’s also possible for courts to rule that the sale of the physical TV was a one-time agreement but that this EULA is separate and represents an ongoing agreement to allow access to Roku’s services.

Your comment actually circles around the issue at hand when you say that EULAs are enforceable if “…you have been granted sufficient notice to accept or decline…”. The thrust of the argument is that adding conditions after the sale of an object that, if not agreed to, render the object inoperable feels an awful lot like not being given sufficient notice and is essentially a backdoor by which the contract can be unilaterally amended after agreement.

jmp242 ,

I just think that contracts of adhesion (IIRC) should be illegal or unenforceable. Make me wet sign a document or go to a separate docusign at least, this click wrap is crap. Get me to affirmatively agree, not click OK till the install or setup completes. Otherwise I strongly disagree there’s actually a meeting of the minds. And if I can’t send back my suggested alterations for cross signatures, it’s not a valid contract either IMHO.

That said, we’ve decided to continue to screw people over as we all know.

brianorca ,

There have been US court cases where arbitration clauses were voided if they weren’t prominently visible outside the box before purchase. Dang vs Samsung

reverendsteveii ,

“This is the type of shit I be talking about” —dmx

Iirc wasn’t that one on the box of a fridge, but the people who installed it deboxed it first and then Samsung tried to argue that the customer was still bound by a EULA they never knew existed?

brianorca ,

That’s another one still working through the court.

_dev_null ,
@_dev_null@lemmy.zxcvn.xyz avatar

legally responsible if their load isn’t secured?

kek

ConstantPain , (edited )

Here in Brazil, EULAs (they are called adhesion contracts here) can only deal with the way service is provided and cannot limit consumer rights in any way. Even if the contract has these types of clauses, they are considered void by default.

These types of things never fly here.

Belgdore ,

The same is mostly true in the US. The companies use them to scare people into settlements. But it does depend on the state.

KairuByte ,
@KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

Binding arbitration is not only a thing, but has been upheld by the courts as enforceable.

Belgdore ,

It depends on your state. The verbiage that works on one state doesn’t necessarily work in another.

KingThrillgore ,
@KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml avatar

I wonder why Roku make you sign this agreement out of the blue. I think they’re about to drop either an acquisition announcement, or news they were hacked.

I of course signed it like an idiot. I hate this cyberpunk present.

archomrade ,

My money is on a data breech - happens all the damn time.

CptEnder ,

Man if a hacker wants to break into my Roku to watch my streams I don’t really mind. Would be kinda cool to see what their preferences are on what they watch. Just don’t use my profile, that’s an act of war.

starman2112 ,
@starman2112@sh.itjust.works avatar

Data breach doesn’t mean hackers know what you watch, it means hackers know your name, address, and payment info

CptEnder ,

Lmao it’s a joke bruh

LifeOfChance ,

Was it your or you’re 8 year old who was just trying to watch some cartoons? 🤔

You are right there is something coming though

interdimensionalmeme ,

Never allow internet access to unrooted devices. My TVs are airgapped.

yoz ,

Lol sure mine is waterboarded

ours ,

I’ve sent mine to a CIA dark site for advanced interrogation.

NotAtWork ,

Waterboarding, Earthed ground, Fire wall, Air Gap, Long ago, the four protections lived together in harmony.

bruhduh ,
@bruhduh@lemmy.world avatar

Till new Nvidia power connector started fires

chiliedogg ,

But all that changed with the Fire Stick attached.

ours ,

Ah yes, airgap the streaming device.

baseless_discourse ,

I believe it is possible by simply attach a rooted device to the TV with streaming capability, like a computer, or a rooted nvidia shield.

Although I don’t agree with OP that everything needs to be rooted, for example, my phone runs grapheneos without root, I do believe most rooted OS are more usable than proprietary OS like Roku.

interdimensionalmeme ,

It can still stream video over the hdmi port just fine. This is about containing the rooted malware inside the tv’s firmware from exfiltrating and then self destructing.

starman2112 ,
@starman2112@sh.itjust.works avatar

My TV streams my shows just fine via my xbox

octopus_ink ,

Once again, Stallman was right. (Also Corey Doctorow)

snrkl ,

At least in Australia, Consumer Law means you have grounds to walk the TV back for a full refund.

yoz ,

I think its up to 12 months.?

snrkl ,

Depends on the price. I was able to return a 13 month old iPhone when apple announced the CSAM scanning (that they eventually abandoned) - I got a full refund. The phone costs enough that ACL considers it should operate for at least 2 years.

wccrawford ,

I’m really surprised about this. Amazon got called on their arbitration clause so much that they removed it because it was so expensive.

wsj.com/…/amazon-faced-75-000-arbitration-demands…

Roku is practically asking for people to do the same to them. They could even do it about this clause, IMO. (I am not a lawyer.) This is a really dumb clause to have these days.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •