Terms of Service | Discord
discord.com
Read about Discord's Terms of Service

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/17618684

Forced arbitration means any legal disputes you may have with Discord must be resolved through a single third party mediator, who 99% of the time is chosen by, and will rule in favor of, the corporation/Discord. This effectively removes all your legal rights as a consumer, because arbitration decisions are legally binding and non-appealable.

The new ToS goes into effect April 15th, 2024.

YOU CAN OPT OUT OF ARBITRATION. You must email [email protected] BEFORE MAY 15TH (30 days after ToS effective date) with your username stating that you wish to opt out of the arbitration clause. Once May 15th passes you are bound to arbitration with Discord forever.

Opt-out before it’s too late.

  • Lvxferre@mander.xyzEnglish
    902·
    9 months ago

    I am not a lawyer, but:

    Given the recent trend of corporations trying to force you to give up your legal rights, I strongly advise everyone here to check their local laws and see if this sort of forced arbitration is even legal where they live.

    Just for the sake of example I’ll translate an excerpt of the local (Brazilian) Customers’ Defence Code, from 1990:

    Section II. On abusive clauses.

    Article 51. Contractual clauses referring to the supply of goods and services are void of full right (i.e. non-enforceable), when: […]

    subsection VII - they determine the compulsory usage of arbitration.

    I bet that most people around the world have similar laws protecting them. Use them or you’ll lose them.

    • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.comOPEnglish
      401·
      9 months ago

      This is true. Generally speaking, arbitration isn’t enforced (or enforceable at all) outside of the U.S. Discord knows this and explicitly states that the arbitration agreement will only apply if you are a US Resident; and any other conflicts will be subject to federal and California law. That said, they should still try to opt out if they can, if only to send a message.

      • Lvxferre@mander.xyzEnglish
        81·
        9 months ago

        That said, they should still try to opt out if they can, if only to send a message.

        Yup - full agree. And I think that they should be nagging their lawmakers to actually defend their interests, instead of bowing to corporations in servitude.

        (Note that my earlier comment was mostly a public service announcement, not disagreeing with you. Your point in the OP is sane and I agree with it.)

        • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.worldEnglish
          3·
          9 months ago

          And I think that they should be nagging their lawmakers to actually defend their interests, instead of bowing to corporations in servitude.

          (Above highlighted link is for US citizens.)

          Edit: Just contacted my representative, and let them know my feelings about this issue.

  • ArchAengelus@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    605·
    9 months ago

    Relevant instructions:

    Opt-out. You can decline this agreement to arbitrate by emailing an opt-out notice to arbitration-opt-out<at>discord.com within 30 days of April 15, 2024 or when you first register your Discord account, whichever is later

    I had to ask bing copilot how to write the opt out email. Here’s a template for everyone to use.

    Subject: Opt-Out of Discord Arbitration Clause

Dear Discord Legal Team,

I am writing to formally opt out of the arbitration clause outlined in your Terms of Service. I do not wish to be bound by the arbitration provisions.

Please confirm my opt-out status via email.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,
[Your Full Name]
[Your Discord Username]
      • ToxicWaste@lemm.eeEnglish
        197·
        9 months ago

        Yes but No. For most people writing this kind of mail should not be a problem. However, for many different reasons it can become difficult to write such things: This mail is some kind of formal letter and alters a contract. Let’s imagine someone with a learning disability, they may be able to sign up for a online service, as they have done it many times. Writing a formal letter they may not have done many times and they cannot map past experiences the same way as a neurotypical person.

        Depending on the local law this may be a reason why forced arbitration has to be opt-in: Typically the law should protect the weaker party. As the barrier for writing this letter is higher than the sign-up process, there is an argument that the chosen opt-out process of discord is targeted against some of their weakest customers.

      • ArchAengelus@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        101·
        9 months ago

        In short, I don’t write formal documents often in my role as a software engineer.

        There are any number of ways that an opt-out message could be too ambiguous to be legally interpreted. For example, if you just send the message saying “no thanks, I don’t want to use arbitration”, but forget to identify yourself in a way that is meaningful to the other party, it may not hold up in any proceedings.

        For example, either your legal name or username may be required, or both, depending on whether you need to prove you are/were a user at the time of opt-out.

        Specifying the confirmation is helpful as well in a normal document that someone reads.

        Several other companies have made opt outs that you have to send paper mail for as a way to raise the barrier of rejection.

        People are lazy. I am lazy. I asked a resource to do it for me and shared the results to help others like me. This helps reduce the barrier to people who would like to opt out but can’t be bothered to figure out how to write that email.

      • Steal Wool@lemm.eeEnglish
        33·
        9 months ago

        wHy dId yOu hAvE tO aSk cOpIlOt tO wRiTe tHaT sImPlE eMaIl…?

        fixed iT for yOu

    • Kissaki@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      18·
      9 months ago

      Citing the username alone should be enough. The email address is explicitly named for this use case only.

  • millie@piefed.social
    501·
    9 months ago

    This seems like an unreasonable provision that wouldn’t hold up in court. Companies put all kinds of unenforceable shit in their contracts.

    • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.comOPEnglish
      333·
      9 months ago

      It’s perfectly enforceable in the US. Almost every corporation uses arbitration now, because handpicked arbitrators rule in favor of the corporations 99% of the time. All completely outside of the public legal system, all completely secret, all completely legal and allowed.

      • TootSweet@lemmy.worldEnglish
        91·
        9 months ago

        Sounds like something John Oliver ought to cover.

        (And, yeah, I know he’s mentioned it in episodes dedicated to other things, but an episode specifically about forced arbitration would be cool.)

          • TootSweet@lemmy.worldEnglish
            23·
            9 months ago

            Gotta be honest about my experience with Legal Eagle. One of the first videos I ever saw of his contained an error. (Sonny Bono had nothing to do with the Copyright Act of 1976. Bono wasn’t in congress until 1995. Legal Eagle is confusing the Copyright Act of 1976 with the “Sonny Bono” Copyright Term Extension Act which was passed in 1998.)

            And maybe it’s just serendipitous that one of the first videos of his that I watched contained an error that I was able to identify immediately. And maybe the vast majority of his videos aren’t riddled with errors. But I’m no expert on law and he’s supposed to be an expert on law, and given that one of the first few facts I even heard him speak was one I could immediately identify as incorrect, it made me concerned.

            Like if I had no expertise in Chemistry beyond my high-school class 20 years ago and was able to correct someone on YouTube who claims to hold a Ph.D. in Chemistry and claims to have worked as a chemical engineer at Dow Chemical for the last 20 years that “no, actually oxygen isn’t a noble gas. Maybe you’re thinking of neon? It’s just two to the right on the periodic table from oxygen.”

      • chiliedogg@lemmy.worldEnglish
        7·
        9 months ago

        It’s also possible to use it against them though. The twist on arbitration is that the company has to pay for the arbiter win or lose. If a bunch of people opt to use it for a relatively minor issue, it’s more expensive for them than a regular lawsuit even if they do win.

        Even for individual stuff, it can be nice. I had a car dealership try to fuck me over. I looked into the arbitration clause, found the arbiters they used, and found out it was going to cost the dealership $4,000 to go to the arbiter over a $1,500 dispute. If I won, I’d get my repair and they’d lose $4,000. If I lost, I wouldn’t get my repair, and they’d lose $4,000.

        When I explained that they did the repair for free.

        • Peffse@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          9 months ago

          You will be happy to know that modern EULAs now have provisions against mass arbitration and bind you to a “class action” style arbitration.

          I honestly don’t understand how any of this is legal considering they can’t prove you agreed to anything at all. I know my family members have agreed to junk while visiting my house and I don’t know what account and where.

          • chiliedogg@lemmy.worldEnglish
            2·
            9 months ago

            I don’t expect that to stand up to a court challenge. Arbitration allows extra-judicial resolution of individual or class agreements (though most arbitration clauses actually prohibit class-action arbitration). But mandatory class arbitration would make it effectively impossible to seek individual damages of any kind, and there’s no way that’s legal.

            You can lose your individual right to sue by not opting out of class membership when a class-action settlement or ruling is reached, yes. But that’s not the same as automatically being assigned to a class before a suit can occur.

      • catloaf@lemm.eeEnglish
        81·
        9 months ago

        Is there any case law of people fighting them and a court determining their enforceability?

  • merthyr1831@lemmy.worldEnglish
    462·
    9 months ago

    My “you cannot sue me for anything illegal ive done” clause is making people ask a lot of questions about illegal things that ive done that are answered by my “you cannot zue me for anything illegal ive done” clause

    • philpo@feddit.deEnglish
      4·
      9 months ago

      Tbh, more like Revolt Exodus,sadly.

      While Matrix clearly is the superb system and I would absolutely love to see people to migrate to it, but I have a feeling that people will use the solution that comes the closest to what they are used to - which is revolt at this point.

      But revolt,imho, is not quite there yet and would very likely collapse under the increasing pressure on their ressources, just like many Lemmy or Mastodon servers did back in the day - but revolt is far less decentralized.

      Which would send people straight back to Discord.

      A shame,really, Matrix is clearly the better system,but VoIP/Video/Community building is not quite there yet. It might be with Element X,but we will see. Maybe I am wrong and I would love to be wrong here - I actually operate a small Matrix server and it’s a fantastic system.

      • far_university1990@feddit.deEnglish
        4·
        9 months ago

        Interesting: Revolt maybe open to federation, but not any priority (https://developers.revolt.chat/faq/federation). Also creates problems with privacy goal.

        Maybe revolt interface with matrix backend (like matrix bridge, but other way around) could take pressure off revolt and onto matrix server? And i read about discord matrix bridge, maybe use to „export“ chat to matrix then use them in revolt? No clue of their system though if that could even work.

        • philpo@feddit.deEnglish
          4·
          9 months ago

          The way I understood revolt their idea of federation was more between different Revolt instances, but it’s not a hugely discussed topic over there.

          The frontend would be no issue Matrix-wise, it’s not that difficult to build a Discord like client for Matrix if the actual backend would support the necessary features - which currently is not the case.

          The Bridge (I run one myself) is only good to use it as long as you use still Discord,so more for a migratory phase,yes. And technically it’s against their TOS,so it could end up bad for larger communities.

          Anyway, it’s clear that at least FOSS projects should definitely not work with Discord as a repository or support channel anymore.

          • far_university1990@feddit.deEnglish
            2·
            9 months ago

            The way I understood revolt their idea of federation was more between different Revolt instances, but it’s not a hugely discussed topic over there.

            Yes, also thought so.

            The frontend would be no issue Matrix-wise, it’s not that difficult to build a Discord like client for Matrix if the actual backend would support the necessary features - which currently is not the case.

            No meant revolt (backend) talk to matrix (backend), not alt front end. Like for handle lot of user data on matrix side and revolt only sync when done processing. Thought maybe help with load balance away from revolt and onto many different matrix server.

            Or bridge from matrix to revolt for similar purpose. Not too many user on revolt side, can offload user load to matrix and still connect large community. Or does bridge take same performance as process message as if on own server?

            Anyway, it’s clear that at least FOSS projects should definitely not work with Discord as a repository or support channel anymore.

            Fuck that, discord not a forum. Black hole of information, opposite of what support channel need to be.

  • Ignacio@kbin.social
    254·
    9 months ago

    Settling disputes between you and Discord

    Informal resolution. Most disputes can be resolved informally, so if you have an issue with the services, you agree to reach out to us before initiating a lawsuit or arbitration. This requires emailing [email protected] written notice (‘Written Notice’), which must include: (1) your name; (2) the email address or phone number associated with your Discord account; (3) a detailed description of the issue, and (4) how you’d like to resolve it. If the dispute is not resolved within sixty (60) days after receipt of the Written Notice, you and Discord agree to resolve any remaining dispute through further informal discussions or one of the formal dispute resolution provisions below. You must engage in this informal resolution process before starting any formal dispute resolution unless exempted by law. Applicable statutes of limitations and due dates for arbitration filing fees or other deadlines will be tolled upon receipt of the Written Notice to [email protected], while the parties attempt informal resolution.

    If you reside in the European Union, you may also be entitled to submit your complaint to the European Commission’s Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) Platform or the Out-of-Court Dispute Settlement (‘OCDS’) mechanism under DSA Article 21. ODR allows EU consumers to resolve disputes related to the online purchases of goods and services without going to court. Note that a submission to the ODR or via the OCDS mechanism alone, without submitting a Written Notice to [email protected], will not toll the applicable statutes of limitations or other deadlines.

    Governing law and jurisdiction. The Federal Arbitration Act, federal arbitration law, and California law will apply to these terms and any disputes related to these terms or our services, regardless of conflict of laws rules. Any dispute that is not subject to arbitration will be resolved exclusively in the state or federal courts in San Francisco County, California, and you and Discord both consent to venue and personal jurisdiction in these courts.

    If you are a consumer who resides in the European Union, this clause and these conditions generally do not affect any mandatory consumer rights you may have under your local law, and all disputes arising in connection with the services or these conditions shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the court of Amsterdam (The Netherlands) or, if you are a consumer, to the closest court to your home if you are in a state member of the Europan Union.

    THIS. Now, next time anyone posts something, think a little bit more about the rest of the world, because we exist too. US is not the only place here.

    • Cringe2793@lemmy.worldEnglish
      141·
      9 months ago

      I wish people paid more attention to Asia as well haha. At least y’all get mentioned.

      • el_abuelo@lemmy.mlEnglish
        7·
        9 months ago

        Why? You only have checks notes the majority of the world’s population.

  • Limonene@lemmy.worldEnglish
    19·
    9 months ago

    Haha. I sent them an opt-out notice by email, and it bounced!

    They are using Google email servers for discord .com and Google has apparently shadowbanned me. It gives an error message saying “The account [my email address] is disabled.” but I have never created a Google or Gmail account, and my email address is on a domain not associated with Google at all.

    So I’ve completed my obligation to opt-out. Discord will have no record of it, but I have the email server logs to prove I sent it.

    If, in the future, anyone needs to sue Discord and forgot to opt-out, feel free to use this same excuse.

    • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.comOPEnglish
      1·
      9 months ago

      Classic. Assuming that’s the email you registered your discord account works, wonder how that domain blacklist even works if it’s your primary login. It must have been added after you registered.

      That’s a major problem with any non-standard email domain names… They’re always at risk of being blacklisted by the big names due to “spam” (which conveniently entrenches the power of the big player domains like google). It basically means you can’t ever self host email because many large sites will auto blacklist EVERY email server until approved.

  • corsicanguppy@lemmy.caEnglish
    12·
    9 months ago

    Welp, killed the account.

    Honestly, I wasn’t getting much value out of it, so it made sense.

  • eronth@lemmy.worldEnglish
    11·
    9 months ago

    Super weird. I remember opting out of arbitration with them years ago… Like, 5+ years ago. Seems funky that they could just require me to opt out again.

    • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.comOPEnglish
      17·
      9 months ago

      No, not according to the current wording of the ToS. It only removes you from the arbitration requirement, but still retains all other sections of the ToS and allows you to keep your account.

      If they do choose to terminate you, it will make for a very interesting PR news cycle for them.