Thread

1. oceansky · 1790000838 · focus · HN ↗

   Good outcome, but forced arbitration should still be illegal.

   1. TZubiri · 1790003430 · focus · HN ↗

      What's the line? If 2 brothers sign a contract, can't they decide their father will be the judge if disputes arise?

      If there's a sports match, shouldn't the sports arbiter be able to decide whether some team scored a goal or not?

      These are all valid civil contracts. It only affects the civil claims, never criminal, and the venue for disputing the arbitration clause (if you believe arbitration wasn't legal to begin with) are the public courts anyways, who will delegate or not to the private court.

      Almost all countries recognize it and it has a quite defensible theory.

      1. Glyptodon · 1790004489 · focus · HN ↗

         I think my gripe is less that it exists and more so that it's not a negotiated agreement. I think it should only be allowed if the contract was negotiated between two parties with full authority to offer any terms in the negotiation. If it's a standardized, take it or leave it, contract where one party has no opportunity to offer alternative terms that get proper and full consideration by the other party, it shouldn't be allowed. In most of the examples you give, they are contracts that have been clearly negotiated between parties, not click-wrapped take it or leave it, my way or the highway, terms.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.