515
TikTok requires users to “forever waive” rights to sue over past harms (arstechnica.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
57 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 16 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Except in several states if any of the contract is invalid it all is.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 20 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    In the United States where TikTok is based, contracts can include "severability clauses" that state that in the event any part of the contract is deemed unenforceable, the other parts are still good

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Uhhh tiktok is based in China

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Wasn't there a big hoohar about that a couple of years ago which meant they had to move?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    Corporate:'I'm sorry you were looking for an issue with tik tok. the problem is. tik tok is not the issue.'

    due to dividends untold tik tok just money guns politicians in the cooter till they spazzin...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    What

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child)

    Wasn't there a big hoohar about that a couple of years ago which meant they had to move?

    My Comment In gest " we investigated ourselves and found there to be nothing wrong, also we gave money to policy makers."

    did you forget what you typed above? was my comment so far left field?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Is that true? I can't find any source for it, except very specific cases where the language and contents of the contract matter.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    IANAL; However Usually the contracts have a severability clause, meaning even if some parts of that contract are null and void the rest of it stands minus the parts that are illegal. Does that mean those clauses are also null and void depending on locality? Again IANAL, but I believe it's pretty settled contract law at least in the US.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    It's a pretty common clause in most contracts, so I'm not sure why you're so confident that they aren't used in EULAs

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •