Roku users across the country turned on their TVs this week to find an unpleasant surprise: the company asked them to agree to new dispute resolution terms in order to access their device. The devices cannot be used until the user agrees.
Users (at least this user) received an email the other day that said “we’ve made changes to our Dispute Resolution Terms, which describe how you can resolve disputes with Roku. We encourage you to read the updated Dispute Resolution Terms. By continuing to use our products or services, you agree to these updated terms.”
The terms, of course, include a binding arbitration agreement that prevents the user from suing or participating in lawsuits against Roku. It is common these days as a way of limiting liability and users often have little or no recourse. They only find out later when the company does something heinous and the consequences are negligible. Tech companies love this one dirty trick to save millions!
But what’s really new about reading the terms is an entire “Informal Dispute Resolution” section. That requires anyone with legal complaints to first take them to Roku’s lawyers, who will hold a “Meet and Conference” call and then “make a fair, fact-based settlement offer,” which will no doubt be generous and thoughtful. So they’ve added a pre-arbitration arbitrator to further remove legal threats from going into effect. The change actually happened last fall, but it only went into effect recently, and now, a few weeks later, users are being updated using this method.
I try to opt out of them when I can, and after reading the terms (of course, by “continuing to use” my TV I had already agreed) I found that you could only do so by sending a written notice to their lawyers — which I fully intended to do today . In fact, since arbitration was apparently already required, this provides an opportunity to opt out of something I didn’t know I was already subject to.
But yesterday I turned on the TV and saw the notification again, as did countless others (some saw it a few days ago), who quickly took to the forums to complain. I accidentally agreed (again… I think) by pressing the star button then back, which I intended to look for an exit, but there was none. There was no access to the device without agreeing to the new terms.
Interestingly, the terms themselves have not changed for a long time. Whenever they were informed
Here’s how it looked to anyone trying to watch the new episode of Shōgun (great so far):
Image Credits: Roku/AJCxZ0 Forums
This is from forum user AJCxZ0, hope you don’t mind.
Not that this is all that unusual. Besides, we constantly use apps and games that present us with new EULAs and terms and conditions. I probably ignored a dozen or so and exposed myself to untold dangers here. But there is indeed something rather despicable about completely disabling a user’s device until they agree, and having basically anything the user does count as agreement. Many phones, apps and services allow you to keep using them for a period of time or limit you to the current version until you agree.
Unfortunately that is not the case here. As of this moment I am bound by this new agreement. I’ll still be exceptional, and so will you — but you’ll have to move quickly. You can only do so within 30 days of the new terms coming into effect for you. It could be when you were notified, but it could also be March 20th, which is 30 days after they nominally (and silently) went into effect on February 20th. So grab a pen and paper and jot down the following information:
- Name of person being excluded
- Contact information (address and phone, possibly)
- Email used to register the Roku account if applicable
- “Issue” product, software or service model — for example, the model number of your TV or streaming stick. It may also mention Roku OS.
- If you have proof, you can include it but it’s not necessary, obviously
Even if they already have it. Stick it in an envelope and send it to…
- Stephen Kay, General Counsel, Roku, Inc.
1701 Junction Court, Suite 100
San Jose, CA 95112
Thanks in advance, Stefan. Although in hindsight, I, and also literally every user of your company’s services, would have preferred a simple electronic opt-out instead of this dishonest ploy to increase friction and further force acceptance of these terms.
Don’t delay, or when people sue them for how they held devices hostage in order to force them into consumer-unfriendly dispute resolution terms, you won’t be able to join the fun. It will only be the 35 or so of us who still have pen, paper and folders within easy reach who will reap the benefits.
Modernize: My mistake, the arbitration terms already existed, but not the informal dispute resolution terms. However, the devices were effectively inaccessible until users agreed to the terms, which quietly went into effect two weeks ago. I have updated the post to reflect this.
Roku declined to provide a statement on the file, though they pointed out that arbitration was already in the terms. I’ve asked some follow-up questions and will update again if I hear back.
