Hacker News Reader

The Zoom arbitration agreement includes a specific clause for that which lets them combine separate claims together and only arbitrate 15 of them.

From a consumer perspective it really is a no-win situation. The agreements are specifically designed to make the process as one sided as possible.

View on HN

> lets them combine separate claims together and only arbitrate 15 of them

Link to the language? I don't believe they can dismiss an unrelated claim on the basis of having argued another.

https://explore.zoom.us/en/terms/

I misremembered; it’s 16, not 15

This looks innocuous. It lets them consolidate cases of “substantially similar nature brought against either party by or with the assistance of the same law firm, group of law firms, or organizations.”

Each side picks eight cases while the others are held. Once those sixteen are decided the rest are resolved, collectively, taking those sixteen cases’ resolutions into account. At each step, you can dispute the characterisation, and Zoom pays the arbitration fees.

Nobody’s case is ignored. It’s to avoid this [1].

[1] https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/uber-loses-appeal-b...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com