It says you’re bound by “opening and using” the product, rather than “opening or using”. Have someone else open it for you. Then neither of you have done both.
Thus is the kind of legalistic bullshit interpretation I can get right behind
Contractual malicious compliance let’s go
Yeah but just to be clear, the terms are likely there for a reason and using this product probably has risks associated.
The only product I want to use with a liability waiver attached is the bungie cord at the fair.
Apparently, it’s full of lead.
Why would a bungee cord have lead?
Weight makes you go faster
I think it should be “and/or” because if it’s just “or” the terms would only apply if you either open it or use it.
No, that’s xor
Go one step further and have someone under 18 who cannot legally enter into a contract open it haha
I think having someone open if for you still counts. You’d have to already find one opened.
Leave it in a workplace fridge with a clear sticker saying “MIKES DO NOT TOUCH”
This is Vital Proteins brilliant response to being taken to court over heavy metal and “foreign materials” contamination in their products.
Do you have any supporting links? I saw a reddit post saying something similar but I cant find a real article or support. Either way I am returning the product.
https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/prop65/complaints/2017-02480C5316.pdf
Found searching ‘“vital proteins” lawsuit’
Sued by an environmental nonprofit for failing to warn about the presence of lead and heavy metals as required by CA law. They settled.
Found searching ‘“vital proteins” lawsuit’
that’s just cheating
prop 65 is a useless law that goes against known science about hazard limits, causing manufacturers to have to label nearly everything with warnings. if a company is violating that law, it usually doesn’t mean much.
Seems like a labelling issue due to california laws rather than legitimate ingredient flaws with toxic or heavy metals.
Honestly you should assume all supplements are toxic and full of heavy metals, because that shit is virtually unregulated.
To some degree I totally agree. If you don’t find 3rd party lab verified then I’d be skeptical. Not just any 3rd party. It has to be from legitimate Orgs and trusted vendors.
I’m unsure how much people look at labels now days, unless you have a health issue requiring it. The levels of say vitamins manufacturers add to even like biotin or other vitamins/supplements. Thousands and sometimes 10s of thousands more than a daily dose your body can consume. Which means your kidneys or liver have to process that out. Things are toxic in high doses.
Its all about balance. A lot of these supplements are way way out of balance. It’s a shame, businesses or people can’t be reputable.
perhaps related to this?
https://www.health.com/vital-proteins-collagen-peptides-recall-2023-7510523
Would love to see them try and enforce whatever EULA they wrote up.
They’ll drag out any legal challenge in hopes you won’t want to pay for months of legal fees fighting it, on top of whatever legal fees are incurred that caused you to challenge it in the first place…
Sometimes mandatory arbitration doesn’t work out so well for companies either as Valve found out. When they run into what are effectively class action lawsuits but they get forced into individual arbitration with hundreds of thousands of people that clause starts to look really dumb.
And fuck the American Arbitration Association.
That’s concerning.
Isn’t that an illegally forced agreement? I mean, the consumer already bought the product and is forced to enter an agreement after the fact? At least it feels like it would be illegal.
It’s the same with software, sure, but somehow I’ve been brainwashed into thinking it’s ok because it’s a digital product/I only agree to a license of said product.
If this is in the US you are 1 year away before companies can run Squid Games, “illegally forced agreement” is a thing of the past
deleted by creator
Well they do hide their own guy amongst the players who can influence the vote
awesome, I hope the hunger games are only a few decades away
Def illégal in Germany. You can’t force an arbitration agreement.
Vital Proteins got bought out by Nestle and almost immediately turned to shit iirc
I didn’t know this—time to shop for a new collagen supplement.
At the board meeting, I want to hear when they decided to broadcast that they’re expecting to get sued, but in a really cute way
Now that it’s opened slightly, return it “immediately”
By reading this comment, you agree to be bound eternally in thrall to me, and wear a maid dress for my amusement.
Ugh damn it man. okay pm me your address
im good
everyone’s all for enthralling randos on the internet, but as soon as they ask A/S/L suddenly its gone to far
thou can serveth me from uhh… over there
I’m sorry, the contract has already been signed.
So when do I get the dress?
Post a PO box and I’ll send it over.
deleted by creator
wear a maid dress for my amusement.
when you see my hairy ass stuffed into a maid dress and claw your eyes out, it’ll be my amusement then. almost worth the dress…
Where can I put my case of beer, bed and computer?
all that jazz for a protein supplement?
One full of toxic heavy metals.
Supplement purity is hard, yo.
You even get some heavy metals included for free! What a bargain
Lol too bad they only wrote it in English
So when my underage child opens this what’s the plan? Clearly theyre not old enough to enter into an “legally” binding agreement, right?
Shit like this is rarely enforceable but in order to find out, you need to have money.
What I like to do is clap back and send them my own terms and conditions, with the stipulation that if they don’t write back, then they are accepting them.
That’s actually legally binding, still do long as it’s ensured mail (or whatever your country calls it when a signature is required to accept the package).
Just fyi, a biased judge could hold you to even the tiniest loophole the company might find if you send them terms that you define without their input. Still totally do it (IANAL), but you might want to either use boilerplate language whose implications you fully understand or run it by a lawyer.
Ever had any replies?
Oddly no but I suspect that it’s either due to them not caring enough for one person doing this or them thinking their T&Cs will prevail in court.
For me, I don’t see a loss. Either my contract doesn’t hold up, which means that I only lose time and money or it does hold up in which case I lose time and they (and every other company that has clauses where you accept terms by continuing services) loses their contract terms.
If it ever came to it, I would bet the company would choose to settle rather than risk a president being set.
Interesting how we’ve all become accustomed to the notion that “agreeing to arbitration” has just become “waving your consumer rights” and no lawmaker is pushing to have that fixed.
no lawmaker is pushing to have that fixed.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_Arbitration_Injustice_Repeal_Act
Was reintroduced several times, Passed the house once. Republicans keep killing it in committee.
There’s also the Justice for workers Act specifically for employer force arbitration, more recently
Mandatory arbitration agreement for a protein shake or whatever it is. First it may not be enforceable. Second it makes me think that this product is not fit for consumption.
I honestly think it’s just a ridiculous ploy and that the product is fine. We need a proper regulatory system instead of this junk. I do think it’s unenforceable though.
I wonder if we’re not fucking ourselves.
“Not enforceable” may have been a thing of the past, with the way technology has developed. We may be approaching a point where terms & conditions ARE enforceable.
