• Tetsuo@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    Honey has in its terms of services that you accept not to take part in a class action lawsuit and favor arbitration. It seems like these kind of clause is enforceable usually so I’m curious to see how Legal Eagle will navigate the issue.

    Edit: Either the creators sue Honey and they will argue it is not illegal to poach affiliate links because they follow the “last click” rule that is standard (it’s just that they pushed it to the extreme).

    Or its the users that are scammed because they were told the best coupon would be used. But if it’s the users, they are under the EULA and should have to comply with the no class action rule.

    I’m not a lawyer but this is how I understand the setup for this trial to be.

    • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      16 days ago

      The class is people that use referral codes as an income source, so not the users that would have been subject to the terms of service.

    • Hugin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      In this case the class action would be youtubers and other content creators not users of Honey.

      • Tetsuo@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        Then it remains to be proven that it is illegal to poach affiliate links like that. Because Honey says they just follow strictly the “last click” rule that is common practice in the field.

        It’s bullshit but if that bullshit rule is indeed the standard practice then it will be hard to fight.

        • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          That’s kind of like a looter invoking the ‘finders keepers’ defense. Last click isn’t a law.

            • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              13 days ago

              That’s okay, because there is a law about interfering with someone else’s contracted agreement.