[hundchenkatze]

Here's a case between Uber and a blind person [0].

TLDR:

- Someone is suing Uber for discrimination because drivers didn't allow the person's guide dog in the car.

- Uber's terms state users can't sue Uber and must go through Uber's arbitration process

- Uber's terms were presented in the "By continuing you agree to these terms" fashion

- Person claimed they never agreed to arbitration and that they should be allowed to sue Uber, and a state court agreed

> But the broader impact of the ruling is to put companies on notice that they can't bind users to restrictive terms merely by linking to those terms somewhere in a site or app's registration process. In order to create a legally binding contract, a tech company has actually put the terms in front of the user and get them to affirmatively agree to them.

[0] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/01/court-says-uber-...

[m463]

California allows you to opt-out of binding arbitration at the time of signing or for a period after signing.

[colejohnson66]

That’s actually part of the Federal Arbitration Act; It’s not specific to California. However, California’s labor laws do have some restrictions on arbitration in the workplace.