See title - very frustrating. There is no way to continue to use the TV without agreeing to the terms. I couldn’t use different inputs, or even go to settings from the home screen and disconnect from the internet to disable their services. If I don’t agree to their terms, then I don’t get access to their new products. That sucks, but fine - I don’t use their services except for the TV itself, and honestly, I’d rather by a dumb TV with a streaming box anyway, but I can’t find those anymore.

Anyway, the new terms are about waiving your right to a class action lawsuit. It’s weird to me because I’d never considered filing a class action lawsuit against Roku until this. They shouldn’t be able to hold my physical device hostage until I agree to new terms that I didn’t agree at the time of purchase or initial setup.

I wish Roku TVs weren’t cheap walmart brand sh*t. Someone with some actual money might sue them and sort this out…

EDIT: Shout out to @testfactor@lemmy.world for recommending the brand “Sceptre” when buying my next (dumb) TV.

EDIT2: Shout out to @0110010001100010@lemmy.world for recommending LG smart TVs as a dumb-TV stand in. They apparently do require an agreement at startup, which is certainly NOT ideal, but the setup can be completed without an internet connection and it remembers input selection on powerup. So, once you have it setup, you’re good to rock and roll.

  • grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    69
    ·
    9 months ago

    you know that report is going straight into the rubbish bin.

    In that case, you should additionally complain to your Congressperson that the FBI isn’t doing their goddamn job.

    • NateNate60@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      9 months ago

      No, what’s more productive is writing that this should be a crime. It’s currently not.

      If you think otherwise, let’s pretend you’re a prosecutor. Which offence do you accuse them of committing (use a legal citation to refer to a specific section), list out each of the elements of that offence and explain why you believe each of them is satisfied.

      • barsoap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        No, what’s more productive is writing that this should be a crime. It’s currently not.

        It’s at the very least coercion by ways of property damage, at least in sane legal systems.

        Also it’s generally not the job of citizens to figure out which paragraph exactly to throw at an accused, that’s what police and prosecutors are for.

        • NateNate60@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          9 months ago

          The parent commenter asserts that it is a crime. What I essentially said is “prove it”. I assert there is no law that makes this behaviour a criminal offence. Prove me wrong. Don’t say “Well, this is what the law should be”, tell me what the law is.

          If you want to talk about what the law ought to be, write to your legislators. It’s not the FBI’s job to write the rules. They only enforce what’s already there.

          I don’t think the behaviour is right, and it may be illegal in other ways, but it isn’t a crime, and if it isn’t a crime, reporting it to a law enforcement agency is just wasting your time.

          • barsoap@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            and it may be illegal in other ways,

            And it is the responsibility of law enforcement to figure that out. If I go to the police and say “that guy stole from me” and the actual criminal case ends up not being for theft but embezzlement, did I waste the agency’s time?

            You don’t need to have a law degree to be entitled to file a complaint with the system.

            • NateNate60@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              9 months ago

              By “illegal in other ways” I mean “creates a civil cause of action”. This is not something the police can help with. You don’t need a law degree to complain but I think you’re just being purposefully obtuse.

              • barsoap@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                Last I checked coercion is a crime over here. Property damage is, too.

                You’re one of those people who hear a smoke alarm, want to call the fire brigade, but first wonder whether it’s actually opportune, whether you shouldn’t deal with it yourself, whether the situation is bad enough, aren’t you. The answer is yes it is the department rather moves out too often than not often enough and chalks up burnt potatoes at the bottom of a now dry pot under exercise.

                You have a reason to believe that a crime could have occurred because your innate sense of justice got offended. You can articulate which action of a particular entity offended it. That’s enough, they’ll take it from there. Might it go into the bin and you be told “sorry that’s a civil matter”? Yes. But that’s their job. Just as it’s the job of the fire department to deal with you not being able to cook potatoes.

                • NateNate60@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  My God. You just used words that you think are criminal offences, and then proclaimed that you think they applied. “Last I checked” my arse, you did not check at all.

                  And when I tell you to read the statutes and show why you think they apply, you go and say “No, that’s not my job” because you’re either too lazy to Google search the text of the law or you’re afraid of seeing that you wouldn’t be able to justify your point.

                  You claim this is a criminal offence. You can’t cite or don’t want to cite any criminal statutes substantiating your claim. Instead you just speak out of your ass instead of checking to make sure. The information’s there. You just don’t want to read it.

                  You’re wrong. Just quit the conversation already. You’re not winning this one.

                  • barsoap@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    9 months ago

                    You just used words that you think are criminal offences,

                    §§ 240, 303 StGB.

                    Yes I know that’s German law. I don’t know US law. But I bet if I sold you a fridge and three days later came into your house and said “sign this or I’ll destroy the fridge” that’s a crime in the US. “Computer sabotage” is the rough equivalent of “trespass” in this example, you still have property damage and coercion even if computer sabotage doesn’t apply for some reason.

      • Mic_Check_One_Two@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        It’s not a crime per se, but it does open them up to civil litigation. Because it’s a contract of adhesion, where the consumer gains nothing from the additional terms, cannot negotiate the terms prior to acceptance, and is forced into accepting the terms on a take-it-or-leave-it basis.

        In order for a contract to be enforceable, both sides need to be able to negotiate the terms, and both sides need to receive something meaningful from said contract.

        • NateNate60@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          I think you’re likely right, but I think this is also why reporting it to the FBI is a waste of time. The FBI only deals with criminal matters.

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          It’s not a crime per se, but it does open them up to civil litigation.

          If I am a shop owner and sell you a washing machine, and then three days later come into your house with a baseball bat saying “sign this or I’ll destroy the machine”, did I commit a crime?

          The thing they want you to coerce you into is civil, yes, but that doesn’t make coercion a civil matter.