Features, settings & updates

[Campbell220]

I can't watch my TV because I don't agree to the Dispute Resolution Terms. Please help 

[dbmixer]

I agree with all of the above but would add, remove all accounts that are processed through Roku along with your payment method.

I just finished my opt out letter which will be sent registered mail today.

My rough draft to my Senators and Congressional Representatives will be emailed later today.  I am going to also send a copy to the FTC, BBB & State Att. General.

Roku Inc. is getting bombed for this heavy handed and arrogant tactic of dealing with its customer base.  It is obvious that they wanted it to place a greater burden on the customer who elects to opt out than those without issue and elect to agree.

This could have easily been remedied by having the choice of "Agree" or "Opt Out" at the end of the notice.

Looks like some really poor legal advice and now Roku will pay the price.

[formercustomer]

So, you buy a product, and you use it. And they want to change the terms limiting your rights, and they basically brick the device (an entire tv, if it's a roku tv) if you don't accept their new terms. This should be illegal. It must be. I hope they get their comeuppance here, as this is disgraceful.

It makes me think there are big problems ahead for roku. Why else would they do this? It reminds me of 23andme and their data breaches and lawsuits.

In any case, they've lost all good will in our house and in our neighbor's. We have two devices (a tv and a regular roku) and are moving to replace them, probably with mini-computers. We have a mini-computer in the living room, and it's all around a better experience.

[techfan]

>> every company you deal with will have very similar terms

Fascinating and stunningly obvious information. Be a Roku fan, if you like, its a nice little device, but don't trivialize other's experiences.

In my case,  I don't even use the **bleep** Roku streaming device. I have a TCL Roku TV with a connected Apple TV. All I use "Roku" for is to switch inputs to the other device. However, I can no longer use my TV, at all,  unless I agree to these BS terms.

To reiterate, I didn't choose a Roku streaming device, I don't use a Roku streaming device, It was simply included with the TV I liked. If I'd known that I would be forced to agree to Roku's terms to simply turn on my **bleep** TV, I never would have purchased it.

And, for the record, no...not every company forces both binding arbitration and binding mass arbitration. While many larger companies do this, not all of them do. And so far, not a SINGLE company I've EVER dealt with, in 60 years of dealing with many, many companies, has EVER retroactively bricked my two year old device unless I agree to their terms.

This is NOT normal corporate behavior.

[andyross]

Then you will need a new TV. BUT, be aware that probably ALL Smart TV's and electronics have the same binding arbitration agreements.

[Burkenstock5]

Did anyone else have their account completely deleted?  I woke up this morning to a completely wiped Roku and I can't reset a password because my account is gone. 

[techfan]

>> The only large company I know that does not have an arbitration only clause

Sorry to continue this, but you got me curious. I didn't want to respond definitively without first researching my answer.

To the best of my knowledge the main competitors for Roku are as follows: Amazon Fire TV, Apple TV, and Google TV.

As you can easily check, via the links below, exactly zero of them (except Roku) have a binding arbitration clause. All are, I believe, comparatively large companies.

Amazon Fire TV Terms

https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html

Apple TV Terms

https://www.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/appletv.pdf

Google TV Terms

https://play.google.com/about/movies-tv-usage-rules/

https://play.google.com/intl/ALL_us/about/play-terms/index.html

I mostly use both Apple TV and Google TV. Neither has required me to retroactively agree to terms to continue using their devices. Again, this is NOT normal corporate behavior.

As an apparent fan of Roku, you should not want Roku to do this either. They are already losing market share to new competitors. Does anyone honestly believe this action is going to help them regain it?

Instead of paying l@wyers to fend off suits, and annoy customers, they would be better served investing money to improve their services and win back customers.

[andyross]

As noted all over the place, binding arbitration has been in the Roku TOS for several years. This was just a minor update, but they made a bigger deal about making sure you knew about the changes.

And, be aware that I'd assume 100% of electronics and services have the same terms in their own TOS's. They only way to avoid them is to get rid of all your electronics, cancel all your credit cards, read books, and deal only in cash.

[techfan]

att@rney, l@wyer, and l@wsuit are all blocked...though, strangely not counsel or suit 🙂

[Anonymous]

I'm done with this. Want to have a hissy fit about this? Feel free. I've got more important things to be concerned about. Anyone who did not know the terms of service before they use it, has no one else to blame. That what's going on here, People had no idea what the terms are.