23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

Re:23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration by CrendKing on Wednesday December 06, 2023 @11:05PM (#38552698)

What prevents 23andMe from simply deleting the opt-out emails they receive and claiming they never received anything, in case someone did sue them?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration by houston_Euler on Wednesday December 06, 2023 @11:08PM (#38552709)

Wouldn't the sender have a time-stamped copy?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration by justneedaname on Thursday December 07, 2023 @04:56AM (#38554683)

2 Generals problem

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF on Thursday December 07, 2023 @02:07PM (#38560428)

Courts aren't dumb, though. It's a lot harder for an average person to fake something in their gmail outbox than it is for someone working for a corporation to delete emails from an inbox. Google could also possibly be sent a subpoena.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration by mminer237 on Thursday December 07, 2023 @09:48AM (#38556942)

The sender could simply show in his outbox that he did send such and 23andMe would be in even worse legal trouble then?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration by CrendKing on Thursday December 07, 2023 @02:08PM (#38560449)

I asked because unlike paper mail where the deliverer is one trust-able government/commercial body, email by its distributed nature is delivered by hosts everywhere in the internet. How does plaintiff generally gather evidence to prove the email was indeed delivered in these cases?

[ Parent | on HN ]