[–] chirogonemd 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

My God the reporting on this situation is awful. Final ruling?

The only thing that has been done is the court denied Patreon's injunction to avoid arbitration. The cases are still going to be heard in arbitration and there is no guarantee at all that the arbitrating agency isn't going to rule in Patreon's favor.

[–] spirit1977 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I have read multiple sources that state that Patreon also has to pay for the costs of both sides in arbitration. With multiple cases this could cost them millions. If Pateron wins then they might then have a chance to recover the money but that might be difficult as some people might not have the money.

Stopping deplatforming is not true. A new company will be started that has different terms of service. Arbitration will not be possible with this new company.

[–] chirogonemd ago  (edited ago)

The chances are better than zero that arbitrators will still form a class from these suits. It wouldn't surprise me anyway. Think about it. Each of the claims has the same substance, that each plaintiff was harmed in precisely the same way, at precisely the same time by the exact same (and singular) action of Patreon's. This is what classes exist for. Patreon was wrong to try to thwart that process in their TOS, and that might deserve something punitive, but precedents like this would be bad for industry in general. This is just the sort of situation that class action is designed to handle. Treating this as 100 separate suits is ridiculous, but so were Patreon's TOS.

At any rate, arbitrators may decide to, and that may represent the punitive action. As in, "See Patreon? See what happens when you try to use TOS to get around the law?" I'd like to see this happen, personally. Again, I doubt that it will. I would bet money that arbitrators form a class of these litigants.

Nobody is talking about this other side of things, which is that there are going to be 10 million eyes on this case. There is going to be a lot of pressure on the arbitrators in this case, and I'm sure a lot of big tech money "leaning in" on them, if you will. If this arbitration leads to 100 separate victories for the litigants, for a singular action that damaged them all in the same way at the same time, then you might have a pseudo-precedent for fan communities being able to act like labor unions, in some sense, and throwing their big dicks around at big tech.

Of course, as you point out, this all has to do with TOS. We aren't going to defeat this monster with suits that pivot on TOS. Even now all of the other companies are changing their TOS and have teams of lawyers going over them with fine-tooth combs to make sure they're water-tight. At best, we can damage one company this way and keep the rest on their toes. We need a more fundamental change in the philosophy of law, however, if we think we are going to impact the overall trajectory that we are in with regard to the people's relationship with big tech.

[–] daskapitalist 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Bust a deal, face the wheel.

[–] areyoumygaffer 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

not a big shock. patreon has people paying money to support people. direct finance to those who contribute. not like other (((influencer))) scenarios requiring links.

patreon will fall first.