Author gives permission to reprint.
We’ve Updated Our Legal Terms
by bdunn on April 17, 2014
Just for General Mills. Yup.
You know General Mills. It’s a big honkin’ conglomerate producing many, many tons worth of processed factory food-like substances your kids clamor for due to multimillion-dollar advertising campaigns engineered by rogue child psychologists to wham on the Youth Sugar Organ tucked into the brain’s lower vortex.
Well, it turns out General Mills gets sued a lot. Like many corporate executives, those at General Mills decided they could save a lot of money on lawsuits by finding a way to force aggrieved customers and the like to use arbitrators rather than hire lawyers to settle their grievances. Now, this happens all the time when a consumer is forced to sign or otherwise agree to what amounts to a contract, such as the purchase of licensed software or cellular service. Lawyers for companies who provide such goods and services know there is nothing worse for their companies than other lawyers, and so they insert clauses basically telling their peasant customers that if they want Internet or cable TV or a mobile phone, they had better give up the right to hire a lawyer should their ears or balls fall off due to negligently configured microwave towers or web packets or what have you.
But until the New York Times reported it today, we had heretofore never before been forced into giving up our right to hire lawyers through the act of eating a bowl of Honey Nut Cheerios. Now, apparently, we have:
“PLEASE NOTE THAT SECTION 3 BELOW CONTAINS A BINDING ARBITRATION CLAUSE AND CLASS ACTION WAIVER,” the company says, shouting, all in caps, in the “Legal Terms” section of its web site. “IT AFFECTS THE RIGHTS YOU HAVE IN ANY DISPUTE WITH GENERAL MILLS (INCLUDING ITS AFFILIATED COMPANIES AND BRANDS), INCLUDING DISPUTES ARISING OUT OF YOUR PURCHASE OR USE OF ANY GENERAL MILLS PRODUCT OR SERVICE FOR PERSONAL OR HOUSEHOLD USE, INCLUDING GENERAL MILLS PRODUCTS PURCHASED AT ONLINE OR PHYSICAL STORES.”
General Mills’ team of lawyers then goes on to say that you are entering into a “binding legal agreement” and consent to give up the above rights “in exchange for the benefits, discounts, content, features, services, or other offerings that you receive or have access to by using our websites, joining our sites as a member, joining our online community, subscribing to our email newsletters, downloading or printing a digital coupon, entering a sweepstakes or contest, redeeming a promotional offer, or otherwise participating in any other General Mills offering…”
The Times says that new lawyer words added to the General Mills web site after a Times reporter called them up now indicates “that buying its products would bind consumers to those terms.”
Ergo, eat a bowl of Honey Nut Cheerios, give up your right to hire a lawyer with whom to sue General Mills.
Now why, I wondered, would the maker of so many fine food-like substances go to such great lengths to keep attorneys so far at bay?
The Times reporter wondered, too, and found that General Mills had paid $8.5 million last year in a suit over health claims it made about its Yoplait yogurt, and was forced in another case to remove the word “strawberry” from its Strawberry Fruit Roll-Ups, which somehow did not happen to contain even a trace of strawberries.
A little search for both “recalls” and “General Mills” also found:
? General Mills recalled some single-serve cases of Cinnamon Toast Crunch cereal last year because they might have been tainted with salmonella;
? General Mills recalled some batches of Pillsbury Cinnamon Rolls With Icing last year because they might have contained fragments of plastic;
? General Mills recalled some cases of Old El Paso Hot Chunky Tomato Salsa last year “due to the presence of glass.”
? General Mills recalled cans of Progresso Italian Wedding Soup last year after word got out beef used in the soup had come from a slaughter house the U.S. Department of Agriculture accused of processing “diseased and unsound animals” whose meat was not inspected by the government, you know, as is required by law.
So in response to General Mills’ contention that I have (mistakenly or otherwise) purchased one or more of the company’s products and thus in effect signed a contract that I knew nothing about giving up my right to hire a lawyer and sue the crap out of said General Mills if I eat a mouthful of high-fructose corn syrup-encrusted glass shards for breakfast, I have made some changes to my web site’s Legal Terms, to whit:
IF YOU ARE A CURRENT OR PAST EMPLOYEE, CONTRACTOR FOR OR REPRESENTATIVE OF GENERAL MILLS CORP. OR ANY OF ITS AFFILIATES OR SUBSIDIARIES, BY HAVING READ THIS BLOG POST, GLANCED AT THIS WEB SITE OR THOUGHT ABOUT READING THIS OR ANY OTHER ARTICLE LOCATED AT THIS INTERNET DOMAIN YOU HAVE FOR ALL LEGAL PURPOSES AGREED THAT BOB DUNN AND ALL MEMBERS OF HIS IMMEDIATE AND EXTENDED FAMILY POSSESS THE IRREVOCABLE RIGHT TO HIRE A VERITABLE BUTTLOAD OF LAWYERS IF THEY SO CHOOSE, FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUING GENERAL MILLS AND/OR ITS AFFILIATES, SUBSIDIARIES, EMPLOYEES, EXECUTIVES AND/OR CONTRACTORS INTO SUBMISSION ANYTIME THE MOOD STRIKES AND THEY FEEL SO MOVED.
I’m glad we got that settled.
Feel free to share this with your friends:
http://www.bobdunn.com/dunnbob/wordpress/2014/04/17/weve-updated-our-legal-terms/
= new reply since forum marked as read
