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.

  • @ofcourse@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1411 year ago

    I reached out to Roku support regarding this. The rep told me “why are you complaining. You are the only one.” He then disconnected the chat. I’ve reached out to my state’s AG to report this. No action so far but waiting. If there are enough complaints, that might help move the needle.

    What Roku is doing should be completely illegal - bricking the product after purchasing it for full price if you don’t agree to waiving your rights.

  • @theangryseal@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    131 year ago

    I have a dumb 4k tv. It’s cheap, it won’t meet everyone’s needs, but I really really really don’t want a smart tv.

    It’s a Sceptre. Cheap enough that if it breaks it won’t break your heart to replace it.

    • @recapitated@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      81 year ago

      Funny, I got a large Toshiba with fire TV because it was the cheapest option when I was looking, loaded with surveillance capitalism from Amazon.

      Regretted it immediately, I would pay double for a dumb tv next time.

      • @theangryseal@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        51 year ago

        My tv is wonky as hell sometimes. I have to spray the volume button with contact cleaner from time to time or it turns itself up or down.

        It’s fine other than that though haha.

  • @grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    86
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Report Roku to the FBI for violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act by hacking into and sabotaging your property.

    That’s a sincere suggestion, by the way. This shit should literally be a crime.

    • @pete_the_cat@lemmy.world
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -13
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yeah, that would definitely not go anywhere. Roku isn’t hacking into their device. OP probably bought a Roku Smart TV for like $75 (the cost is subsidized by Roku, hence why it’s so cheap) and is now complaining about it. It’s like buying an Amazon FireTV and then complaining about Amazon having control over the TV.

      Edit: am I saying it’s right? No, but sometimes it pays to read the EULA. If you’re getting something for cheap, there’s probably a reason for it.

      • @stellargmite@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        81 year ago

        Non American here, and also not a lawyer, but I’m curious what the correlation is between consumer rights (or lack of) and the relative cost of the product. This is somewhat different to buying a cheaply manufactured product and it unsurprisingly falling to bits - though in many jurisdictions there are even basic rights for that situation, the price is irrelevent. Someone elsewhere in chat has suggested suing in small claims for the cost of the product, due to Roku intentionally bricking their own product unless the rightful owner (is the purchaser even the owner?) agrees to certain terms, even though OP purchased it in good faith. If a straight up refund is not available during a straight forward opt OUT option, we have a very unfair situation for the rightful owner of this product. Needless to say opting out should be as straight forward as opting in. Your suggestions is that if a product is of or below a certain price you must bend over and gratefully accept the corporation you paid money to, then inserting anything they like up your rear end. In my opinion your thesis is not price based as this is a common practice unfortunately in the consumer (and enterprise for that matter) tech industry where we have had shiny brand even expensive products initially sensitively torpedoed up our various orifices, only for brand HQ weeks later to press a button which flicks open hidden blades in the torpedo. No one wants or deserves this. The question is what recourse is there in OP’s jurisdiction.

        I may be misunderstanding you if actually you mean that any tech corp can do such a thing at any time that you have paid for. In which case we agree. But it’s far from ideal and shouldn’t be accepted.

        • @pete_the_cat@lemmy.world
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          21 year ago

          I’m not saying it’s right for them to do this, it’s a shitty practice and I’d definitely be pissed off. What I’m saying is there’s probably a clause in the EULA/TOS that pretty much says Roku has control over the function of the TV and either you accept those terms or you don’t use the TV. The price comparison was just pointing out the difference in experience between getting a $50-75 Amazon Fire tablet vs a $700 Samsung Galaxy tablet. The former is going to have ads all over it and Amazon controls it essentially, they tell you this, meanwhile the Galaxy tablet most likely has no advertising or additional strong-arming since you’re paying a lot more for it. The company is always out to get their income one way or another is simply the point I was making.

          There is practically zero consumer protection in the US (assuming OP is from the US).

            • @pete_the_cat@lemmy.world
              cake
              link
              fedilink
              English
              21 year ago

              No problem, this is essentially the Human Cent-iPad South Park episode playing out in real life… Obviously without the shit eating and mouth to ass sewing 😂

    • @NateNate60@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -211 year ago

      Don’t do this. This just creates more work for the FBI and you know that report is going straight into the rubbish bin. That is just wasting public resources.

      • @grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        401 year 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
          41 year 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.

  • @Ottomateeverything@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    321 year ago

    IANAL, and not that it really makes this bullshit any better but…

    It’s unlikely that agreeing to terms of service that claim you waive rights to any class action lawsuit would actually hold up as legally binding in court. Many of these agreements aren’t reply binding are already legally gray… Plus, universally vaguely signing your legal rights away in any contract doesn’t hold any water either.

    I highly doubt you’d actually lose any rights to a check box that’s bound to “you can’t ever sue us”.

    • @phx@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      It’s like the waivers at skihills etc. Lots of stuff not legal, but it gives then deleting to waste your time and money on and the can afford the lawyers better than you can

    • @DaleGribble88@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      161 year ago

      IANAL either, but I’m pretty sure you are correct. I put it in another comment somewhere, but I’m more upset about not being given a choice to refuse the change rather than the actual change itself. I don’t mind signing the waiver at amusement parks, or to buy a car with no warranty. I just want to know what I’m agreeing to, and I don’t like folks pulling the rug out from under me or changing the deal.

      The situation feels like if I were to drop out of college, I would be given electroshocks until I’d forgotten anything learned in class.

      • @Ottomateeverything@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        71 year ago

        Yeah, I totally agree with you, don’t get me wrong. I think it’s bullshit to switch terms. And also bullshit to write terms that just say “if we fuck you over, you can’t do anything about it”.

        I just wanted to point out that the legality of it probably wouldn’t hold any actual water so don’t be totally paranoid about it and take it with a grain of salt. For anyone who’s a little more torn.

        But yeah, Idk that I’d keep the device at that point either.

    • @T156@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      31 year ago

      I highly doubt you’d actually lose any rights to a check box that’s bound to “you can’t ever sue us”.

      Could the agreement not force OP to use arbitration if they wanted to sue, making it economically infeasible to do so themselves?

      • @chiliedogg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        71 year ago

        Pretty much all arbitration clauses require the manufacturer to pay for the arbitration. That’s the consideration offered by the manufacturer to get the customer to waive their rights to sue.

        It’s actuaoworked out well for me I the past, because once you start going down the arbitration path, they’re more likely to just give you what you want since that’ll be cheaper than the arbiter in the end win or lose.

        • @Raxiel@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          And as Elon found out, mandatory arbitration clauses can come back to bite you, like when a large number of claims have to be paid for separately all at once and can’t be consolidated to save costs.

  • @tomkatt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    81 year ago

    Shit like this is why my LG C1 is restricted to LAN access only in my router (local network for automation purposes) and can’t communicate with the internet.

    • @ohlaph@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41 year ago

      I think the purpose of roku is to stream though, so it needs Internet. Unless it can serve local stuff, that I uave no idea about.

      • @COASTER1921@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        81 year ago

        This is referring to the Roku built into many TVs. So you have no choice but to deal with it at least a little bit for switching between your HDMI/PC inputs. The reason this case is so bad is that it literally prevents you from using any input or device until you find the Roku remote that came with the TV and click accept. The TV is a “brick” until you do this.

  • Ghostalmedia
    link
    fedilink
    English
    181 year ago

    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.

    Search for monitors, not televisions. For example, you can get an 48in and 55in OLEDs dumb monitors with multiple HDMI inputs.

    • @Raxiel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      Just make sure they have audio out too (unless your source can drive a soundbar directly). I just got a new monitor that had built in speakers. They’re dog shit, and I didn’t plan on using them anyway, but I hadn’t appreciated how useful it was having a device that can decode the audio stream from HDMI or DP.
      I still have my old usb soundbar for the times I want a loudspeaker, but I can just leave my headphones plugged into the monitors jack and switch the output device on the computer.

  • Cosmic Cleric
    link
    fedilink
    English
    6
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Sections 1(F) and 1(L) seem like the only ways out/around of this. (IANAL; the bolding emphasis was done by me.)

    F. Small Claims. You or Roku may pursue any Claim, except IP Claims, in a small-claims court instead of through arbitration if (i) the Claim meets the jurisdictional requirements of the small claims court and (ii) the small claims court does not permit class or similar representative actions or relief.

    L. 30-Day Right to Opt Out. You have the right to opt out of arbitration by sending written notice of your decision to opt out to the following address by mail: General Counsel, Roku Inc., 1701 Junction Court, Suite 100, San Jose, CA 95112 within 30 days of you first becoming subject to these Dispute Resolution Terms. Such notice must include the name of each person opting out and contact information for each such person, the specific product models, software, or services used that are at issue, the email address that you used to set up your Roku account (if you have one), and, if applicable, a copy of your purchase receipt. For clarity, opt-out notices submitted via any method other than mail (including email) will not be effective. If you send timely written notice containing the required information in accordance with this Section 1(L), then neither party will be required to arbitrate the Claims between them.

  • @neomachino@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    291 year ago

    I don’t see how this could be legal at all and how any of those terms could be applicable. My 2 year old found the remote today and he loves buttons, so naturally he pushed every button on there. I thought nothing of it but saw something pop up and then disappear, I assumed it was an error or something from the button mashing, but I guess my 2 year old agreed to rokus new TOS.

  • @aesthelete@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    9
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Mac address ban the TV from your network and it should work but will no longer have Internet access. I just did this locally and it worked for the one, have to go out but will do it on the other one as well.

    • @aesthelete@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      In order to prevent it from blinking, factory reset the TV once it’s unconnected to the network, and then make sure to not reconnect it to the Internet during the setup process. Afterwards, you’ll be stuck trying to find ways to replicate all of the built-in functionality of the TV like I now am. I had no idea the Chromecast w/ google TV’s apps had such shitty surround support…anyone know a good replacement device? The ONN streamers are similar in that they basically only put out PCM stereo for Hulu.

    • @RainfallSonata@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      31 year ago

      This. I used a large-screen, dumb tv as a computer monitor for streaming for several years. My kid got his first real job and bought us a smart TV. It is so much worse…

      • @A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Smart TVs are only bad if you do the dumb thing of connecting them to the internet.

        I miss Dumb TVs, and Sceptre quality is too hit or miss to rely on them.

  • muculent
    link
    fedilink
    English
    141 year ago

    Take a brick to Roku until it agrees to your terms.