I dont want to enter a contract when consuming your product..

It says you're bound by "opening and using" the product, rather than "opening or using". Have someone else open it for you. Then neither of you have done both.

Thus is the kind of legalistic bullshit interpretation I can get right behind
Contractual malicious compliance let's go
I think it should be “and/or” because if it’s just “or” the terms would only apply if you either open it or use it.
- No, that's xor
I think having someone open if for you still counts. You'd have to already find one opened.
- Leave it in a workplace fridge with a clear sticker saying "MIKES DO NOT TOUCH"
Go one step further and have someone under 18 who cannot legally enter into a contract open it haha

This is Vital Proteins brilliant response to being taken to court over heavy metal and "foreign materials" contamination in their products.

Do you have any supporting links? I saw a reddit post saying something similar but I cant find a real article or support. Either way I am returning the product.
- https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/prop65/complaints/2017-02480C5316.pdf
  Found searching ‘“vital proteins” lawsuit’
  Sued by an environmental nonprofit for failing to warn about the presence of lead and heavy metals as required by CA law. They settled.
- perhaps related to this?
  https://www.health.com/vital-proteins-collagen-peptides-recall-2023-7510523
I'm sure they definitely didn’t think removing all those pesky "foreign materials" and next-gen metals from they products...

Mandatory arbitration agreement for a protein shake or whatever it is. First it may not be enforceable. Second it makes me think that this product is not fit for consumption.

I wonder if we're not fucking ourselves.
"Not enforceable" may have been a thing of the past, with the way technology has developed. We may be approaching a point where terms & conditions ARE enforceable.
I honestly think it’s just a ridiculous ploy and that the product is fine. We need a proper regulatory system instead of this junk. I do think it’s unenforceable though.

Isn't that an illegally forced agreement? I mean, the consumer already bought the product and is forced to enter an agreement after the fact? At least it feels like it would be illegal.

It's the same with software, sure, but somehow I've been brainwashed into thinking it's ok because it's a digital product/I only agree to a license of said product.

If this is in the US you are 1 year away before companies can run Squid Games, "illegally forced agreement" is a thing of the past
- Squid Game at least honor the votes to end the game, IRL they'll just cancel elections lmfao.
- awesome, I hope the hunger games are only a few decades away
Def illégal in Germany. You can't force an arbitration agreement.

Add to this the fact they try to enforce mandatory arbitration - a thing that shouldn't ever exist to begin with, in any jurisdiction, and is actually unenforceable in many.

In most of Europe, no contract can take away legal rights
- Same in the USA, but that doesn't mean they won't try.
- Exactly
- This, and contract details that are shown after opening the packaging (as seen here covered by the lid) are void.
It doesn't matter if you can't afford the lawsuit.
- The legal system in Australia is better because if you win a lawsuit, the losing side usually has to pay your legal fees. As a result, there's far fewer frivolous lawsuits, and companies don't drag out lawsuits hoping the other party runs out of money (which is a common tactic in the USA), since they could be on the hook for all those costs.
- Then lack or presence thereof won't help you, either.

No way this is legally binding. It amounts to a bait and switch. A product was purchased and provided without agreement to any further terms. Then they sneak in supposed terms after the fact based upon the action of opening the product. That is a change in agreement made without any consideration for the purchaser. That's not generally allowed in contact law.

Furthermore, I really doubt that they can get away with the argument that the act of opening a product can constitute any amount of conscious agreement to some writing on a package. If for no other reason than that this is (afaik) a novel way to attempt to coerce agreement such that nobody would expect such an agreement to be part of the opening process and likely won't notice it.

And it's not accessible for every person who may be using this product even if they do notice the words. Are you a non-English speaker? Farsighted? Blind? Illiterate? Would you have any way to even be aware that those words are terms that somehow binding you to an agreement by virtue of your opening the thing you just bought? Would you have any reason to even suspect that that is the case?

Also, they'll undoubtedly claim that the fact that you have the opened product means that you agreed to the terms, but that is also not the case. Your mom opened it for you and wrapped it as a gift? You bought it secondhand? The packaging was torn open when it shipped to you and you never had any reason to see this text in the first place? It was misprinted? Any of those things and more would mean you never agreed to anything. And they have no way to prove any of those things weren't the case.

Just stupid. I have zero doubt that any number of lawyers would love take this to court and get that payday.

Absofuckinglutely
If I bought it and got home and found this, I'd return it as I have before. You're not trapping me into agreeing for anything without the notice on the OUTSIDE of the product packaging. Fuck this
- Plus it speaks volumes to the product itself. If they're trying to pull shit like this there's no way I'm trusting whatever they're trying to get me to put in my body.
All it does is prove to the purchaser that the fuckers don't trust the basic safety and fitness for use of their product. Spectacular self own.
It actually does have legal precident. You know how you can't read or accept the EULA for software until after you purchase it?
- They get away with stuff like that when they have sold you a "license" to their software, rather than something you gave actually purchased outright. It is argued that a license is a an agreement to access a software product, rather than ownership of it, and putting an EULA in between your license purchase or changing it later doesn't affect your purchase because you continue to hold the license even if you choose not to agree to the terms necessary to use it. It's a bit different for a physical item that you have actual ownership over, not a license to use it (pending agreement).
  I also find all of that to be loophole bullshit that should be fixed, but that's a separate issue.
- While true, the software put it in your face and forces you to interact with a screen that says "EULA". I doubt using a consumable as intended will hold any jurisprudence. But then again look who we have appointing judges right now...
Yep, I was just agreeing with someone else saying this is unenforceable. Just a ridiculous ploy and an attempt to make it precedent.

Would love to see them try and enforce whatever EULA they wrote up.

They’ll drag out any legal challenge in hopes you won’t want to pay for months of legal fees fighting it, on top of whatever legal fees are incurred that caused you to challenge it in the first place…
- Sometimes mandatory arbitration doesn't work out so well for companies either as Valve found out. When they run into what are effectively class action lawsuits but they get forced into individual arbitration with hundreds of thousands of people that clause starts to look really dumb.

There's an easy solution: keep buying it, break the seal to get to the message, then return it. Have your friends do the same, at the same store. Pretty soon that product will be gone and you can move on to the next store.

If the store starts to bitch about it, you can claim that you wanted to see if the statement had been removed.

By reading this comment, you agree to be bound eternally in thrall to me, and wear a maid dress for my amusement.

Where can I put my case of beer, bed and computer?
wear a maid dress for my amusement.
when you see my hairy ass stuffed into a maid dress and claw your eyes out, it'll be my amusement then. almost worth the dress...
Jokes on you I'm into that shit
Ugh damn it man. okay pm me your address
- im good
So when do I get the dress?
- Post a PO box and I'll send it over.

Time to use the box cutter and open it from the bottom.

Yeah they really slipped up by saying "and" using it, as opposed to "or".
I'm going to gnaw into it like a little rat.

That's concerning.

Is there a bigger red flag than a message on it saying 'if you break this seal you can't sue us!'

Ackchyually, that makes it easier to sue them.
- Attorney: -calls witness, a physicist- Physicist: “by simply observing this product, even without opening it, your clients life was changed in some way.” Attorney: “crazy label people, pay up!”

I hope you returned that shit. That’s not mildly infuriating, that’s capitalism has officially run amok and needs to be taken out back and shot in the head

Vital Proteins got bought out by Nestle and almost immediately turned to shit iirc

I didn't know this—time to shop for a new collagen supplement.

"By opening AND using this product (...)"

Have someone else open it for you, then consume the product yourself. Boom, no contract. Checkmate, lawyers!

hand it to a baby. it's like the cursed weapon loophole.
- And loose your right to claim the Amazon $5 gift card? You'll fold. Just like all the others.

Interesting how we've all become accustomed to the notion that "agreeing to arbitration" has just become "waving your consumer rights" and no lawmaker is pushing to have that fixed.

Because 98% of them are on the corporations' side because they practice insider trading.
- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_Arbitration_Injustice_Repeal_Act
  Don't be too lazy with your both sides bullshit.
  The Senate version of the bill, S.505, has 39 cosponsors, all of them being Democrats.[6]

Holy shit. How does this not just reduce their sales to 0?

The same way millions of ~~fucking morons~~ regular non-political people voted for drumpf: they thought, "well all politicians are bad, so it's not like voting for a bad guy is bad."
Most companies have loads of legalese attempting to protect themselves. Contrary to popular belief, that does not make them all equal.
- Those things aren't even remotely similar to each other in terms of badness.
It's not legally binding.
- Assuming you're talking about the US, this is correct.
  In the US you need to both actively acknowledge acceptance of the T&Cs, which simply opening a package typically doesn't meet.
  Also, and arguably more important, they need to include the entirety of the T&Cs for you to be able to review before accepting. This means on the packaging or presented at time of purchase, not requiring you to go elsewhere to find them or having to search them out.
  Now even though it's not legally enforceable, I'd say it's still scummy and companies that do it should be avoided.
Are you saying poop can be religious? It’s an inanimate object so I disagree. Your whole comment is dumb.
See I ignored the rest and just assumed. That’s how.
- Just wait until you hear about holy water.
  I do get the point of your comment, but I couldn’t resist
  Edit: it’s also funny as hell that you got downvoted, thereby proving your point. People really don’t read to the end of things
You know how all these companies are making it lives shittier?
Well people are what companies are. And people are the absolute fucking worst.
And unfortunately there are on orders of magnitude more shitty people who don't run the worst companies in existence than there are people who work for the worst of companies that are making them what they are.
Find your people, the ones that don't suck, because there are a lot more people who only want what's convenient for them and can't spare one spark of concern for all of the consequences that affect entirely too many people that don't want their decisions

There should be an "protest buy" action to any the products that do this bullshit. A large group of people buy the products and then return them to the store for a refund. Especially for perishable goods, this would make them worthless. Which would make stocking such products a loss and force the vendors and manufacturers to cut the shit out.

Well, the top cap apparently needs to be torn off to read the sentence, lowering the shelf appeal of the product even though there are other tamper-evident seals present.
Be careful, if you do a "protest buy", they may legally be able to not accept the return since you already knew about the contract. So you know, either don't do it or at least don't post on social media about it.
- Yeah you'd want to legally verify that and organize en masse for this to have any impact.

At the board meeting, I want to hear when they decided to broadcast that they're expecting to get sued, but in a really cute way

A good attorney could argue that drilling a hole in the side of the carton does not constitute opening the package.

The cap also says "by using", so you have been outlawyered. You've been had. You have forfeited all your rights. You are now a property of Big Protein. Better luck next time.
- By opening AND using.
  A good lawyer would surely argue that they didn’t open and use it.

Now that it's opened slightly, return it "immediately"

Open it from the bottom.

This isn't mildly annoying, this is corporate hellscape.

It depends if you live in a Google state or an Apple state.

Shit like this is rarely enforceable but in order to find out, you need to have money.

What I like to do is clap back and send them my own terms and conditions, with the stipulation that if they don't write back, then they are accepting them.

Just fyi, a biased judge could hold you to even the tiniest loophole the company might find if you send them terms that you define without their input. Still totally do it (IANAL), but you might want to either use boilerplate language whose implications you fully understand or run it by a lawyer.
That's actually legally binding, still do long as it's ensured mail (or whatever your country calls it when a signature is required to accept the package).
Ever had any replies?
- Oddly no but I suspect that it's either due to them not caring enough for one person doing this or them thinking their T&Cs will prevail in court.
  For me, I don't see a loss. Either my contract doesn't hold up, which means that I only lose time and money or it does hold up in which case I lose time and they (and every other company that has clauses where you accept terms by continuing services) loses their contract terms.
  If it ever came to it, I would bet the company would choose to settle rather than risk a president being set.

That's how you KNOW they're putting sawdust and filler in their products.

all that jazz for a protein supplement?

You even get some heavy metals included for free! What a bargain
Supplement purity is hard, yo.

Obvious solution is to not only return that one, but then go to a different brand of store, buy a bunch, then return them the next day. Repeat for each kind of store you can reach that sells them.

Relevant lockpicking lawyer video

Lol too bad they only wrote it in English

So when my underage child opens this what's the plan? Clearly theyre not old enough to enter into an "legally" binding agreement, right?

Make your own opening elsewhere on the package.

You're still opening it.
But if you have your friend open it, then you are not opening and consuming the product.
Of course, with such draconian rules, one should not drink that stuff anyway.

Telling us the product so we could avoid it would be useful.

Some Vital Proteins product, it seems.
https://www.vitalproteins.com/
Other people are saying it's Vital Proteins, apparently.

"I went to the url but it was just a 404, honest. No terms, no conditions"

This is a real thing?

Lg tried it on refrigerators, even though refrigerators are not delivered in boxes.So the customer never receives them. The delayed or denied every warranty claim on their stupid 2 stage refrigerant pump, then said since the customer opened the box with the terms agreement that they couldn't sue. It took more than a year to resolve just that there could be a class action lawsuit against LG.
- I had one of these fridges. The pumps even got an extended warranty since they failed so often. Mine died on year 6 of the 5 year standard MFG and it still got fixed for free because of the class action lawsuit.
  I learned about the lawsuit after the fact too.
- No LG appliances, no Samsung appliances... any other brands to avoid?
- I'm gonna need some good news soon. This dystopia just keeps getting worse and worse.

Write on the money you used to purchase this by accepting this money you agree to the terms of service...

Eat shit turdblossoms.

Ah! That's one of the worst parts of the internet, and they've figured out a way to make it real.

At least they mention the arbitration upfront, I guess.

Vital proteins take themselves a bit serious. I’d send it back. Terms and conditions my @$$.

Idiot behavior from self important companies should not be rewarded.

return it after opening and consuming. the text does not say if you do not agree do not open. nor does it say you can’t agree, open, then disagree.

I can't imagine that's enforcible. It is a reasonable expectation that when you purchase the product, you are free to use the product without further limitations being put upon you. They'd have to have you agree to arbitration before purchase, wouldn't they?

In the US it might stand-up unfortunately.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrinkwrap_(contract_law)
- Might, but that article is in reference to digital products and not physical ones.

Lmfao protein additives (or whatever that is) now come with a EULA…? What a time to be alive 🫠

I have completely agreed to the terms of 500 INTERNAL SERVER ERROR.

Has this been revealed after opening product? What a shit company. Are customers expected to read the T&C's every time someone opens the packaging? FYI, the page mentioned links to 4 additional pages and one of them is a 404.

What is this ridiculous product?

An unregulated "nutritional" supplement. If it puts you on dialysis for the rest of your life - arbitration only and the best they can offer is a 25% discount on your next purchase. Limit 2.

They’re bringing back Prima Nocta.

Is that even legal?

Almost certainly not. Just like click-through terms (terms that are offered only by link with an Ok button) are not enforceable. It's just there to dissuade those that assume it has any weight, which isclikely most people that are not lawyers or filthy rich who would consult a lawyer anyways if they got hurt.
It's almost certainly on similar legal grounds to a cease and decist letter. You're not being sued, you're just being warned that they don't like you via legalese.
- I would have thought that that applied to the Uber wrongful death suit also, but at least one court decided that type of click-through terms were binding even though it was clearly a bunch of shit.
  Although, it was overturned later because it's a bunch of shit. But it was at least a debate.
  https://evan.law/2021/05/18/murdered-uber-passengers-mom-can-keep-her-case-in-court-and-out-of-arbitration/
Depends: how poor are you?
No, but they can use it to drag out the court case until you run out of money.
It probably isn't legally binding, but is enough to get most folks off their back.

hilarious. I think they're doing you a favor so you don't have to buy this product ever again

You can disagree to the terms by pulling it open the other way around.

a kidney or other superfluous organs. mmm fruity

Did... Did someone MAKE you buy that?

It sure looks like this is displayed after peeling back the very top layer that is still slightly attached at the top right in the image.
So they most likely did not know this was a thing when they purchased it.

Open it from the bottom.

Alright then, dear trusted canopener: We have a mission to perform at the other end.

Next there will be cookie banners

This is what I imagine buying kratom is like

Not really. They just hand you the powder in a pouch and say "that'll be $16.42, please".