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.
Rather than a TV, I just have a Roku box that I plug into my TV, and it had the same issue. I started it up today and was met with a box that said something like, 'By clicking this, you agree to the updated terms' -- and there's no option to VIEW the terms, the users simply must agree to them or they can't use the box. I wish I had a small child to click through this junk for me (without me knowing or seeing it) because it seems unreasonable pay good money for a 'thing' and then have the maker arbitrarily and unilaterally pull a Darth Vader, "I am altering the deal. Pray I do not alter it any further."
Maybe we should get congress to require companies to fully reimburse consumers for this tactic.
Because so few have read it, there is an opt out. It's a bullshit way that is designed to make people not do so, and asks you to provide the hardware and software of all devices you opt out from by writing a physical letter and mailing it to Rokus General Counsel.
I'm curious what products/services you can use without agreeing to the TOS. If you're buying a TV that's literally branded as an online TV... I don't know what was expected.
You get how thinking you can just hyphenate them as if they're equivalent is part of the problem, right?
The entire issue here is that it's a violation of both the First Sale Doctrine and the buyer's property rights to try to treat a product as if it's a service.
Right. Hey man, you go right on ahead and sue every software company and service provider that makes you sign terms of service before you can use whatever the product is.
Let me know how it works out for you. You guys are acting like this is the first time you've ever had to click on "I agree"
I think it is getting downvoted because most things you buy (like toasters and shoes) can be used once you buy them. Nothing keeps you from continuing to use them after purchase. Even with computers, you agree to the OS license on purchase/install, and then you get to keep using it. At least historically, if a new update has a new license, you could refuse the upgrade and keep using the old version. For recurring payment items like monthly subscriptions, it makes sense that you can't keep the original terms, but for one-time purchases, you should not have to change what you bought unless they are willing to take it back for a full refund.