[throwaway092323]

They probably know that it doesn't hold water legally. The hope is to victim blame as much as possible so that fewer people sue them in the first place. The next step will be to "remind" people about the TOS that they totally agreed to.

[dylan604]

This looks like a perfect class action case. There's really no physical harm or financial harm to the users, but a class action might be the only way for it to hurt. But IANAL, and probably have it all wrong in my head???

[underwater]

Why is it that in the US individuals have to band together and privately launch a class action to stop these types of parasitic behaviours. The government is supposed to represent the interests of citizens.

[lp0_on_fire]

Exactly. Same reason construction vehicles have "Stay back 200 feet: not responsible for broken windshields" written on the back.

[constantly]

Yep. A small tangent for anyone who has seen these: they’re very clearly not specifically enforceable. I got a window banged up by things falling off a truck with this signage, and the first thing they said when I called their “How Am I Driving” number the first thing they said was that they were not responsible citing this sign. Fortunately that sign was non binding. :)

[eweise]

At least in California, its illegal for anything to fall from a vehicle except water and bird feathers so not sure how that sign help them.

[dotnet00]

or the "Warranty void if removed" stickers on electronics, which are not legally enforceable in the US.

[arwhatever]

“Not responsible for black eye if something falls from your vehicle and damages my vehicle.”

[candiddevmike]

Does this apply to shopping carts in parking lots?

[batch12]

I wish a class action could include those of us who have never used their service, but whose relatives have.