i don’t see that anywhere in the notice and such a clause would be unconscionable, IANAL.
All the notice claims is “violations of [ToS], including misuse of Tesla’s trademarks and brand identifiers in media content that falsely implies endorsement, sponsorship, or affiliation with Tesla.”
This interpretation of the ToS could be deemed unconscionable, but that seems like the kind of argument that takes a judge and 5-6 figures in legal fees to settle.
An arbitrator is just going to read it, say ‘yup, you broke the rule’, and side with the company.
i don’t see that anywhere in the notice and such a clause would be unconscionable, IANAL.
All the notice claims is “violations of [ToS], including misuse of Tesla’s trademarks and brand identifiers in media content that falsely implies endorsement, sponsorship, or affiliation with Tesla.”
ToS is effectively a contract.
This interpretation of the ToS could be deemed unconscionable, but that seems like the kind of argument that takes a judge and 5-6 figures in legal fees to settle.
An arbitrator is just going to read it, say ‘yup, you broke the rule’, and side with the company.