This site is a developmental version of Wiki Law School. To go to the production site: www.wikilawschool.org

Harris v. Blockbuster: Difference between revisions

From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
mNo edit summary
m (Text replacement - "|case_treatment=No " to "")
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
|court=Northern District of Texas
|court=Northern District of Texas
|date=2009-4-15
|date=2009-4-15
|subject=ontracts
|subject=Contracts
|other_subjects=Privacy
|other_subjects=Privacy
|case_treatment=No
|facts=Blockbuster Inc.'s online outlet had a '''click-wrap''' requiring users to agree to "terms & conditions." These terms & conditions includes an (1) arbitration clause, & (2) a class-action waiver.
|facts=Blockbuster Inc.'s online outlet had a '''click-wrap''' requiring users to agree to "terms & conditions." These terms & conditions includes an (1) arbitration clause, & (2) a class-action waiver.


Line 20: Line 19:
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link
|link=https://www.quimbee.com/cases/harris-v-blockbuster-inc
|link=https://www.quimbee.com/cases/harris-v-blockbuster-inc
|case_text_source=Quimbee video summary
|source_type=Video summary
|case_text_source=Quimbee
}}{{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link
}}{{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link
|link=https://casetext.com/case/harris-v-blockbuster-inc
|link=https://casetext.com/case/harris-v-blockbuster-inc

Latest revision as of 03:39, July 14, 2023

Harris v. Blockbuster
Court Northern District of Texas
Citation
Date decided 2009-4-15

Facts

Blockbuster Inc.'s online outlet had a click-wrap requiring users to agree to "terms & conditions." These terms & conditions includes an (1) arbitration clause, & (2) a class-action waiver.

Blockbuster contracted with Facebook to automatically share the customers' movie rental selections with their Facebook friends.

Ms. Harris claimed that Blockbuster was sharing her rental history at Blockbuster with her Facebook friends without her informed, written consent. Harris claimed a violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA).

Procedural History

Harris sued Blockbuster in a Texas state trial court.

When Blockbuster moved to invoke the arbitration provision, Harris argued that the arbitration clause is illusory.

The case was moved to the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

Issues

Is a contract illusory if a promisor can change the terms at any time?

Holding

Yes. A contract is illusory if a promisor can change its terms at any time.

Rule

Morrison rule: A contract is enforceable is it contains a savings clause that only applies amendments to disputes that arise after the amendment is published.

Case Text Links