Forced arbitration with Smartwool socks
❗Article Status Notice: This Article is a stub
This article is underdeveloped, and needs additional work to meet the wiki's Content Guidelines and be in line with our Mission Statement for comprehensive coverage of consumer protection issues. Issues may include:
- This article needs to be expanded to provide meaningful information
- This article requires additional verifiable evidence to demonstrate systemic impact
- More documentation is needed to establish how this reflects broader consumer protection concerns
- The connection between individual incidents and company-wide practices needs to be better established
- The article is simply too short, and lacks sufficient content
How You Can Help:
- Add documented examples with verifiable sources
- Provide evidence of similar incidents affecting other consumers
- Include relevant company policies or communications that demonstrate systemic practices
- Link to credible reporting that covers these issues
- Flesh out the article with relevant information
This notice will be removed once the article is sufficiently developed. Once you believe the article is ready to have its notice removed, visit the Discord (join here) and post to the #appeals channel, or mention its status on the article's talk page.
Smartwool is a brand of wool clothing. The incident described in this summary is a example of Post-purchase EULA (End User License Agreement) modification (colloquially referred to as "EULA roofieing"). It occurs when a business attempts to create or modify a contract after a sale on the basis of no-response from customers. Often this is done as prudence for business interests. However, it creates the potential for unjust situations[1]. To illustrate the magnitude of risk posed by a clothing-related EULA, one can imagine a less responsible company accidentally including toxic dyes or coatings due to supply chain mishaps. In such a case they might avoid paying damages to the harmed consumers.
A feature of this example is the strategic use of asymmetry. The business delivered their opt-in in a inexpensive, unexpected, and casual nature. The consumer has to do absolutely nothing to opt-in, and they can opt-in without reading it. Opting out is difficult, tedious and relatively expensive.
Incident of Post-purchase EULA modification
According to a viewer of the Rossman channel,[2] Smartwool emailed a list of their account holders stating that they were opting them into forced arbitration, and to opt out, they must send a letter. through USPS Priority Mail, which is not the First Class mail that people typically use for mailing letters.
In addition to being a post-purchase action, the customers were opted in via email and could not simply reply to the email to opt out.[3]
References
Video associated with this article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=670rwHz1WV8