Read this and replies with at least 1 scholarly source to support your conclusions and ideas, as well as Biblical application in current APA format. (minimum 100 words) Note that “I like what you said
Read this and replies with at least 1 scholarly source to support your conclusions and ideas, as well as Biblical application in current APA format. (minimum 100 words) Note that “I like what you said,” “that’s a good comment,” and “I disagree with your comment” do not count as a complete reply.
As Facebook is a massive online corporation, they choose to include forum shopping within their terms and conditions, although it to be considered an unethical practice. I personally believe that Facebook is mainly trying to reduce their legal risks from upset consumers, however this convenience falls short as it attempts to override global court jurisdiction. Having forum shopping within the terms of service limits the court’s choice of venue to the petition party, that being Facebook. I believe forum shopping makes it much harder for the plaintiff to sue a corporation, which should not be the case if a consumer is suing for a legitimate reason.
I personally believe that courts should disregard Facebook’s clause in its user agreement as forum shopping limits many of Facebook’s global users from responding to Facebook’s actions. This is because forum shopping disqualifies country of reception approaches to suing the online entity. Some studies have found that “even if the complainant wins on the merits, will the state subject to the judgment change its behavior? The current trend suggests that the answer to both questions is no” (Gates, 2017, p. 307).
Need assignment help for this question?
If you need assistance with writing your essay, we are ready to help you!
Why Choose Us: Cost-efficiency, Plagiarism free, Money Back Guarantee, On-time Delivery, Total Сonfidentiality, 24/7 Support, 100% originality
Since Facebook is a company that appears within many global markets, this would mean that Facebook should be subject to jurisdiction of every state court in the United States. Being restricted to venue is not optimal because the case is limited to that very state’s laws (Bone, 2017, p. 2). My conclusion to this matter is that internet-based companies need to have the ability to be invited to international court systems; even if it is merely a virtual appearance. If Facebook does not wish to deal with this international inconvenience, then they should have necessary precautions to which users may use their service, otherwise Facebook should not open up to a global market at all.
For Facebook to limit the number of people being able to sue, they are in fact attempting to not be tied to their consumer’s opinions and requests. I believe this to be unethical since Scripture states in Proverbs 12:15 that “The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but a wise man listens to advice” (ESV).