This paper begins by evaluating and comparing the Terms of Use policies of three different, prominent companies: Lowe’s, Best Buy, and Starbucks. The language will be evaluated from both a customer and a business perspective, as well as the strengths and weaknesses of each being discussed. This is necessary to understand in order to later make recommendations for the Terms and Use conditions of Softieware Limited to achieve an economically viable policy. Evaluation Strengths and Weaknesses of Lowe’s Business perspective. The dispute and binding arbitration section of Lowe’s Terms and Conditions of Use (n.d.) describes that any dispute or claim made by the customer against Lowe’s will be resolved through binding arbitration. From a business perspective, this is a strength of the policy because it allows the company to avoid the heavy financial burden that is felt through hiring various attorneys and the extensive court process. A weakness of the Terms of Use policy (n.d.) is that the company is required to pay half of the costs associated with the administrative expenses and arbitration fees (Dispute Resolution section, para. 10). This will have a negative impact on Lowe’s financially given the fact that they’re obligated to pay their half of the fees. …show more content…
A strength of the policy for the customer is that arbitration may be conducted over telephone, in a court of your county, or at another court that is agreed upon by you and a company. This offers the customer more freedom of choice of the venue that their arbitration will be held at. A weakness of this policy is that Best Buy will only reimburse arbitration fees for claims under $10,000 (“Terms and Conditions”, 2017). This is a drawback for the customer because in the event that their claim exceeds $10,000, they would be required to pay those outstanding arbitration