81–90 of 93 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Huge numbers? If I ever met anyone who said they read the full license for all software they use, I would call them a liar.
Stallman
One does not require a software license in order to use it. An elevator may be controlled by software, without having to sign an EULA. I have seen Stallman using a network connection where the router ran a non-free OS and where he did not sign a license agreement in order to use it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think there are two things at play here. 1. People perceive they don't have a choice. For example when you visit the doctor and you have to sign 12 different form/contracts. Most people believe they either sign them or don't get treated. 2. Fear of not understanding. They think they wouldn't understand they legalese even if they tried, so why even bother? Personally I don't blame them. I've read contracts that were…
I think a grossly underutilized tactic is learning the art of quickly reading and red-lining a contract. Meaning you go through line by line and cross out particularly nasty lines or clauses, or make quick edits, and then initial next to the changes. Then sign at the bottom and hand it back. It's a habit I picked up from being in the music business for years, specifically being a concert promoter in my early 20's, wh…
I'm always shocked by the number of people who don't read the contracts they sign. It's one thing if you have hundreds of pages of legalese in front of you - I can see the value of a service such as this, or hiring your own lawyer for such cases - but for a few pages, five minutes of your time max, I just don't understand why so many people don't take the time to do so. One habit I've noticed in highly successful peo…
Since you wanted anecdotal stories, I've known multiple relatively successful people (not billionaires, but millionaires who moved in high powered social circles) who didn't read the contracts for their rental cars or hotel rooms. It's not a particularly interesting anecdote. The anecdotes aren't interesting. Nothing ever came of not reading the contracts, but they were successful people who didn't take ten minutes t…
Also the rental companies have a an incentive to not be featured in a 60 minutes style expose.
https://freelancers.legalsifter.com/
http://techcrunch.com/2014/08/07/legalsifter-helps-designers...
As a lawyer, I am always excited to see innovation in the legal space. This seems like an interesting concept: using an algorithm to summarize a document (contract) and to flag unusual clauses. Put the document in, and out comes the legal blessing. However, I am a little concerned about the viability of this concept in terms of producing a valuable analysis. A true analysis considers the context of a document. For in…
Fellow JD here. I have to disagree with you re: viability. Not only does most of our work lend itself well to automation (discovery, researching precedent, and predicting case outcomes), but this particular startup is aimed squarely at the most obvious domain where humans mostly aren't needed anymore: formulating contracts. Translating boilerplate legalese into natural language and running both parties through checkl…
As a member of the State Bar of California, I can only wish it acted as a guild protecting my interests. Quite the contrary, it has an adversarial relationship with its members from overseeing the attorney discipline system to enforcing continuing education rules. It is more about consumer protection than attorney protection. I see your point, though.
Register seems to be crashing under load.
Great work guys!
Note: I didn't click on the link the first 3 times I saw it because (of the title) I assumed it was an article telling me I ought to read contracts ;-]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you find that has a negative affect on your interactions with society? I can't imagine I could find a dentist or doctor that didn't have patient contractual obligations that I'd rather not agree to.
This is the problem, really. Don't like some terms in e.g. a mobile phone agreement? Take it or leave it. If you can't mobilize a mass of people to join you in rejecting it (you almost certainly can't, even if everyone hates the terms) your choice is to sign or go to another carrier ( who will have the same problematic clauses in their contract). It'll hurt you more to be without a phone than it'll hurt the company n…
What's starting to emerge is the concept of a WiFi-only device which is usable for voice / messaging when within network range, but not otherwise.
I agree with you generally vis-a-vis power relations -- that's really a highly underappreciated element of economics, though Smith's own second discussion of wealth begins: "Wealth, as Mr Hobbes says, is power".
More generally, organizing politically to prohibit such measures is necessary.
Not merely "making them unlawful to use for discrimination", as there are plenty of other unrestricted grounds for discrimination. But prohibiting outright.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've walked out of businesses and/or offices on account of contract terms offered. There is that option.
Do you find that has a negative affect on your interactions with society? I can't imagine I could find a dentist or doctor that didn't have patient contractual obligations that I'd rather not agree to.
I'll note that there's discussions that happen as well. WallMart's story on HN had a substantial discussion of their mandatory drug test requirement.