The ‘Terms and Conditions’ Reckoning Is Coming • Hacker News Board

Re: The ‘Terms and Conditions’ Reckoning Is Coming

#21

Post by heymijo » Fri, Apr 20, 2018, 3:21 PM UTC

dyladan wrote: post #12

>”I don’t think the average person likely reads that whole document.” This is my favorite quote in the whole article. Sums up the pompousness of the company quite nicely I think. This is one of the largest companies in the world. The quote could easily have been “we go to great lengths to make sure that’s the case,” or “that’s the point, grandpa.” At least it wouldn’t have come across as dishonest and cowardly that w…

I assume Facebook has data showing how long each user stays on the T&C page before consenting or not.

I wouldn't be shy to conjecture that time elapsed before consenting is a very small fraction of the time it would take an average reader to get through, let alone comprehend the terms and conditions.

Re: The ‘Terms and Conditions’ Reckoning Is Coming

#22

Post by aesh2Xa1 » Fri, Apr 20, 2018, 3:23 PM UTC

jve wrote: post #19

dyladan wrote: post #12

>”I don’t think the average person likely reads that whole document.” This is my favorite quote in the whole article. Sums up the pompousness of the company quite nicely I think. This is one of the largest companies in the world. The quote could easily have been “we go to great lengths to make sure that’s the case,” or “that’s the point, grandpa.” At least it wouldn’t have come across as dishonest and cowardly that w…

That is actually quite honest. Do you read temrs for all services? Or do you read terms at least for most important services? If you do, great. Many don't and just complain or are surprised when they learn what almost every service on the web does with his data.

OP is saying that it is actually the intent of the company that the end user does not read the ToS; it's an accusation that the quote demonstrates deceptive intent and therefore not honest in a way you haven't considered (in your response).

Re: The ‘Terms and Conditions’ Reckoning Is Coming

#23

Post by pjc50 » Fri, Apr 20, 2018, 3:24 PM UTC

alex_young wrote: post #3

How can PayPal rationalize closing accounts because users opened them years ago when they were too young? Is that really an issue for a 28 year old? Contract or no, PayPal looks really bad here. One would think they would be looking for good will rather than this kind of press in such a competitive market.

PayPal close user accounts on the slightest pretext. Often they keep the money.

Re: The ‘Terms and Conditions’ Reckoning Is Coming

#24

Post by DoofusOfDeath » Fri, Apr 20, 2018, 3:30 PM UTC

Disclaimer: I hate complex / abusive T&C's, and I'm keen to see them abolished. But...

It seems to me like we as a public are blaming corporations for our failures. As adults we're responsible for what contracts we enter into, except in cases of coercion.

99% of us were stupid enough to state that we accepted terms that we didn't even read. Especially in cases where the product/service was purely optional (Netflix, Call of Duty, etc.), I don't see how this is anything but our fault. IMO, we have not been acting as competent, responsible adults.

Should we change our laws to make complex and/or abusive T&C's go away? Absolutely. But are corporate lawyers the only flawed agents here? IMO, no.

Re: The ‘Terms and Conditions’ Reckoning Is Coming

#25

Post by ceejayoz » Fri, Apr 20, 2018, 3:37 PM UTC

DoofusOfDeath wrote: post #24

Disclaimer: I hate complex / abusive T&C's, and I'm keen to see them abolished. But... It seems to me like we as a public are blaming corporations for our failures. As adults we're responsible for what contracts we enter into, except in cases of coercion. 99% of us were stupid enough to state that we accepted terms that we didn't even read. Especially in cases where the product/service was purely optional (Netflix, C…

> 99% of us were stupid enough to state that we accepted terms that we didn't even read.

I don't think that's fair. These things are written at a high reading level (worse than Beowulf: https://theconversation.com/googles-terms-and-conditions-are... ; https://www.creditcards.com/credit-card-news/unreadable-card... says credit cards require a reading level half the population lacks), with domain knowledge the vast majority of us lack. Reading them is pointless - even with a college education we don't have the information needed to detect many legal traps laid in these things.

They're also extremely lengthy, and generally "subject to change at any time without notice".

Re: The ‘Terms and Conditions’ Reckoning Is Coming

#26

Post by SketchySeaBeast » Fri, Apr 20, 2018, 3:37 PM UTC

ben_w wrote: post #5

> If a typical user wouldn’t understand the [user agreement documents], the consent that companies rely on for their business activities would be legally invalid. I’ve not had time to read the GDPR, so this is news to me.* Especially surprising, because it’s exactly what I want the law to say, and I’m not used to that. I’d also like that principle to apply to the law as a whole, but I appreciate that’s as much wishfu…

If agreement for a contract requires easily understood English, what does that mean for my mortgage?

Re: The ‘Terms and Conditions’ Reckoning Is Coming

#27

Post by dawnerd » Fri, Apr 20, 2018, 3:43 PM UTC

One thing I’d like to see outlawed is forced arbitration. Waiving someone’s right to a lawsuit is just wrong and only serves to benefit the company.

Re: The ‘Terms and Conditions’ Reckoning Is Coming

#28

Post by DoofusOfDeath » Fri, Apr 20, 2018, 3:47 PM UTC

ceejayoz wrote: post #25

DoofusOfDeath wrote: post #24

Disclaimer: I hate complex / abusive T&C's, and I'm keen to see them abolished. But... It seems to me like we as a public are blaming corporations for our failures. As adults we're responsible for what contracts we enter into, except in cases of coercion. 99% of us were stupid enough to state that we accepted terms that we didn't even read. Especially in cases where the product/service was purely optional (Netflix, C…

> 99% of us were stupid enough to state that we accepted terms that we didn't even read. I don't think that's fair. These things are written at a high reading level (worse than Beowulf: https://theconversation.com/googles-terms-and-conditions-are... ; https://www.creditcards.com/credit-card-news/unreadable-card... says credit cards require a reading level half the population lacks), with domain knowledge the vast maj…

I agree with your points about the incomprehensibility and onerous terms of such agreements. And in cases of coercion or semi-coercion (e.g., it can be hard to get a job without owning a cell phone), I can understand accepting the T&C's despite those problems.

That's why I'm limiting my argument to other situations such as Netflix and video games. For those situations, I'm arguing that adults should accept full responsibility for choosing to accept those horrible T&C's.

Re: The ‘Terms and Conditions’ Reckoning Is Coming

#29

Post by ashelmire » Fri, Apr 20, 2018, 3:51 PM UTC

liberte82 wrote: post #13

_xnmw wrote: post #7

Just like an underage person or drunk is unable to give consent, it should be illegal to coerce an average Joe untrained in the law to agree to a 50-page document filled with legalese, unless you pay for them to be advised by a lawyer.

When exactly did it enter the public consciousness that drunk people are unable to give consent? I feel if this is true, there are many drunken hookups that become questionable. I'm in my mid-30s, and I feel this concept wasn't really a thing in my clubbing days.

Your own ignorance of the law and unawareness of what constituted consent at the time does not reflect on the state of society at the time. It was always illegal and immoral to have sex with someone who was very drunk (at least, well before either of us was born). The line was and is not always clear, but there have always been clear cases (e.g. having sex with someone who has passed out or drugged is obviously illegal and immoral).

Similarly, legal contracts require a meeting of the minds, which requires that parties not be intoxicated. A quick search suggests such contracts are not void by default but are voidable.

Re: The ‘Terms and Conditions’ Reckoning Is Coming

#30

Post by rabboRubble » Fri, Apr 20, 2018, 3:52 PM UTC

DoofusOfDeath wrote: post #24

Disclaimer: I hate complex / abusive T&C's, and I'm keen to see them abolished. But... It seems to me like we as a public are blaming corporations for our failures. As adults we're responsible for what contracts we enter into, except in cases of coercion. 99% of us were stupid enough to state that we accepted terms that we didn't even read. Especially in cases where the product/service was purely optional (Netflix, C…

250 hours: that is the number of hours required to actually read all the adhesion contracts the typical American is exposed to in a year.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/03/terms-of-...

250 hours is a full man-month of time. Do you have a free month in your calendar to read contracts and do very little else? Nobody I know has that sort of free time. So calling people or their behaviors "failures" for not reading all contracts is an unfair, unrealistic expectation.