Earlier quoted context omitted.
Easily.
In the sense of introducing far far more ambiguity and making the law incomprehensible, yes.
You obviously didn't look at the law you are speaking about.
The ‘Terms and Conditions’ Reckoning Is Coming
251–255 of 255 posts
Re: The ‘Terms and Conditions’ Reckoning Is Coming
#252Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Where, precisely... Right here, clear as day: "We collect information from or about the computers, phones, or other devices where you install or access our Services, depending on the permissions you’ve granted" Also notice that if they have that data, you explicitly gave permission to access phone/SMS data in the app install process; i.e., you granted those permissions. > ...steal... Again, that's the problem! Face…
No, it's not clear at all, and wasn't clear to virtually anyone who agreed to it.
Care to propose a rephrasing that's more clear? If the average person can't understand the meaning of that sentence, the only real solution is to improve K-12 English teaching.
> and wasn't clear to virtually anyone who agreed to it
Virtually everyone who agreed to it never bothered to even try to read the policy in the first place. So, really, what difference does that make?
Again, the fundamental point is that chasing ToS clarity/readability/length is a losing battle. The majority of consumers don't care enough to read, no matter how simple you make things. Improving this metric won't make a difference. This issue is a red herring. Focus efforts elsewhere: consumer education and consumer rights.
Re: The ‘Terms and Conditions’ Reckoning Is Coming
#253Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That I write my code in brainfuck is of no consequence to someone, unless that brainfuck is potentially going to incarcerate them. If you write software to control medical equipment in Brainfuck, it's potentially of consequence to a great many people. Same for autonomous driving routines. Trying to make things clearer is a good cause. Expecting that everything can be made clear enough for the average person is a fo…
> The law is no different. There's a core set of things people are aware of. As things become more specific, or a problem happens, we call in domain experts to help. Using Brainfuck is an extreme example but you're taking it to its logical conclusion - off a cliff. The difference is, the law affects and is applied to everyone. Contracts can and do affect the average person. However, only a domain expert has do deal i…
I have absolutely no problem with trying to make legal documents, contracts, TOS, etc more readable by providing additional information. I just think the idea of replacing what we have with something more like regularly spoken English would be problematic at best, because a lot of the problems we have with interpreting the law are because it's so close to an actual spoken language, and Human languages thrive on ambiguity.
Re: The ‘Terms and Conditions’ Reckoning Is Coming
#254Earlier quoted context omitted.
Was a time long, thoughtful, informed comments on this site garnered plaudits rather than gripes. Considering this is one of the only informed, reality-based comment in the entire thread, I think it’s best to engage with and appreciate it, rather than making easy jokes.
I’ve read your entire comment and still think that the GP is an appropriate joke. You gave a good overview, in clear language, trying to be as concise as possible. The result us still quite long, in fact I guess it is long enough that most commenters won’t read it in full, just like a typical T&C document. Contracts are long for good reasons, but excessive contract length is a real problem.
The US is set up to be regulation-lite and litigation-heavy. As such, contracts tend to be rather encompassing, lest they be vulnerable to litigation.
You also seem to be missing that your parent and the GGP are not the same account. The original comment was written by grellas, a longtime HNer and valued contributor. I doubt grellas runs sockpuppets considering he had a YC connection at one point, IIRC.
Re: The ‘Terms and Conditions’ Reckoning Is Coming
#255Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is the average adult doesn't get educated in the ways of contract law. In fact, I think this is a symptom of the fact that attorneys and legal practitioners are a "protected" class with a relatively high barrier to entry to basic education in their field. While everyone has the "freedom" to learn on their own time, it seems disingenuous to be able to legally bind people who honestly have no clue what they…
> In fact, I think this is a symptom of the fact that attorneys and legal practitioners are a "protected" class with a relatively high barrier to entry to basic education in their field. There's essentially no barrier to entry to basic education in the field; there are classes on the basics in most undergraduate institutions (including community colleges)—corporations and contract law (plus elements of some other sub…
Availability of the class != assurance that every citizen has taken it and passed.
Furthermore, most tech companies don't even engage or give the opportunity to engage in the "negotiation" part of the contract forming process.A EULA or ToS document isn't a meeting of equals. It's a salesman rushing you down the hall telling you to sign, sign, SIGN!
In fact, if nothing else, technology has provided one of the finest examples of a cautionary tale with regards to a "delegatory" legal profession (a profession where legal literacy is contained to a specialized sub-population and where literacy of the full population in the intricacies of the legal system cannot be assumed). I'd be interested in seeing a chart of user accounts of major software platforms or providers at time of ToC/EULA change in order to run the numbers to prove it, but I have a hunch that due to arbitrary/periodic ToC/EULA changes, there is a possibility that the tech industry has generated more legal contracts that no user has bothered to read or understand than the entire legal profession has honestly brokered (I.e. ensured informed consent between both parties) in its entire recorded history.
Caveat emptor be damned. There is something fundamentally wrong with a system that could manage something like that.