3 ms·

IMO, this is a question of consumer protection. It's ok to provide complicated contracts to corporations who can afford to hire lawyers, but it's not ok to do s

IMO, this is a question of consumer protection. It's ok to provide complicated contracts to corporations who can afford to hire lawyers, but it's not ok to do so with consumers. If we make a requirement that for consumer products, contract should be now longer than 1 page written in a language understandable by 10 year old, it will solve problem.

jstarfish 9y ago
I like the elevator pitch approach. If you can't explain your T&S in as many words as it takes to explain your product, one or the other needs to be revised.
- solomatov 9y ago
  It sounds good in theory, but in practice there're aspect which prevents it from being applicable. See here: https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=16886176&goto=threads%3Fid%3Dsolomatov%2316886176 https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=16886176&goto=threads%...
  - jstarfish 9y ago
    Yes, you have a valid point. The one I was more trying to make is that a product should not be simply marketed as "a platform for sharing pictures with your friends" if it is actually "a platform for sharing pictures with your friends in exchange for your participation in unspecified and ethically questionable social experiments." The T&S can stay the same for all I care, I just think companies shouldn't be able to hide behind them when they dramatically oversimplify the nature of the product in the process of selling or promoting it.
protonfish 9y ago
Even if EULAs were easily understood, they are still ultimatums: you either take it or leave it with no room for negotiation or repercussions for demanding far more than the product could reasonably ever be worth. There is no motivation to ever write these in good faith. There should be a general federal law to protect users and businesses from malice, privacy laws (similar to CAN-SPAM,) and a ban on all other end-user license nonsense.

3 ms·

IMO, this is a question of consumer protection. It's ok to provide complicated contracts to corporations who can afford to hire lawyers, but it's not ok to do s

by solomatov 9y ago

jstarfish 9y ago
I like the elevator pitch approach. If you can't explain your T&S in as many words as it takes to explain your product, one or the other needs to be revised.
- solomatov 9y ago
  It sounds good in theory, but in practice there're aspect which prevents it from being applicable. See here: https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=16886176&goto=threads%3Fid%3Dsolomatov%2316886176 https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=16886176&goto=threads%...
  - jstarfish 9y ago
    Yes, you have a valid point. The one I was more trying to make is that a product should not be simply marketed as "a platform for sharing pictures with your friends" if it is actually "a platform for sharing pictures with your friends in exchange for your participation in unspecified and ethically questionable social experiments." The T&S can stay the same for all I care, I just think companies shouldn't be able to hide behind them when they dramatically oversimplify the nature of the product in the process of selling or promoting it.
protonfish 9y ago
Even if EULAs were easily understood, they are still ultimatums: you either take it or leave it with no room for negotiation or repercussions for demanding far more than the product could reasonably ever be worth. There is no motivation to ever write these in good faith. There should be a general federal law to protect users and businesses from malice, privacy laws (similar to CAN-SPAM,) and a ban on all other end-user license nonsense.