5 ms·

Consent is not freely given if it's a requirement for something else.

• wasdfff 7y ago
  Looks like every end user agreement is bs by that metric too
  • lovich 7y ago
    That is a legitimate argument people make and also a reason companies don't want to test their EULA's in court
  • delecti 7y ago
    Yes, they are. And GDPR at least seems to rather explicitly agree with that sentiment. Consent buried in a document isn't real consent.
    • Xelbair 7y ago
      Yeah, and you cannot 'bundle' consent.
• gmanley 7y ago
  In this case it totally is. Your free to not use 23andMe if you don't consent. I do think, however, it shouldn't be buried in the EULA but communicated clearly.
  • Fnoord 7y ago
    > Your free to not use 23andMe if you don't consent That is not how consent works. If I am selling you an apple, but thereby you give me consent to use its genetics for research, and without that we do not do business, then there is nothing optional about it; no opt-in, no opt-out. Opt-in is when the flag is disabled by default, and you can enable it if you want to, and use the product regardless of your choice. Opt-out is when the flag is enabled by default, and you can disable it if you want to, and use the product regardless of your choice.
    • matz1 7y ago
      That is how consent should work, if I don't consent I should not buy your apple. Buying your apple is optional, I'm not required to buy your apple. Opt-in is when I buy your apple. Opt-out is when I don't buy your apple.
      • misterman0 7y ago
        You're not buying apples, though. You're buying "apples+X". That's a different from "apples". If your seller is upfront about that then I and people who want just an apple can go somewhere else for fruit. Most, though, aren't upfront about it.
        • matz1 7y ago
          If you want to buy just apples then you should buy it from other seller who just sells apples.
          • Fnoord 7y ago
            That is up to our governments to decide if such is allowed or not. For example, it isn't allowed to sell a gun or drugs with an apple (at least not here in The Netherlands, YMMV). That you can decide to not go for the entire package is not what we disagree on (apart from above, I suppose). What we were discussing is that the consent is optional; it is not in any of these examples. It is part of the package deal; then you don't call it opt-in or opt-out, as that allows you to opt-in or opt-out of something which is otherwise not in your direct advantage, but is in the other party's advantage.
            • matz1 7y ago
              That should be up to us (not government) to decide if such is allowed or not. >What we were discussing is that the consent is optional Yes the consent is optional, in the sense you are allowed to opt-out by not buying the apple or buying it from someone else or produce it yourself.
• dkonofalski 7y ago
  I think a clearer phrasing of that is "Consent is not freely given unless it's explicit". I'm fine with giving consent as long as I'm clear on what that is. General consent for using a service, to me, doesn't include using my data and/or information outside of what's needed to provide that service.
• BurningFrog 7y ago
  This idea would really upend contract law if applied there!
• austhrow743 7y ago
  Trade, no, interacting with others in general; ruled nonconsensual. You read it here first folks!