3 ms·
>Written, signed contracts where the agreeing parties are not being coerced is presently our gold standard for opt-in consent. Except that you can't later with
by omginternets 7y ago
>Written, signed contracts where the agreeing parties are not being coerced is presently our gold standard for opt-in consent.
Except that you can't later withdraw your consent. You said that was "a violation of consent".
Which is it?
- sneak 7y agoAhh, I see what you were saying now. Employment contracts in the US (if they exist at all and aren’t simply an implicit agreement, so-called “at will” in most states) don’t generally provide for severance. Almost every one I’ve ever read allows for either party to opt out at any time without penalty, or explicitly states what the remaining liabilities would be in the instance that one of the parties did end the transaction. If you don’t have a written, signed contract, you cannot assume future consent to perpetuating or extending a transaction. There wasn’t any explicit future-consent. The existence of a written, signed contract changes that.