3 ms·
> They only exist to shield the service provider from liabilities. In that case privacy policies serve no valid consumer facing function why bother the consumer
by asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
> They only exist to shield the service provider from liabilities. In that case privacy policies serve no valid consumer facing function why bother the consumer with them in the first place?
Because the consumers bother the companies with lawsuits if they aren't "forced" "to read" the privacy policy. The only way you can get away from the requirement to display these policies prominently is if you make it generally illegal to sue over anything disclosed in the privacy policy, even if it's not prominently displayed. Or, as you say, make the kinds of things people like to sue for actually illegal, so there will be nothing to disclose.
- austincheney 6y agoIt sounds like you are arguing for tort reform. They can sue anyways regardless of whether they read the policy and regardless of whether the suit is groundless. All it takes to create a law suit is to issue a motion to the court. Whether or not the suit is frivolous is for the court to decide in response to an opposing motion.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 6y agoI wouldn't say I'm arguing for it. I don't have any real problem with the status quo as it pertains to privacy policies. I'm just saying IF you have a problem with privacy policies, it needs to be very inexpensive to defend lawsuits on privacy grounds which are currently defensible only due to privacy policies.