8 ms·

Farmer ordered to pay $CAD82k after confusion over meaning of thumbs-up emoji

133 points by ColinWright 3y ago

ColinWright 3y ago
In short, in some circumstances replying with a thumbs-up emoji to a photograph of a contract can be as legally binding as signing the contract. "In a summary judgement that contained 24 instances of the emoji, Judge T J Keene resolved the issue by ruling that a thumbs-up emoji is enough to accept contractual terms."
- defrost 3y ago
  A significant part of those circumstances being: "I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that Chris okayed or approved the contract just like he had done before except this time he used a thumbs-up emoji." "In my opinion the signature requirement was met by the thumbs-up emoji originating from Chris and his unique cell phone," the judge said. a past history of business transactions. It's not dissimilar to a physical nod or thumbs up in an auction situation.
  - bombcar 3y ago
    Yeah, if "yup" and "ok" sign the deal, certainly the thumbs up does. Should have done the contract on HN, the thumbs up would have been stripped.
    - quickthrower2 3y ago
      An upvote seals the deal here
      - xg15 3y ago
        I'd like to upvote this, but I'm kinda afraid to do so.
  - jstanley 3y ago
    What's unique about his cell phone? The article doesn't seem to mention it.
    - dinkleberg 3y ago
      The fact that it is theirs. It was sent via their phone number, not some random number.
      - jstanley 3y ago
        What a strange turn of phrase then. The fact that a message appears to come from a particular number doesn't imply it came from any particular phone.
        Timon3 3y ago
        If the message hadn't originates from his phone, he could have brought it up in the context of the lawsuit. So no, it's entirely accurate.
    - cvoss 3y ago
      I guess it's unique in the sense of "it's his phone", which is a description no other phone meets. In that way, it functions like an old fashioned seal.
    - masfuerte 3y ago
      There are many phones like it but that one is his.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - User23 3y ago
    Is balance of probabilities a lower standard than preponderance of evidence?
- nivertech 3y ago
  What's next? Double Green Check icon in WhatsApp message with a contract can be as legally binding as signing the contract? Why people are wasting many millions of dollars to implement cryptographically-secure electronic signature systems, if a simple thumbs-up emoji is enogh? ;) Some contarcts can be closed verbaly in-person, but this is not the case, because they didn't talked in-person, but over a remote digital medium. Common Law system is flawed.
  - NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
    > What's next? If you text :eggplant: to your wife, then you might get her pregnant!
  - dazc 3y ago
    You can argue the 'green check icon' was not entered by you and a screenshot of such could have been created by any competent 12 year old. Accepting you did enter the icon, and the screenshot is accurate, then saying you didn't mean it to be interpreted as an agreement is another matter. I think this is where your digital signature wins.
    - nivertech 3y ago
      Any written communication (such as email or SMS) can be considered as evidence in court (NOTE: just evidence, not a signature). That's why M&A departments don't do deals or negotiations over email. But that's long form. Emojis on the other side are very short. It's a new medium and doesn't have a stable interpretation yet. Also, any contract negotiation is a process (sometimes even a Saga ;) Plucking a single message out of a sequence of messages is wrong.
  - dsego 3y ago
    You could argue that a thumbs-up emoji is equivalent to a handshake and a verbal agreement.
    - atq2119 3y ago
      That is precisely the argument, and it is a perfectly reasonable one, especially in the right context.
quickthrower2 3y ago
Good old commodities trading ;-)
mynameishere 3y ago
[flagged]
- rsynnott 3y ago
  Yeah, I'd go with the not running a company approach if I were you.
- weird-eye-issue 3y ago
  Do everyone a favor and don't run a company
- fundad 3y ago
  Our mythical small family farmers are actually landed gentry operating massive businesses and making 6 figure deals over SMS.
  - tobyhinloopen 3y ago
    ^ Same, and I jokingly complimented the client's haircut the same day (he's bald)
- ThunderSizzle 3y ago
  You sound like a joyish person to work with.
  - ghusto 3y ago
    To be fair, he's talking this context in particular. I wouldn't be anywhere near as harsh, but would definitely frown on somebody replying to a legal contract with a thumbs up to mean "I accept". If it were the other party, I would (and have) asked for clarification. Surprise; there have been multiple instances of potential disaster caught early this way!
- tobyhinloopen 3y ago
  I actually run a company and the use of babyish icons are very widespread and common. Discussing terms and details about large contracts are absolutely done using childish methods like complimenting a client's haircut (the client was bald), sending emojis, and other informal texts and apps. Most people (we deal with) are just working to get stuff done and have fun while doing so. I don't think I've seen any environment where people were suited up or addresses each other in a matter that's "formal"
cinbun8 3y ago
Found the filing: https://www.canlii.org/en/sk/skkb/doc/2023/2023skkb116/2023skkb116.html https://www.canlii.org/en/sk/skkb/doc/2023/2023skkb116/2023s... It's pretty funny. The thumbs up was accepted by the court as an electronic signature. --------------------- MR. JORDAAN: Objection. My client is not an expert in emojis. MR. MARSCHAL: Okay. Q.MR. MARSCHAL:But he does send emojis, correct? A.Yes. ---------------------
- subroutine 3y ago
  Previous contracts delivered without issue... 5. On July 14, 2020, after discussing and agreeing on a contract with Chris Achter, I prepared a contract for the sale of 185 metric tons of durum wheat from Achter Ltd. to SWT for $312 per ton. I signed the contract and then took a photo of it using my cell phone and sent it to Chris. I messaged: “Please confirm terms of contract.” Chris texted me back: “Looks good”. Achter Ltd. delivered on this contract without issue. (Exhibit “B”) 6. On September 11, 2020, after discussing and agreeing on a contract with Chris, I prepared a contract for the sale of 131 metric tons of wheat from Achter Ltd. to SWT for a price of $284 per ton. I signed the contract and then took a photo of it using my cell phone and sent it to Chris. I messaged: “Please confirm terms of durum contract”. Chris texted me back: “Ok”. Achter Ltd. delivered on this contract without issue (Exhibit “C”). 7. On October 21, 2020, after discussing and agreeing on a contract with Chris, I prepared a contract for the sale of 395 metric tons of durum wheat from Achter Ltd. to SWT for a price of $308 per ton. I signed the contract and then took a photo of it using my cell phone and sent it to Chris. I messaged: “Please confirm terms of durum contract”. Chris texted me back: “Yup”. Achter Ltd. delivered on this contract without issue. (Exhibit “D”). ‎ ‎‎‏‏‎ ‎ The flax contract... 10. I then called Chris about the potential flax contract. I said “I assume you talked to Bob about this” and Chris confirmed that he had spoken to Bob and wanted to enter into a flax contract for 87 metric tons of flax at $669 per ton. I told Chris I'd send the contract by text message and ask him to confirm he contract via text when it came through, which Chris agreed to do. 11. I then wrote up the contract for a purchase of 87 metric tons of flax for $669 per ton. I signed the contract, took a photo of it and texted it to Chris. I messaged: “Please confirm flax contract”. Chris tested back a thumbs up emoji. I understood this to be that Chris was agreeing to the contract. A copy of the contract and the text message is attached as Exhibit “E”.
nobrains 3y ago
I don't think its fair. I use thumbs up emoji to indicate have received something. Does not mean I am accepting it. Usually for that, I use the actual word: "Agreed" or "Accepted".
- paddw 3y ago
  to a contract?
- jollofricepeas 3y ago
  If he both previously accepted contracts and agreed to them in text message, then the judges point rightly stands. Example:: 1st instance: - msg: contract sent - reply: “Yes” 2nd instance: - msg: contract sent - reply: “I agree” 3rd instance: - msg: contract sent - reply: Thumbs up emoji
  - ghusto 3y ago
    That wouldn't be my interpretation, and is exactly why lawyers get you to state things in full sentences.
- tester756 3y ago
  Emojis are part of language and have meaning How conceptually emoji is different from your "agreed"?
  - dahart 3y ago
    That’s not the judge’s reasoning in this case. The reason is because the farmer in question already had a demonstrated habit of accepting contracts with short informal texts like “Ok”. Thumbs up is widely used to acknowledge receipt of a message without agreeing to anything contractually. It also has other meanings, such as ‘I like what you said’, and ‘that’s a good idea’. The ruling here does not represent a precedent over the meaning of the thumbs up emoji, nor does it confirm or deny any of the multiple common definitions for the thumb up emoji.
- Bluecobra 3y ago
jbverschoor 3y ago
What about a dreaded accidental double tap
- unsupp0rted 3y ago
  Seller could quickly follow-up to the double-tap with a "reviewing now" or "will approve later" and then no matter the emoji it won't be a signed contract.
  - jbverschoor 3y ago
    This is the world upside down.
    - Supermancho 3y ago
      It's the world same as it ever was. If you say "uh huh" in an oral contract, you would have to say "wait, nevermind" if you immediately wanted to correct the immediate mistake (answering someone else or other reasoning). A contract is not strictly written to, but agreed to by both parties.
aaron695 3y ago
[dead]
csomar 3y ago
The article seems to be missing an important piece of evidence > He said: "I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that Chris okayed or approved the contract just like he had done before except this time he used a thumbs-up emoji." It does seem that the farmer has agreed to previous contracts in a "similar fashion" which is, apparently, what the judge based his decision on. It's easy to make commentaries here about how crazy this is when we do not have the full facts of the story.
- ghusto 3y ago
  "just like he had done before except this time he used a thumbs-up emoji" Surely the "_except_ this time he used a thumbs-up emoji" means he did _not_ use the thumbs up to mean acceptance before?
  - gambiting 3y ago
    He used words like "yup" and "looks good" in the past to accept the contracts - the judge ruled that a thumbs up emoji is effectively the same as saying "yup" which as demonstrated was enough for him to accept contracts in the past. To make a difference between "yup" and an emoji at this point is to engage in a linguistic discussion that avoids the core of the issue - if your contractor was previously accepting contracts by saying "yup", is a thumbs up emoji just as good? The judge seems to think so.
  - sokoloff 3y ago
    If he previously said “okay” but said “ok” this time… Or sent the OK emoji… Or previously said “yes” but this time said “yup” or sent a Yes emoji… In all those cases (and this case), I’d conclude exactly as the court did. I don’t think this was some kind of trickery being attempted by the plaintiff, but rather they made a completely reasonable conclusion that they had an accepted contract.
    - jeremyjh 3y ago
      Yeah, this was clearly a farmer trying to back out of a contract after prices had skyrocketed and he could do better than deliver on his existing deal. There was clearly a meeting of the minds here, and that is all that is required for a contractual obligation to be enforceable.
nubinetwork 3y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36618650 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36618650 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36618977 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36618977 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36620437 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36620437 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36621950 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36621950 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36624684 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36624684 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36637158 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36637158 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36639726 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36639726
- the-printer 3y ago
  This is nuts. I can understand the appeal of “legacy” articles (ones that spring up from time to time across months/years) being valuable as individual records. But there should be a way for articles/threads like this one that cover current events and are reposted from multiple sources multiple times throughout the initial news cycle to be consolidated; sources, comments, etc somehow rolled onto a single page. Or something. Cc: dan(g)
  - ChrisArchitect 3y ago
    Just gotta mention they're a dupe earlier and maybe link to where the discussion is happening. The problem is people upvoting this like crazy when it's already been big and lots of comments elsewhere ....stop upvoting this!
    - dahart 3y ago
      They’re all different URLs and all have different titles. Looks like most of those didn’t make it to the front page, so it hasn’t been that “big”. I didn’t see any of those articles. Why do you think upvoting is the problem? How are people supposed to know? The mods here do often merge submissions when necessary (when dupes make it to the front page within a short enough time frame). I don’t see much of a problem in this case, and I disagree strongly with the command to stop upvoting. It’s fine when people notice, but it’s not our responsibility as readers to spend time searching for dupes and filter them out. Dupes in the “new” page are to be expected at all times, because HN is a user-submit system, so different people are always going to be racing to submit the same news. It’s not a problem until dupes hit the front page and comment sections get large.
lolinder 3y ago
The actual ruling [0] is very approachable and far more interesting than the article above. The farmer was in the habit of accepting contracts from this particular company by saying "yup" or "looks good" or similar short responses. SWT quite reasonably took this usage of the thumbs up emoji as just another one of the farmer's casual signatures. If Chris sincerely did not intend to sign the contract, he really should not have been in the habit of accepting contracts with a casual single-word reply in the first place. Had he insisted on a more formal process in prior negotiations with SWT, I doubt the judge would have granted summary judgement in this case (and SWT probably wouldn't have assumed the thumbs up was a signature). [0] https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/2023skkb116-480130.pdf https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/2023skkb116-480130.pdf
- roenxi 3y ago
  This behaviour must be the result of some sort of internal policy; but it really highlights just how low the quality of corporate[0] journalism is. They're doing not much useful except polluting a search for the case details with links to their poorly articulated take. It'd be so easy to include the link or a copy of the PDF in the article. But they just aren't in a headspace where people might want facts, context or otherwise have an interest in the details of the story. The professionalism of these services is poor. We don't even have the name of the person stirring up clickbait. [0] The ABC is government funded, but still follows the same basic model as all the rest and it looks like they lifted this off Reuters.
  - goodbyesf 3y ago
    > They're doing not much useful except polluting a search for the case details with links to their poorly articulated take. Polluting a search indeed. On youtube, it feel like every search result, even if not news related, is filled with links to news. I just don't get it. > it looks like they lifted this off Reuters. The source of most news is the AP or Reuters. If the company wants to add their spin on a topic, they'll have their journalists add to the ap or reuters articles.
    - 3y ago
oneTbrain23 3y ago
Judge has very poor sense of unintended consequences. For this particular very specific case, yes the judge is right to force the farmer to pay. But this set precedence and dilute the stringent wording legality of contract. Now, if a teenage (Japan AV industry if you curious) show a thumbs up to a soul selling contract it is good because in the past she did it. Watch the Star Trek Strange new world ep2 and see how the judges should have refraint to make their decision. Any this is Canadian which in legality world consider one of the least prudence of all English speaking nations. Hence I am not surprise with this ruling. Basically Canadian has created law making from bench rather than parliament. Terrible judge even he is a nice person.
- GuB-42 3y ago
  There was a precedent. The judge didn't rule that a thumbs up is a legally binding signature in all contexts. Here, the farmer have already accepted contracts and delivered with simple "yep" or "okay" answers, so the customer reasonably thought it was the same with a thumbs up emoji. Assuming it was legal for teenagers to sign contract for work in porn (that's what "AV" means for the uninitiated), which is most likely not the case, then if she performed after answering "yep" or "okay", then one should expect her to perform again on a thumbs up. The "soul selling" aspect is another matter and the contract may be deemed invalid on these grounds, and if she were asked to do more than the usual performance, the ruling may change. Judges are not just robots running code, they care about context.
villgax 3y ago
t(-_-t)
baron816 3y ago
Anyone notice they did the currency conversion backwards? CAD$82K = USD$62k
- rflrob 3y ago
  The article is from a .au TLD, and the conversion to Australian dollars is roughly correct.
- avgcorrection 3y ago
  American moment.
ChrisArchitect 3y ago
[dupe]
rkagerer 3y ago
I always prefer the notation CAD$82k over $CAD82k
activiation 3y ago
Posted this a few days ago on HN... Pretty funny... He should have said that AI automatically posted this emoji for him
aio2 3y ago
that thumb was worth 82k, holy shit
jiveturkey 3y ago
this is a rather simple case that just tickles the internet and HN interest due to the novelty of an emoji. the real focus should be on the despicable behavior of the defendant for trying to renege on an expensive contract. it’s everyday stuff. what i find most interesting is that the official court documents, which as we are familiar with are in a typewriter-like ascii plus some typographical symbols (like the section marker), contain the emoji in question. i appreciate the least common denominator format for official government documents. i find it quite something that they have reproduced the actual emoji symbol rather than restricting themselves to a description. whereas even HN does not accept emoji in comments.
- lolinder 3y ago
  > whereas even HN does not accept emoji in comments. This isn't due to a technical barrier, it's an aesthetic decision. dang has at least once edited a submission title to include an emoji, and I'd assume comments could just as easily include them, it's just not in line with HN's style.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
frankreyes 3y ago
In France they have to sign, it order to approve a contract, with "lu et approuvé" because of this reason.
10g1k 3y ago
The issue here is the nature of contracts. A written dcoument signed by all parties is not (necessarily) a contract. It is evidence of a contract. Any agreement of exchange of goods and services may be a contract, whether it's an email, a phone call, a handshake, or almost anything else. A written document, video, or audio recording merely serves as evidence of the contract.
more_corn 3y ago
“Confusion over meaning?” What else could he possibly have thought the thumbs up emoji meant?

133 points by ColinWright 3y ago

In short, in some circumstances replying with a thumbs-up emoji to a photograph of a contract can be as legally binding as signing the contract. "In a summary judgement that contained 24 instances of the emoji, Judge T J Keene resolved the issue by ruling that a thumbs-up emoji is enough to accept contractual terms."

defrost 3y ago
A significant part of those circumstances being: "I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that Chris okayed or approved the contract just like he had done before except this time he used a thumbs-up emoji." "In my opinion the signature requirement was met by the thumbs-up emoji originating from Chris and his unique cell phone," the judge said. a past history of business transactions. It's not dissimilar to a physical nod or thumbs up in an auction situation.
- bombcar 3y ago
  Yeah, if "yup" and "ok" sign the deal, certainly the thumbs up does. Should have done the contract on HN, the thumbs up would have been stripped.
  - quickthrower2 3y ago
    An upvote seals the deal here
    - xg15 3y ago
      I'd like to upvote this, but I'm kinda afraid to do so.
- jstanley 3y ago
  What's unique about his cell phone? The article doesn't seem to mention it.
  - dinkleberg 3y ago
    The fact that it is theirs. It was sent via their phone number, not some random number.
    - jstanley 3y ago
      What a strange turn of phrase then. The fact that a message appears to come from a particular number doesn't imply it came from any particular phone.
      - Timon3 3y ago
        If the message hadn't originates from his phone, he could have brought it up in the context of the lawsuit. So no, it's entirely accurate.
  - cvoss 3y ago
    I guess it's unique in the sense of "it's his phone", which is a description no other phone meets. In that way, it functions like an old fashioned seal.
  - masfuerte 3y ago
    There are many phones like it but that one is his.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- User23 3y ago
  Is balance of probabilities a lower standard than preponderance of evidence?
nivertech 3y ago
What's next? Double Green Check icon in WhatsApp message with a contract can be as legally binding as signing the contract? Why people are wasting many millions of dollars to implement cryptographically-secure electronic signature systems, if a simple thumbs-up emoji is enogh? ;) Some contarcts can be closed verbaly in-person, but this is not the case, because they didn't talked in-person, but over a remote digital medium. Common Law system is flawed.
- NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
  > What's next? If you text :eggplant: to your wife, then you might get her pregnant!
- dazc 3y ago
  You can argue the 'green check icon' was not entered by you and a screenshot of such could have been created by any competent 12 year old. Accepting you did enter the icon, and the screenshot is accurate, then saying you didn't mean it to be interpreted as an agreement is another matter. I think this is where your digital signature wins.
  - nivertech 3y ago
    Any written communication (such as email or SMS) can be considered as evidence in court (NOTE: just evidence, not a signature). That's why M&A departments don't do deals or negotiations over email. But that's long form. Emojis on the other side are very short. It's a new medium and doesn't have a stable interpretation yet. Also, any contract negotiation is a process (sometimes even a Saga ;) Plucking a single message out of a sequence of messages is wrong.
- dsego 3y ago
  You could argue that a thumbs-up emoji is equivalent to a handshake and a verbal agreement.
  - atq2119 3y ago
    That is precisely the argument, and it is a perfectly reasonable one, especially in the right context.

quickthrower2 3y ago

Good old commodities trading ;-)

mynameishere 3y ago

[flagged]

rsynnott 3y ago
Yeah, I'd go with the not running a company approach if I were you.
weird-eye-issue 3y ago
Do everyone a favor and don't run a company
fundad 3y ago
Our mythical small family farmers are actually landed gentry operating massive businesses and making 6 figure deals over SMS.
- tobyhinloopen 3y ago
  ^ Same, and I jokingly complimented the client's haircut the same day (he's bald)
ThunderSizzle 3y ago
You sound like a joyish person to work with.
- ghusto 3y ago
  To be fair, he's talking this context in particular. I wouldn't be anywhere near as harsh, but would definitely frown on somebody replying to a legal contract with a thumbs up to mean "I accept". If it were the other party, I would (and have) asked for clarification. Surprise; there have been multiple instances of potential disaster caught early this way!
tobyhinloopen 3y ago
I actually run a company and the use of babyish icons are very widespread and common. Discussing terms and details about large contracts are absolutely done using childish methods like complimenting a client's haircut (the client was bald), sending emojis, and other informal texts and apps. Most people (we deal with) are just working to get stuff done and have fun while doing so. I don't think I've seen any environment where people were suited up or addresses each other in a matter that's "formal"

cinbun8 3y ago

Found the filing: https://www.canlii.org/en/sk/skkb/doc/2023/2023skkb116/2023skkb116.html https://www.canlii.org/en/sk/skkb/doc/2023/2023skkb116/2023s... It's pretty funny. The thumbs up was accepted by the court as an electronic signature. --------------------- MR. JORDAAN: Objection. My client is not an expert in emojis. MR. MARSCHAL: Okay. Q.MR. MARSCHAL:But he does send emojis, correct? A.Yes. ---------------------

subroutine 3y ago
Previous contracts delivered without issue... 5. On July 14, 2020, after discussing and agreeing on a contract with Chris Achter, I prepared a contract for the sale of 185 metric tons of durum wheat from Achter Ltd. to SWT for $312 per ton. I signed the contract and then took a photo of it using my cell phone and sent it to Chris. I messaged: “Please confirm terms of contract.” Chris texted me back: “Looks good”. Achter Ltd. delivered on this contract without issue. (Exhibit “B”) 6. On September 11, 2020, after discussing and agreeing on a contract with Chris, I prepared a contract for the sale of 131 metric tons of wheat from Achter Ltd. to SWT for a price of $284 per ton. I signed the contract and then took a photo of it using my cell phone and sent it to Chris. I messaged: “Please confirm terms of durum contract”. Chris texted me back: “Ok”. Achter Ltd. delivered on this contract without issue (Exhibit “C”). 7. On October 21, 2020, after discussing and agreeing on a contract with Chris, I prepared a contract for the sale of 395 metric tons of durum wheat from Achter Ltd. to SWT for a price of $308 per ton. I signed the contract and then took a photo of it using my cell phone and sent it to Chris. I messaged: “Please confirm terms of durum contract”. Chris texted me back: “Yup”. Achter Ltd. delivered on this contract without issue. (Exhibit “D”). ‎ ‎‎‏‏‎ ‎ The flax contract... 10. I then called Chris about the potential flax contract. I said “I assume you talked to Bob about this” and Chris confirmed that he had spoken to Bob and wanted to enter into a flax contract for 87 metric tons of flax at $669 per ton. I told Chris I'd send the contract by text message and ask him to confirm he contract via text when it came through, which Chris agreed to do. 11. I then wrote up the contract for a purchase of 87 metric tons of flax for $669 per ton. I signed the contract, took a photo of it and texted it to Chris. I messaged: “Please confirm flax contract”. Chris tested back a thumbs up emoji. I understood this to be that Chris was agreeing to the contract. A copy of the contract and the text message is attached as Exhibit “E”.

nobrains 3y ago

I don't think its fair. I use thumbs up emoji to indicate have received something. Does not mean I am accepting it. Usually for that, I use the actual word: "Agreed" or "Accepted".

paddw 3y ago
to a contract?
jollofricepeas 3y ago
If he both previously accepted contracts and agreed to them in text message, then the judges point rightly stands. Example:: 1st instance: - msg: contract sent - reply: “Yes” 2nd instance: - msg: contract sent - reply: “I agree” 3rd instance: - msg: contract sent - reply: Thumbs up emoji
- ghusto 3y ago
  That wouldn't be my interpretation, and is exactly why lawyers get you to state things in full sentences.
tester756 3y ago
Emojis are part of language and have meaning How conceptually emoji is different from your "agreed"?
- dahart 3y ago
  That’s not the judge’s reasoning in this case. The reason is because the farmer in question already had a demonstrated habit of accepting contracts with short informal texts like “Ok”. Thumbs up is widely used to acknowledge receipt of a message without agreeing to anything contractually. It also has other meanings, such as ‘I like what you said’, and ‘that’s a good idea’. The ruling here does not represent a precedent over the meaning of the thumbs up emoji, nor does it confirm or deny any of the multiple common definitions for the thumb up emoji.
Bluecobra 3y ago

jbverschoor 3y ago

What about a dreaded accidental double tap

unsupp0rted 3y ago
Seller could quickly follow-up to the double-tap with a "reviewing now" or "will approve later" and then no matter the emoji it won't be a signed contract.
- jbverschoor 3y ago
  This is the world upside down.
  - Supermancho 3y ago
    It's the world same as it ever was. If you say "uh huh" in an oral contract, you would have to say "wait, nevermind" if you immediately wanted to correct the immediate mistake (answering someone else or other reasoning). A contract is not strictly written to, but agreed to by both parties.

aaron695 3y ago

[dead]

csomar 3y ago

The article seems to be missing an important piece of evidence > He said: "I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that Chris okayed or approved the contract just like he had done before except this time he used a thumbs-up emoji." It does seem that the farmer has agreed to previous contracts in a "similar fashion" which is, apparently, what the judge based his decision on. It's easy to make commentaries here about how crazy this is when we do not have the full facts of the story.

ghusto 3y ago
"just like he had done before except this time he used a thumbs-up emoji" Surely the "_except_ this time he used a thumbs-up emoji" means he did _not_ use the thumbs up to mean acceptance before?
- gambiting 3y ago
  He used words like "yup" and "looks good" in the past to accept the contracts - the judge ruled that a thumbs up emoji is effectively the same as saying "yup" which as demonstrated was enough for him to accept contracts in the past. To make a difference between "yup" and an emoji at this point is to engage in a linguistic discussion that avoids the core of the issue - if your contractor was previously accepting contracts by saying "yup", is a thumbs up emoji just as good? The judge seems to think so.
- sokoloff 3y ago
  If he previously said “okay” but said “ok” this time… Or sent the OK emoji… Or previously said “yes” but this time said “yup” or sent a Yes emoji… In all those cases (and this case), I’d conclude exactly as the court did. I don’t think this was some kind of trickery being attempted by the plaintiff, but rather they made a completely reasonable conclusion that they had an accepted contract.
  - jeremyjh 3y ago
    Yeah, this was clearly a farmer trying to back out of a contract after prices had skyrocketed and he could do better than deliver on his existing deal. There was clearly a meeting of the minds here, and that is all that is required for a contractual obligation to be enforceable.

nubinetwork 3y ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36618650 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36618650 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36618977 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36618977 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36620437 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36620437 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36621950 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36621950 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36624684 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36624684 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36637158 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36637158 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36639726 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36639726

the-printer 3y ago
This is nuts. I can understand the appeal of “legacy” articles (ones that spring up from time to time across months/years) being valuable as individual records. But there should be a way for articles/threads like this one that cover current events and are reposted from multiple sources multiple times throughout the initial news cycle to be consolidated; sources, comments, etc somehow rolled onto a single page. Or something. Cc: dan(g)
- ChrisArchitect 3y ago
  Just gotta mention they're a dupe earlier and maybe link to where the discussion is happening. The problem is people upvoting this like crazy when it's already been big and lots of comments elsewhere ....stop upvoting this!
  - dahart 3y ago
    They’re all different URLs and all have different titles. Looks like most of those didn’t make it to the front page, so it hasn’t been that “big”. I didn’t see any of those articles. Why do you think upvoting is the problem? How are people supposed to know? The mods here do often merge submissions when necessary (when dupes make it to the front page within a short enough time frame). I don’t see much of a problem in this case, and I disagree strongly with the command to stop upvoting. It’s fine when people notice, but it’s not our responsibility as readers to spend time searching for dupes and filter them out. Dupes in the “new” page are to be expected at all times, because HN is a user-submit system, so different people are always going to be racing to submit the same news. It’s not a problem until dupes hit the front page and comment sections get large.

lolinder 3y ago

The actual ruling [0] is very approachable and far more interesting than the article above. The farmer was in the habit of accepting contracts from this particular company by saying "yup" or "looks good" or similar short responses. SWT quite reasonably took this usage of the thumbs up emoji as just another one of the farmer's casual signatures. If Chris sincerely did not intend to sign the contract, he really should not have been in the habit of accepting contracts with a casual single-word reply in the first place. Had he insisted on a more formal process in prior negotiations with SWT, I doubt the judge would have granted summary judgement in this case (and SWT probably wouldn't have assumed the thumbs up was a signature). [0] https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/2023skkb116-480130.pdf https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/2023skkb116-480130.pdf

roenxi 3y ago
This behaviour must be the result of some sort of internal policy; but it really highlights just how low the quality of corporate[0] journalism is. They're doing not much useful except polluting a search for the case details with links to their poorly articulated take. It'd be so easy to include the link or a copy of the PDF in the article. But they just aren't in a headspace where people might want facts, context or otherwise have an interest in the details of the story. The professionalism of these services is poor. We don't even have the name of the person stirring up clickbait. [0] The ABC is government funded, but still follows the same basic model as all the rest and it looks like they lifted this off Reuters.
- goodbyesf 3y ago
  > They're doing not much useful except polluting a search for the case details with links to their poorly articulated take. Polluting a search indeed. On youtube, it feel like every search result, even if not news related, is filled with links to news. I just don't get it. > it looks like they lifted this off Reuters. The source of most news is the AP or Reuters. If the company wants to add their spin on a topic, they'll have their journalists add to the ap or reuters articles.
  - 3y ago

oneTbrain23 3y ago

Judge has very poor sense of unintended consequences. For this particular very specific case, yes the judge is right to force the farmer to pay. But this set precedence and dilute the stringent wording legality of contract. Now, if a teenage (Japan AV industry if you curious) show a thumbs up to a soul selling contract it is good because in the past she did it. Watch the Star Trek Strange new world ep2 and see how the judges should have refraint to make their decision. Any this is Canadian which in legality world consider one of the least prudence of all English speaking nations. Hence I am not surprise with this ruling. Basically Canadian has created law making from bench rather than parliament. Terrible judge even he is a nice person.

GuB-42 3y ago
There was a precedent. The judge didn't rule that a thumbs up is a legally binding signature in all contexts. Here, the farmer have already accepted contracts and delivered with simple "yep" or "okay" answers, so the customer reasonably thought it was the same with a thumbs up emoji. Assuming it was legal for teenagers to sign contract for work in porn (that's what "AV" means for the uninitiated), which is most likely not the case, then if she performed after answering "yep" or "okay", then one should expect her to perform again on a thumbs up. The "soul selling" aspect is another matter and the contract may be deemed invalid on these grounds, and if she were asked to do more than the usual performance, the ruling may change. Judges are not just robots running code, they care about context.

villgax 3y ago

t(-_-t)

baron816 3y ago

Anyone notice they did the currency conversion backwards? CAD$82K = USD$62k

rflrob 3y ago
The article is from a .au TLD, and the conversion to Australian dollars is roughly correct.
avgcorrection 3y ago
American moment.

ChrisArchitect 3y ago

[dupe]

rkagerer 3y ago

I always prefer the notation CAD$82k over $CAD82k

activiation 3y ago

Posted this a few days ago on HN... Pretty funny... He should have said that AI automatically posted this emoji for him

aio2 3y ago

that thumb was worth 82k, holy shit

jiveturkey 3y ago

this is a rather simple case that just tickles the internet and HN interest due to the novelty of an emoji. the real focus should be on the despicable behavior of the defendant for trying to renege on an expensive contract. it’s everyday stuff. what i find most interesting is that the official court documents, which as we are familiar with are in a typewriter-like ascii plus some typographical symbols (like the section marker), contain the emoji in question. i appreciate the least common denominator format for official government documents. i find it quite something that they have reproduced the actual emoji symbol rather than restricting themselves to a description. whereas even HN does not accept emoji in comments.

lolinder 3y ago
> whereas even HN does not accept emoji in comments. This isn't due to a technical barrier, it's an aesthetic decision. dang has at least once edited a submission title to include an emoji, and I'd assume comments could just as easily include them, it's just not in line with HN's style.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

frankreyes 3y ago

In France they have to sign, it order to approve a contract, with "lu et approuvé" because of this reason.

10g1k 3y ago

The issue here is the nature of contracts. A written dcoument signed by all parties is not (necessarily) a contract. It is evidence of a contract. Any agreement of exchange of goods and services may be a contract, whether it's an email, a phone call, a handshake, or almost anything else. A written document, video, or audio recording merely serves as evidence of the contract.

more_corn 3y ago

“Confusion over meaning?” What else could he possibly have thought the thumbs up emoji meant?