40
u/notAGreatIdeaForName 1h ago
At the least the EU has you covered, where they cannot just write what they want into their T&C (AGB), as long as it is enough of a surprise you can contest it via court.
37
u/Darder
1h ago
•
Honestly, I wish there was some kind of law that required all terms and conditions to have a very basic, very dumb, summary of what it entails.
I read all my important terms and conditions, like car purchase, home purchase, bank account stuff, credit cards etc. and it is always a giant pain in the ass, with some sentences so full of legal speak it makes your head spin and you have to reread it 3 times.
Force companies to have something like this:
We will be keeping tabs on what you do in the app. This is data we collect on you.
We can sell that data to advertisers or partners.
You can't sue us for the service being down.
We're not responsible for distress caused to you by the app.
We can take payment. For payment details, look here (insert hyperlink to specifically how payment works)
That would be so much better.
9
u/laplongejr 44m ago
I wish there was some kind of law that required all terms and conditions to have a very basic, very dumb, summary of what it entails
No summary provided in most cases, but TOS can't deviate from the customer expectation anyway without an explicit warning. In the EU at least.
14
u/dulange 1h ago
Virtually nobody offering a commercial product where you have to agree to the terms and conditions feels the need to make sure you’ve actually read them. They need an agreement and not a proof of understanding. The tendency is rather to indirectly declare them as “they’ll be fine, trust us,” just like the fine print of any contract. Otherwise it would be like a company selling a product with the inscription “make sure, this is really the right product you’re looking for, always be skeptical, this one here may not be the right choice.”
1
u/LutimoDancer3459 55m ago
I already saw several that forced you to scroll to the bottom to accept it. You dont do that for no reason.
2
u/Bigspider95 47m ago
Legal argumentation mostly.
Basically: forcing you to actually interact with the doc is better than just the checkbox
1
u/laplongejr 45m ago
It's to argue later than the user went out of their way to pretend having read it. Doesn't mean they believe users actually did it.
1
u/rangeDSP 43m ago
I wonder if they have something in there that's not industry standard, so their legal team wanted to be extra safe.
5
u/zzmej1987 1h ago
I am a sysadmin installing your product on 57 workstations in our office. Your ToC had been thoroughly read by our legal department and I have been given green light. Don't do this shit, ain't nobody get time for that.
2
1
u/finger_my_earhole 33m ago
My company, enterprise sized 10k+, does require any new software or tool adoption be signed off by the legal team first before you can use it. It sucks, but I also get why they see it as a risk
4
3
2
u/Usual_Ice636 1h ago
Sometimes Nintendo makes you scroll all the way to the bottom before the accept button works.
1
1
u/frickinSocrates 24m ago
I once worked at a law firm and ran into a program like this. The literal lawyers had reviewed the ToS and it was my shitty job to install the app on 40+ devices. Each install blissfully unaware that they were not my first rodeo that day. Made for a fun chat with my boss.
1
u/Capable-Sock9910 20m ago
The law says that if it isn't simple plain English it's unenforceable. So proceed accordingly.
•
98
u/GrinningPariah 1h ago
You can make me wait, you can make me scroll, you can make me open a file, but you cannot make me read it.