Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by lhorie 2055 days ago
My take is that the claim that "shoppers were made aware of the activity through decals" fails on multiple levels: whether said decals were actually there, whether they would be capable of capturing nuances of scope if they were (e.g. there's different expectations between a mall entrance, the Shoppers entrance and the LCBO entrance), whether people noticed the alleged decals if they were there, whether they could be reasonably expect to understand it (e.g. non-english speakers), whether people could infer that legalese existed if they did understand it, whether they were capable of understanding the actual terms (e.g. tech illiterates), whether it is reasonable to expect that people would consciously agree to whatever terms are laid out in the legalese, whether all people captured by face recognition necessarily were actually aware of the terms, etc. It just doesn't stick on so many levels.
3 comments

For non-Canadians here: Shoppers is pharmacies and LCBO is provincially-controlled liquor store that has near monopoly on hard liquor sales.
“Near monopoly”? Outside of duty free, where else can you buy booze (not beer) besides the LCBO?
You can buy hard liquor in artisanal distilleries like Spirit of York or few in Niagara region. And talking about “not beer”, wine has been available in grocery stores for a while now.
Doesn’t this vary by province? BC has quite a few non- bc liquor stores, at least in Vancouver.
Every single one of those private liquor stores buys its stock through the BC Liquor Distribution Branch of British Columbia, so yes, the monopoly is still very much there, just hidden behind a few facades. I suspect something similar is the case in other provinces too.
A bar
Any consent that isn't explicit should have no legal value. A "decal" on a door is about as useful as a size 2 font fine print, or an audio disclaimer played back at 5 times the speed.

This implicit agreement can be used to obtain quite literally anything without the other party ever knowing.

In that case I think we're in agreement. :)