[stunt]

I think we need some universal standards for ToS. The same way we have some visual rating signs for movies and video games. Most of it should be regular and easy to categories. And there should be a separate rating for how many irregular terms are in there.

[1ncorrect]

I’ve been chewing on an idea for a while around programmatically handling license agreements, basically each clause is checked atomically, with flow logic as necessary. You could have a personal profile, possibly multiple, of things you’ve decided to accept or reject beforehand, and the anomalous clauses would be presented as a list to review. Providers would have an incentive to reduce the friction by limiting scope to what’s actually required, not just what they want.

With wide enough support, a couple of benefits would be nefarious and malicious components would get highlighted quickly, and it could serve as a feedback channel from consumers to suppliers on why an agreement was rejected.

Ultimately, the power dynamic needs to be recalibrated.

[byecomputer]

So the idea is a form with a checklist?

[1ncorrect]

That’s one major function it would provide if clauses were included which weren’t covered by the pre-populated profile.

A core component would be standardising clauses so they could be handled individually and automatically. If you’ve already answered the clause, and the parameters (time spans, quantities) were within the range you’d set, it would be ‘green’ and could be hidden. Clauses which you had answered but are outside your criteria would be ‘amber’, and unanswered clauses would be ‘red’. As you process more agreements, your can save answers to your profile so the process becomes more optimised over time.

[byecomputer]

Ahh, okay. That part didn't stand out to me in the initial description. So, like, a Common Application for ToS agreements, right? One ToS to rule them all, and one ToS to (legally) bind them.

One concern I'd have is that the level of access I'm willing to give websites isn't always universal, even within the same category. On the other hand, there's some things I really just don't care about and whatever website can help themselves. Just something to consider.

[1ncorrect]

I’d see the option to maintain multiple profiles if you so desire, choose what level you’re comfortable with per instance. The key is that the clauses are subject to individual scrutiny.

Another component would be the ability to rigorously diff agreements as they change, only those components that change or are in some way dependant are presented for attention.

[avel]

We tried that for Privacy Policies with P3P (https://www.w3.org/P3P/) and we failed.

[dsukhin]

This is fascinating, I didn't realize there was a spec for this for the web.

But this begs the question: Apple Privacy Labels "caught on" because Apple has unilateral control to enforce them in the App Store. If ostensibly the same idea for the WWW did not catch on, is the problem (1) the lack of enforcement/economic incentive mechanisms on the decentralized web or (2) that consumers really didn't care/know enough to create/enforce such free market incentives?

[rusk]

I would say both, and a bit more besides. I would say that the big players are actively disincentivized from supporting something like this.

[rusk]

Did it fail on its own or was it helped that way? I can’t imagine any of the big players that drive a lot of the standardisation would be too keen on this ...

[dwighttk]

Yeah let the lawyers argue over what the pictures mean and let us normals just have little pictures.

[faeyanpiraat]

Yes, this is great. Similar to how app permissions work on iOs.

[albertgoeswoof]

A centralised service that tracks all your tos agreements and changes would also be great. It would make things easier for developers as wel