|
|
|
|
|
|
by blueberrychpstx
1505 days ago
|
|
|
Or how about another different (maybe controversial take) - Archetypal TOS If you run a bank, unless you're doing something incredibly sketchy, your TOS will very closely resemble Bank B. If you run a social media company, unless you're doing something incredibly sketchy, your TOS will very closely resemble social media company B. ETC How about we all agree that the archetypal TOS for any given archetype should be readable by someone with a 9th grade education or below and if you deviate from those terms, you must clearly explain why you are so different and special. Idk, I just think we should start coming up with more clever solutions. This doesn't even visit the idea of completely inverting the social media / banking / blah blah whatever industry onto its head by allowing any general user complete control over data / finances, but obviously that would have huge benefits if we can tackle the usability problem for average Joe. |
|
|
So if there were archetypal contracts and they would be balanced or even slightly favor users, there would just be longer TOS to counter them and every company will have the same boilerplate again.
So in that case this archetype will have to come from the industry or politics will have to force them to do something like this. This will then also have (at least) the following side-effects:
1. Lawyers of companies teaming up and tightening their TOS even more 2. Unclarified effects on the participating companies if parts of the common TOS get invalidated/overturned by a court decision 3. Since companies (are maybe forced to) work together, there is the risk of a cartel, since <agreeing on contract conditions to be the same across an industry> is pretty much the definition of a cartel.
To take care of all of that, legislation needs to be first-class and I can't see that happening.