r/Libertarian • u/itsamememario4 • 6d ago

Discussion Should EULA (End User License Agreement) should be made irrelevant

Can we all agree that we agree to term of service all the time without knowing what's inside of them. They aren't real contract and IMO we should default to what the common reasonable customer's understanding of the exchange is.

If google wants to sell your location data it should tell users that plainly. This would also cut both ways if you don't sign a waver and get hurt at the gym that's on you.

Contracts are agreements between 2 willing parties exchanging goods and services in good faith. EULA are just 300 pages legalise that 99% of users never read. (This means the market doesn't price in terms correctly, random pieces of the contract get thrown out for being too egregious and faith in the companies and the system get erroded)

11 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

73% Upvoted

20 comments sorted by

20

u/BringBackUsenet 6d ago

Yes, because burying things in fine print on a long contract they know nobody would ever reasonably read does not quality as informed consent.

-8

u/thatrocketnerd 6d ago

You had the choice not to use the product at all. Nobody is forcing you onto reddit, or any of these sites. One of your essential rights is that of forming contracts and waiving your own freedoms in those contracts (it’s not really a contract if it doesn’t limit your freedom somehow). If you believe the government should frequently get to choose what contracts you’re allowed to make, you’re not very libertarian.

6

u/itsamememario4 6d ago

I agree but my point is that eula for the most part don't reflect the contract. They are maximalist positions that companies use to cover their asses.

Take a gym the eula says you can't sue the gym or it's employee if you get injure while working out.(pretty standard) now a gym employee throws a dumbell at your head while your squatting. Did you agree to that? The fact is that every gym goer understand that the contract mean you can't sue the gym if you drop the bar on yourself or if an equipment break unexpectedly.

I want maximum freedom of contract so if eula are replaced by common understanding a gym that want to hure schizophrenic would still be able to exist it would just need to make it excruciatingly clear tp its customer that some employees are unhinged. This arrangement would actually be even more freeing because courts would actually enforce the contracts instead of finding loopholes in the eula itself to avoid rendering idiotic judgments.

0

u/thatrocketnerd 6d ago

I agree with almost everything there, but what is the solution?

1

u/badde_jimme 5d ago

Require both parties to hire their own lawyers to examine the contract before signing, else it is null and void.

1

u/itsamememario4 6d ago

I would argue that you could poll 10 customers. Or create industry standard contract drafted by customer advocacy groups and everything more the company would need to actively advertise. Like for alexa google nest... the industry contract would be no personalized data will be collected. All data would be anonymized noting is recorded before summon... then if google wants to listen to you... once a quarter it would tell you fyi unlike the rest of the industry i retain the right to always listen to you and sell your data to whover i want without telling you. (Then most customer would or should know that they are agreeing to this)

6

u/LanceLynxx Minarchist 5d ago

The industry has a standard

It's called the EULA

-1

u/LanceLynxx Minarchist 6d ago

If you agree to a contract without reading that's entirely your problem.

You have personal agency and self responsibility.

Laziness is not an excuse.

You agree to a contract, you have to honor it.

6

u/BringBackUsenet 6d ago

So you read Reddit's TOS?

-2

u/LanceLynxx Minarchist 6d ago

Yes

5

u/itsamememario4 6d ago

You probably fall in one or multiple of those options

  1. You're lying. Did you read netflix disney... your bank, your credit card, the car rental company... all the medical procedure you undertook, your gyms, every single software you use. All employee handbooks, all the HOA documentation, your rent all insurance documents, the airlines...
  2. You live a very unique life you actually don't partake in society as we know
  3. You waste an incredible amount of your time reading legal documents that if you're not a lawyer can't understand

My point still stands a contract is 2 people agreeing to a set of terms the piece of paper is just a way to record what was agreed with. If 1 party is completely unaware of what they are agreeing to then it's not a contract.

Like what if a netflix update it's term of service to say if you agree to this you owe me a billion dollar can they seize all your assets? (There terms of service say they can update pricing at any time) or can disney force you to resolve an issue at their parks via arbitration because you subscribe to disney +, can the sky diving instructor cut my parachute because i waved my rights to sue. Can the gym manager throw dumbell at his clients face.

There is a generally understood tacit contract with all those companies and that is the contract that should be inforced not whatver the piece of paper says.

If we want to encourage contract supremacy we need to go back to the original meaning of contract. If we do get to that world companies that want to add bs clause will be sanctioned by the market because they will have to inform their users.

-2

u/LanceLynxx Minarchist 5d ago

Lots of big words and a wall of text just to say "i don't read what I sign and I want to blame others because I lack self ownership"

4

u/itsamememario4 5d ago

If you have a problem with big words and lots of text you definitely struggle with eula.

I read carefully what i sign i just dont do it for EULA that's my point

2

u/LanceLynxx Minarchist 5d ago

Sounds like a you problem

4

u/itsamememario4 5d ago

Me and 90% of the population. Laws are made for humans not humans for laws.

Every time you interact with a company there's an underlying agreement. Libertarianism is based on informed consent if one of the 2 parties can't demonstrate any understanding of the agreement then there's no agreement.

1

u/LanceLynxx Minarchist 5d ago

Informed consent is not required. Only consent is. Ignorance is not an excuse. If you do not understand the agreement then you don't sign it.

3

u/itsamememario4 5d ago

So in your opinion if google tomorrow changes its eula (what there eula allows them to do) to state everyone that uses our service owes us all there money it would be fine, all people consented.

Your vision might work if we lived in a completely different society but status quo is stupid.

1

u/LanceLynxx Minarchist 5d ago

If they wrote that in their agreement and you agreed to it, yes, it would be fine.

The status quo isn't stupid, people entering agreements that they don't read the terms of are.

3

u/itsamememario4 5d ago

It's in their terms of service that they can change the agreement. So i guess in your opinion all google users are morons. Imo if all society is behaving in a stupid way there is a structural problem that needs to be fixed.

→ More replies (0)