![space funeral font unreadable space funeral font unreadable](https://s3.amazonaws.com/CFSV2/obituaries/photos/6873/1517470/62df177baeb79.jpg)
One approach is to move the contract out of the one-second moment before access is granted, and to place its terms before the user when they become relevant.
![space funeral font unreadable space funeral font unreadable](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/8e/b2/ae/8eb2ae761b02026922da4c80d887df84.jpg)
That suggests it might be possible to address the no-reading problem with design fixes. “Ubiquitous EULAs have trained even privacy-concerned users to click on ‘accept’ whenever they face an interception that reminds them of a EULA,” Böhme and Köpsell wrote.
![space funeral font unreadable space funeral font unreadable](https://i.pinimg.com/736x/d6/10/26/d6102627c4c50885faaa24f400a7eb01.jpg)
If the design nudges them instead to follow a habit that years of click-to-agree has instilled, then they’ll do that instead. In other words, when design invites people to consider their options, at least some do. They went along 26% more often than did other users, who had been politely asked to participate (with phrases like “we would appreciate very much your assistance” and both “yes” and “no” options represented by lookalike buttons). Some were told their consent was required and presented with highlighted “I agree” button. A few years ago Rainer Böhme of UC Berkeley and Stefan Köpsell of Dresden’s Technische Universität tested alternative wordings of a simple consent form on more than 80,000 internet users. However, it’s possible that the design of click-to-accept pages makes the problem worse. After all, he points out, few people read the fine print even when it was literally in print. Hoffman is among the legal scholars who believe the no-reading problem isn’t new. “There’s a real concern that consumer protection law is basically being swallowed by click-by-agree clauses,” said David Hoffman, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, who researches the law and psychology of contracts. Increasingly often, too, people click away their right to go to court if anything goes wrong. For example, users give web-based services – and third parties the services contract with, about which users know nothing – the right to keep, analyze and sell their data. We say we do, with our millions of obedient clicks, but that is, as Obar and Oeldorf-Hirsch wrote last year in their paper about the experiment, “the biggest lie on the internet”.īut there’s a lot in click-to-agree contracts that would give many people pause if they knew about them.
Space funeral font unreadable license#
They were confirming, in the lab, what other scholars have found by painstakingly combing data on actual user behavior: nobody reads online contracts, license agreements, terms of service, privacy policies and other agreements. The students were subjects in an experiment run by two communications professors, Jonathan Obar of York University in Toronto and Anne Oeldorf-Hirsch of the University of Connecticut.