
Terms of Service; Didn't Read - Nition
https://tosdr.org/
======
leggomylibro
I actually don't really support these movements. I would prefer that we
entirely deligitimize the notion of 'terms of service' having any measure of
enforceability or weight.

No, I have not read your terms and I do not agree with them. I do, however,
reject the legitimacy of their use and will happily check a box that lets me
proceed unmolested.

And by continuing to provide your service to me, you agree that that my
implicit rejection of your TOS' legitimacy is correct. That attitude from a
customer towards every business is just as reasonable as a business expecting
every customer to read and implicitly accept their specific and lengthy legal
stipulations.

~~~
Clubber
Unfortunately, I believe a count of law would side with the company with the
TOS.

~~~
jaredklewis
It depends. See MEYER V. KALANICK where the court held some provisions of
uber's adhesive terms of service unenforceable since a small hyperlink to a
TOS was not considered sufficient notice to the user that they were waiving
their right to a trial by jury.

[https://casetext.com/case/meyer-v-travis-kalanick-uber-
techs...](https://casetext.com/case/meyer-v-travis-kalanick-uber-techs-inc-1)

~~~
Spivak
I mean neither is a giant wall of legal text that everyone is just going to
skip over either.

------
roceasta
The ToS box is a debasement of standards of public discourse. Not only do most
individuals knowingly lie, everybody _knows_ that they lie, and they know that
everybody knows that they lie, et cetera. It makes me question the legitimacy
of marriage vows and statements like 'How are you?'

------
Vinnl
I haven't been involved with this project for a while, but I am still
following their mailinglist. Please note that there hasn't been a lot of
development and hence the ratings are somewhat out-of-date. The main reason
for this is that they need developers (preferably Ruby/RoR, but I guess they'd
be open to others as well) to redevelop the rating system.

They've actually got funds, so if anyone is looking for a side job on a
project they appreciate, hit them up on their mailinglist:
[https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/tosdr](https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/tosdr)

------
mcescalante
I see this site pop up about once a year. It hasn't had a real discussion in
the past year, or I believe it may be a dupe. Previous discussions (ordered by
number of comments):

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4350907](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4350907)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5888393](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5888393)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9678357](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9678357)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8394144](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8394144)

------
justboxing
Mildly amusing, tosdr.org itself doesn't have a TOS, just the following
disclaimer which says that it's not a replacement for reading the full terms
to which you are bound :)

> Nothing here should be considered legal advice. We express our opinion with
> no guarantee and we do not endorse any service in any way. Please refer to a
> qualified attorney for legal advice. Reading ToS;DR is in no way a
> replacement for reading the full terms to which you are bound. Disclosure: a
> list of donors and supporters is published. All legal information and
> Imprint.

------
nicwilson
What we really need is a set of standard (or at least de facto) ToS, like we
have for OSS licences, so that companies can then list deviation from the
standard ToS. That would reduce the body of text required to be read and might
actually make people read it and they would be more likely to understand the
requirements the ToS.

~~~
fiatjaf
Thanks, this is it. I've just posted the same thing before reading your
comment.

Who should start that movement? Perhaps we could trigger it by having a public
repository of (provisional) licenses and start linking to it from our side
projects?

~~~
nicwilson
Well I dont have any projects (let alone side projects) that need a ToS.
Ultimately those who start it will be those that benefit from having readable
unambiguous ToS. Some benevolent company? A company that has been bitten my
unenforceable ToS? A startup that doesn't want to complicate legal? ISO? EFF?

What stops me from contributing to that effort is at that I don't know (and
dont really want to know) enough legal to know common variations of in ToS.
Not to mention the wide range of fields that ToSes cover.

------
mikedilger
I think the class numbering over-summarizes things to the point of having
almost no meaning. It pretends too much that we all care about the same
things.

Each of us is willing to accept different sets of terms. If standardized terms
were available, matching up what I am will to accept (presuming a register
such information somewhere) against a ToS could algorithmically show me
whether or not the ToS is acceptable to me without me having to read it.

------
sdrzyxr
We should enforce software to pause on the term of service page for a period
of time that is sufficient enough for a average human to read through (say 1
min per 500 words). Then it would be at software companies' interests to
simplify their shit. No companies want their customers to stay on the TOS page
for an hour

~~~
a012
I minute reading ToS won't give you any worthy information.

~~~
Vinnl
GP didn't say they had to force users to read them for 1 minute, but that they
had to force users to read them for a length of time appropriate for the
length of the ToS. In effect, this would make it harder for companies with
lengthy ToS to attract users.

------
cdibona
I'm actually kind of proud of this one (I wrote, had our lawyer review, he
added a stanza or two and said good to go.)

[https://www.fracturedveil.com/terms-and-
conditions](https://www.fracturedveil.com/terms-and-conditions)

Our privacy policy is amazing, too.

Edit: It's a little swear filled...

------
dwyerm
I'm pleased to see the forced arbitration and class action waivers get
noticed, here.

I was going to recommend the EFF's "TOSBACK" program, but it turns out they're
already linked to TOSDR. I'm pleased that TOSBACK is still running! I expected
to find it dying from lack of support, like the EFF's printer tracking dots
list.

------
fiatjaf
Just like there are standardized open-source licenses we can just look at and
recognize (MIT, GPL, Apache etc.) there should be standardized terms of
service.

Or perhaps modular terms. COOKIES = We use cookies blablabla. NON-GUARANTEE =
You are by yourself etc., I don't know, I've never read these things
carefully.

------
luckystarr
Great service! Their browser plugin is sadly not compatible with Firefox
Nightly as it exclusively uses WebExtensions[1].

I won't switch back from Nightly. The performance difference is just too great
to ever go back to the "stable" versions. :) Not had any crashing issues yet.

1\. [https://developer.mozilla.org/de/Add-
ons/WebExtensions](https://developer.mozilla.org/de/Add-ons/WebExtensions)

------
whatsinaname22
I think it's funny a company named Evernote doesn't let you delete your
account.

------
jlengrand
Not related to the article, but I was happy to see a Flattr link. I thought it
was dead. Apparently not!

------
jackmott
I actually quite enjoy lying about having read them.

~~~
ringaroundthetx
I actually enjoy writing ridiculous things inside my app's terms of service.
Stories, making fun of the possible users of said apps, quips about when the
Undertaker threw Mankind off of cage

Its fun.

Also, Penny Stock newsletters also have similarly funny things in their
disclaimers, check them out, its a by product of the regulators strong-arming
and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. It was my inspiration.

