
Order with obligation to pay - AndrewDucker
http://revk.www.me.uk/2014/04/order-with-obligation-to-pay.html
======
nodata
"..or a corresponding unambiguous formulation.."

You're saying "Place order" is ambiguous?

~~~
ColinWright
I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on television. However, I am a
mathematician, a field in which the precise use of language is known to be
difficult and sometimes unnatural or counter-intuitive.

Having said that, here is my reading.

Specifically, the law offers the wording:

    
    
        ... 'order with obligation to pay' ...
    

That seems to indicate that "order" or "place order" by itself is not enough,
and that one must explicitly state that placing the order incurs an obligation
to pay.

So "Place order" is not ambiguous in the sense that it is clear that you are
placing an order. The law seems to be stating (implicitly) that placing an
order does not explicitly carry the obligation to pay, and hence the
requirement for the extra words to make that clear.

When using plain language is it difficult to construct a sentence that a
determined adversary cannot misconstrue. Following the suggested phrasing
closes off some options for such games.

~~~
claudius
In German, it is “kostenpflichtig bestellen“, which is also quite clear and I
have to admit I like it. The button cannot be misunderstood and it seems silly
to claim that it is in any way an inconvenience to a honest trader that they
have to put “kostenpflichtig bestellen“ rather than just “bestellen” on their
websites.

English seems a bit more clumsy, though.

