Hacker News Reader

Comment by seqastian | Hacker News Reader

how much would you be willing to pay for this service?

This here is the problem. You shouldn't have to pay for something like this, it should be provided by default in a readable form.

Otherwise ask yourself this: how much are you willing to pay Amazon to not list your address and a list of possible items at that address for the whole internet to see?

Ideally, companies would pay for this (of course the lawyer should be completely independent, so companies could pay e.g. EFF which will then pay the lawyer).

However, to get this started, perhaps an organization like EFF or Mozilla can pay for the first 10-100 most popular websites?

Didn't you know software developers and attorneys should be giving away their skills and time for free?

Software developers do not write ToSs. Attorneys get paid to make it intentionally overly complicated. The same ones can just get paid twice to turn it back to simple/understandable. Or maybe just get paid once by the company using the ToS and have them come up with something reasonably readable.

And if your job is to make other people's lives harder for no good reason other than to abuse them then yeah, maybe you should be legally obliged to fix that crap for free.

I think the above poster was talking about whomever is actually developing the extension and supporting infrastructure for this "EULA in plain English" button.

That's why I said it should be done by the original company and the same attorneys that made it complicated in the first place. Asking a 3rd party to do it for them on the user's dime is not really a solution.

As long as the software world keeps intentionally writing user-hostile, obtuse ToS documents and screaming bloody murder at the mere suggestion that a professional code of ethics that can be enforced by a regulatory industry body...then yes, I think it's someone's responsibility to do this pro bono.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com