Text archives Help


FW: Battle of the Online Forms [Was: [projectvrm] Mobile SSL hole s]


Chronological Thread 
  • From: "Savage, Christopher" < >
  • To: "ProjectVRM list ( )" < >
  • Subject: FW: Battle of the Online Forms [Was: [projectvrm] Mobile SSL hole s]
  • Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 13:24:49 +0000
  • Accept-language: en-US

I'm hoping it's OK to send these points to the list...

Chris S.


-----Original Message-----
From: Savage, Christopher
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2013 8:20 AM
To: 'Crosbie Fitch'
Subject: RE: Battle of the Online Forms [Was: [projectvrm] Mobile SSL hole s]

-----Original Message-----
From: Crosbie Fitch
[mailto: ]

Sent: Monday, January 14, 2013 3:33 AM
To: ProjectVRM list
Subject: RE: Battle of the Online Forms [Was: [projectvrm] Mobile SSL hole s]

>>Perhaps Christopher's idea might work if augmented?<<

>>One can provide corporations interested in doing business with a choice:<<

>>A) The corporate way: Contracts are agreed to merely by performing an
>>arbitrary act (an act one is at liberty to do anyway, e.g. remove
>>shrinkwrap), and one can sign one's (apparently alienable) liberty away in
>>a contract (not that corporations have liberty), in which case neutralising
>>adhesive contracts are provided (to counter those of the corporate party),
>>OR<<

>>The natural/VRM way: Contracts are only agreed to when both parties
>>voluntarily signify acceptance (by a specific act - unnecessary for any
>>other purpose - that can only construe voluntary acceptance), and contracts
>>affect only property, not an individual's inalienable liberty (human beings
>>cannot surrender their liberty to post negative reviews, reverse engineer
>>the product, etc.).<<

>>One should not just use the corrupt party's corruption against them, but
>>should demonstrate that there is a right way of doing things.<<

Agreed!!! Our "automatic" terms and conditions should contain something that
boils down to, "but if you want to do this transaction in a civilized way,
then..." and lay out the path to what you are calling the "natural/VRM way."

My point is that we need a legal mechanism, which we evidently do not now
have, for individuals to say "STOP!" to the bulls**t that enterprises legally
impose on individuals via online terms and conditions.

Chris S.



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.