The Fallacy of Informed Consent: Linguistic Markers of Assent and Contractual Design in Some E-User Agreements
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14198/raei.2015.28.03Keywords:
Contract design, Choice architecture, Textual markers, Peri-textual markers, Linguistic markersAbstract
Orthodox contract law theory assumes that parties agree to the terms of a contract before entering into an agreement. However, recent factual evidence points towards the fact that consumers do not systematically read, and thus become informed of, the terms of a contract. Academics are asking for mandatory frameworks to ensure that informed consent is indeed sought and given by parties to a contract. The present study looks into the user agreements of four online companies that provide a marketplace for the sale of goods or free provision of services by other sellers and/or users (Ebay, Tripadvisor, YouTube and Amazon). The aim is firstly to identify the lexical/textual markers and peri-textual features of agreement in order to highlight the fallacy of informed consent. Secondly, the paper lists textual and peri-textual alternative contractual design (here called counter-design) in online user agreement. In so doing, contractual design features are distinguished from nudges. Suggested counter-design features help make informed consent effective.References
Alemanno, Alberto and Anne-Lise Sibony (eds.) (2015): Nudge and the Law. A European Perspective. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
Atiyah, Patrick S. (1995): An Introduction to the Law of Contract. 5 th edn. London: Clarendon, 56-79.
Avgoulea, Emilios (2009): “The Global Financial Crisis and the Disclosure Paradigm in European Financial Regulation: The Case for Reform”. European Company and Financial Law Review 6: 440-75.
Ayres, Ian and Schwartz, Alan (2014): “The No-Reading Problem in Consumer Contract Law”. Stanford Law Review 77: 545-610.
Bar-Gill, Oren (2012): Seduction by Contract: Law, Economics and Psychology in Consumer Markets. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bar-Gill, Oren and Omri Ben-Sahari (2012): “Regulatory Techniques in Consumer Protection: A Critique of European Consumer Contract Law”. In Law and Economics Research Paper Series, Working Paper no. 12.
Beale, Hugh (2014): “What Do Consumers Need Protection From?”. At The Image(s) of the ‘Consumer’ in EU Law: Legislation, Free Movement and Competition Law conference in Oxford, UK.
Becher, Shmuel I. (2007): “Behavioral Science and Consumer Standard Form Contracts”. Louisiana Law Review 68: 117-79.
Condamines, Anne and Marie-Paule Péry-Woodley (2007): “Linguistic Markers of Lexical and Texual Relations in Technical Documents”. In G. Rijlaarsdam (series ed.) and D. Alamargot, P. Terrier and J-M. Marie Cellier (vol. eds.), Studies in Writing, vol. 21, Written Documents in the Workplace, 3-16.
Conly, Sarah (2013): Against Autonomy: Justifying Coercive Paternalism. Cambridge University Press: New York.
Delin, John, John Bateman and Patrick Allen (2002): “A Model of Genre in Document Layout”. Information Design Journal, 11(1): 54-66.
Firth, John Rupert (1969): Papers in Linguistics 1934-1951. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Furmston, Michael P. (1981): Cheshire and Fifoot’s Law of Contract. 10th edn. London: Butterworths, 24-105.
Hillman, Robert A. (2002): “Rolling Contracts”. Fordham Law Review 71: 743-4.
James, Philip S. (1989): Introduction to English Law. 12th edn. London: Butterworths, 275-82.
Jucker, Andreas H. and Ziv Yael (eds.) (1998): Discourse Markers: Description and Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins BV.
Kessler, Friedrich (1943): “Contracts of Adhesion: Some Thoughts about Freedom of Contract”. Columbia Law Review 43: 629-42.
Lewellyn, Karl N. (1960): The Common Law Tradition: Deciding Appeals. Boston: Little Brown&Co.
Mellinkoff, David (1953): “How to Make Contracts Illegible”. Stanford Law Review 418(5): 418-32.
Nunberg, Geoffrey (1990): The Linguistics of Punctuation. CSLI Lecture Notes, 18. Stamford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
Power, Richard, Donia Scott and Nadjet Bouayad-Agha (2003): “Document structure”. Computational Linguistics 29(2): 211-260.
Rakiff, Todd D. (1983): “Contracts of Adhesion: An Essay in Reconstruction”. Harvard Law Review 96: 1174-284.
Richard, Isabelle (2008): L’anglais du droit: Interpréter les modaux en contextes normatifs. Aix-en-Provence: PUP.
Richard, Isabelle (2014): “Essai de jurilinguistique en Common Law: approche linguistique et stylistique”. Habilitation Thesis, under the supervision of Shaeda ISANI (Stendhal University, Grenoble).
Robertson, Melissa (2003): “Is Assent still a Prerequisite for Contract Formation in Today’s EEconomy?” Washington Law Review 78: 265-96.
Schiffrin, Deborah (1996): Discourse Markers. In Studies in Interactional Sociolinguistics vol. 5. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schneider, Gary (2014): Electronic E-Commerce. Stanford: Cengage Learning, 325-328.
Steinberg, Erwin R. (1991): Plain English: Principles and Practice. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
Sunstein, Cass (2012): “Behavioural Economics and Paternalism”. The Storrs Lectures in Jurisprudence, Yale Law School, November 12 and 13, 2012.
Sunstein, Cass (2014): Why nudge? The Politics of Libertarian Paternalism. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Virbel, Jacques (1989): “The Contribution of Linguistic Knowledge to the Interpretation of Text Structures”. In Jacques André, Vincent Quint and Richard Keith Furuta (eds), Structured Documents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 161-181.
Todorov, Tzvetan (1984): Mikhail Bakhtin: The Dialogical Principle. Trans. Vlad Godzich. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 80-85.
Wydick, Richard C. (1994): Plain English for Lawyers. 3d ed. Durham, N.C.: Carolina Academic Press.
Downloads
Statistics
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2015 Anne Brunon-Ernst
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
