Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

47

This one is quite easy, you simply can't. If you would use an address on an emailing list where the recipient has opt-out you violate the 6'th requirement of the CAN-SPAM Act. Doing so is violating the law and will enable the recipient to sue your company: Each separate email in violation of the law is subject to penalties of up to $16,000, and more ...


34

I'd say the best two options are: 1) Display terms and conditions as long plain legalese text as usual, in a left hand column, but then summarise it in much shorter, friendlier, simpler text on the right. 500px.com does this really well: 2) Format the text in a legible manner. Separate it into linked sections with proper headings, good typography and ...


18

There is no reason to force a user to read the terms and conditions first. It is not a legal requirement and it doesn't improve the UX. Don't do it. Legally they simply have to agree to the terms and conditions, and if they choose not to read them, then that is their problem. UX wise, what part of the experience are you trying to improve by doing this? ...


14

This is an interesting approach to this issue: “Terms of Service; Didn't Read” - http://tos-dr.info/ e.g. Facebook ToS:


10

I think the notification system used here at the stack exchange could be used to quickly ask the user "Would you like a cookie? We will use it to give you a better experience [Yes][No]"


9

Terms and Conditions, Privacy Policy, and similar documents are there primarily for legal reasons, not UX ones. So the reason that they are usually terrible to read is that they are written in legaleses rather than human speak. A good alternative is to add additional explanations in human speak next to the legalese. StackExchange is a good example to ...


8

Apple uses the legal concept of 'trade dress' to argue for look and feel infringements in which one could argue that UX (or, more specifically, UI) can come in to play. Alas, there aren't any particular clear rules. IP law is gray, and often determined by those with the most lawyers. Add to it things like modern US patent law, for example, where it is ...


8

In the long term, I'd love to see a standardised way to do this (even though it may be wishful thinking). The only way to achieve that, since trusting site owners isn't an option ;), is to have browsers implement some kind of UI that triggers when cookie storage is requested. I imagine it'd look something like the yellow alert bars browsers like Chrome ...


8

It is legal to do that, but you will gain no legal protection if the default state is to agree. Unless a user explicitly agrees (which means actively doing something rather than not doing something), any legal agreement that you have will be unenforceable in court. This has been tried and tested legally, so it is one of the few areas that are crystal ...


8

As with any legal contract, both sides, including the user, must agree (“assent”) to the terms and conditions offered with the online service in order to create a legally enforceable “agreement.” In addition, a user can demonstrate agreement in a variety of ways, either by words or by deeds, depending on the circumstances. Online, however, the line ...


7

Yes, it is confusing, as you have no visual indicator that you have finished the document. The legal issue it the real problem here. In a strict legal sense, you can not be considered to have agreed to part of a document that was hidden from you. This is like someone adding pages to the back of a page in a document that you did not know was there. It is ...


7

In the EU and Germany you can protect your design. There is no rule for all, but several national laws. As far as I understood the process, you are going to protect your design following this guide. There will be no examination for the uniqueness of your design nor a protection for duplicates in terms of secureness. If a possible duplicate exist, you have ...


7

After thinking about this a bit more, I believe we should be able to use the icon, if it is registered against the file type on the end-users machine. So, if they've got the standard word icon registered against the .doc file extension on their machine, they should see the standard word icon in our application, and we could achieve this by querying windows ...


7

Mixing opt-in and opt-out is totally bad UX as it leads to a lot of confusion. The meaning of both lists should be consistent, so there should be either opt-out or opt-in for both groups: Do you want to receive information from us by: []post []phone []email []SMS [] Do you want to receive information from our carefully selected premium ...


6

Not an answer based on studies but on personal experience, and some research I did on this topic recently: Some general aspects of Terms and Conditions[1]: legal document laying down some rules b/w company and customer/user managing expectations and unifying the legal foundations of the business dealing with risks and protecting the company Apart from ...


5

The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) website is already requesting permission to use cookies. They've taken the 'great big wodge of text' approach. The results are ugly (click image for big version): It remains to be seen whether web developers will take the new laws seriously enough to vomit cookie warnings at every new visitor in this way, but ...


5

Opt-in vs opt-out is a legal question and (if it's for communication) in most countries (USA and Europe included). Any agreement to communicate with someone has to be an opt-in, otherwise that communication is legally spam, and anyone receiving it (in a country where it is illegal) may sue you. In fact there are people who make their living suing people ...


5

I don't think it would be a good idea to send them an email again if they unsubscribed to the newsletter. The user could lose confidence in your service. If he decided to unsubscribe it means he had good reasons to do so. Maybe the emails was too frequent, the content wasn't suitable, etc. Plus the legal parameter to take into account. Sadly I think you'll ...


4

I have no legal training regarding terms and privacy policies, but I think one really good way to start moving web services towards resolving this problem is to approach privacy/terms/conditions in much the same way we've approached software licenses and general intellectual property licensing via common-use licenses like MIT, BSD, Creative-Commons, etc. ...


4

UX studies are almost always about testing things that we either want people to do, or things that we don't want them to do. It is rarely about testing whether they do something that we don't care about from a UX perspective. So it is highly unlikely that you will find a UX study on this. You need to remember that besides just treating your customers ...


4

I would not do any paging with navigation buttons. I would disable the continue button until the text box has been scrolled all the way to the end. The reality is your users are either going to read it or they are not. Adding more buttons or messing with the scroll buttons is not going to make someone read who doesn't want to read. You're just irritating ...


4

Hiding your T&C behind a dropdown is probably very dangerous, since a user could legitimately claim that they never saw the T&C.Check out what happened to Zappos: http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2012/10/how_zappos_user.htm .


4

I love this question! Here are some points you might want to consider: 1. Reading on a screen is hard and T&C's are often looong That's the reason why people still prefer to print longer text and not read them on screens. The shorter your text is the better chances are that the text will be read. Ideally users get a summary of the most important ...


3

This really is a legal issue as much as it is a UX one. Explicit consent / agreement is the only type that holds up in court. Putting the license in a text document and stating something like "by installing this software you are agreeing to the license" without the user having to explicitly accept it or check a box stating that they have accepted it, ...


3

Firstly I'd say you have a legal team who appears from the outside to be protecting themselves more than helping you and your users. That they are forcing on your users constraints that are extremely uncommon makes this a difficult task. To answer your question depends greatly on your target hardware. If you're looking to deploy on infrared plane touch ...


3

We have to answer one big question here: Is it actually important for users to understand the full disclosure, or do you want them just to say they did? They're two different answers, because it's unlikely and unreasonable for people to read the full disclosure (and it's often used as a way to force unpopular constraints on a user if they just click though ...


3

Often when terms-of-use or license agreements are presented there is a checkbox to the effect of "I have read and agree..." that must be checked before the process can continue. And often one is not forced to scroll all the way through something before indicating agreement. Unless you feel there's a legal reason to force people to scroll down I wouldn't do ...


3

The requirements for Terms and Conditions as well as for your Privacy Policy are primarily a legal question and not a design question. There are things that you should be aware of design wise, but they are not requirements. There are a number of good questions already on the UX side of design requirements on this site, so I won't try to duplicate them ...


3

At my company (4 million online customers) we noticed that confronting users with these kind of patterns resulted in harvesting very bad (false) contact information. If users don't want spam, they just don't want spam. That's the easy part. Convincing the marketing department with targets on harvesting quantity instead of quality is the hard part. Bottom ...


3

I'd ask this question a company lawyer. I saw some applications (for example, Eclipse) ask user to accept all licenses separately. Probably, this is due to country law prohibits signing multiple documents with a single signature. Multiple agreements are placed into different pages or tabs of a form.



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible