Informed consent was: Re: [LINK] US-AMA far too complacent about
human RFID tags
brendansweb at optusnet.com.au
Wed Jul 4 12:30:04 EST 2007
Geoffrey Ramadan wrote:
> Is this not informed consent?
> Who's fault is it that "users" can not be bothered to read it... or
> maybe they have and are aware?
Without expressing a view on this one way or another, the amount of documentation that people are taken to agree with has been exploding in recent years. Even when you visit a website some places purport to bind you to a raft of terms and conditions. In many cases it is highly legalistic to argue these terms have been agreed in any sense or even to expect that recipients are aware of them/their contents.
My prediction is that this expansion will not be sustainable and courts or the legislature will start giving recipients of these terms more power in these non-negotiations.
More information about the Link