Informed consent was: Re: [LINK] US-AMA far too complacent about
human RFID tags
Marghanita da Cruz
marghanita at ramin.com.au
Thu Jul 5 10:19:40 EST 2007
Geoffrey Ramadan wrote:
> Brendan Scott wrote:
>> 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?
Being cautious and skeptical, I tend to try to verify that my instructions are
reflected on the operational system, to which they apply. I have had two
experiences, where the computer system did not/could not register/record my
One was a bank authority on a joint account and the second organ donation on a
Equally, people blame computers for all kinds of errors in their processes.
With regard to the Do not call register - can anyone report on its
effectiveness, before I bother to register both my home number and mobile.
Anyone care to speculate if you have your home phone with one provider and your
mobile with another, whether those providers can claim a relationship,
exemption, when they call you on the other's service?
>> 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.
> How about mandating a "summary of key conditions" at the start of all
> terms and conditions.
> Geoffrey Ramadan
> Link mailing list
> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
Marghanita da Cruz
Phone: 0414 869202
More information about the Link