A recent conversation reminded me of these excellent blog posts about consent in (implicitly) sexual contexts radtransfem.wordpress.com/2012

'I suggest a non-binary power model of consent, under which we understand the word “yes” to mean:

I choose to say “yes”, understanding the consequences of saying “no”.

The word ‘choice’ here is not used in a liberal sense and does not imply a free choice; the more punitive the potential consequences of a “no”, the less free the “yes”.'



This applies in all sorts of contexts. In the case of software licensing, it helps explain what is wrong with proprietary software. The power gradient between users and developers of proprietary software is so severe as to make clicking "I agree" meaningless. Everyone knows clicking "I agree" is meaningless, yet we still do it and law treats it as legitimate. Users have no power over or even knowledge of the software without source code.

@be laws don't always treat it as meaningful. And they take the power dynamic into account too.

Just because you agreed in a EULA doesn't mean a court will enforce it.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Fosstodon is an English speaking Mastodon instance that is open to anyone who is interested in technology; particularly free & open source software.