IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jcopol/v46y2023i4d10.1007_s10603-023-09546-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consumer Vulnerability, Digital Fairness, and the European Rules on Unfair Contract Terms: What Can Be Learnt from the Case Law Against TikTok and Meta?

Author

Listed:
  • M. Durovic

    (King’s College London)

  • J. Poon

    (King’s College London)

Abstract

Directive 1993/13/EEC on unfair contract terms (UCTD) is one of the oldest pieces of European consumer legislation, formulated before the development of the Internet as the leading marketplace, and still in force, with no major changes since its adoption. As the most significant piece of consumer legislation not substantially amended following the consumer law Fitness Check that resulted in the adoption of Directive 2019/2161/EU, it is questionable whether the UCTD remains fit for purpose in regulating the terms and conditions in the user agreements and policies of social media platforms to address the existence of the social platform related digital vulnerabilities of consumers. This paper assesses the potential and limits of data-based reforms to the UCTD, in procedural notification requirements and substantive unfair terms controls, before demonstrating how the UCTD could be brought up-to-date while preserving commercial certainty and avoiding dramatic changes. This could be done simply by mandating measures that are already being taken, either by social media platforms themselves or by other major tech companies, and by elaborating existing requirements with standards that are analogous to other already-existing consumer rights. The assessment of the real unfair-terms problems highlighted by regulatory actions around the world against two major traders, TikTok and Meta (including Facebook and WhatsApp), may illustrate well the inadequacies in the minimum protections currently afforded by the UCTD.

Suggested Citation

  • M. Durovic & J. Poon, 2023. "Consumer Vulnerability, Digital Fairness, and the European Rules on Unfair Contract Terms: What Can Be Learnt from the Case Law Against TikTok and Meta?," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 419-443, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jcopol:v:46:y:2023:i:4:d:10.1007_s10603-023-09546-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10603-023-09546-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10603-023-09546-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10603-023-09546-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hans-W. Micklitz & Przemysław Pałka & Yannis Panagis, 2017. "The Empire Strikes Back: Digital Control of Unfair Terms of Online Services," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 367-388, September.
    2. Jacoby, Jacob & Speller, Donald E & Berning, Carol A Kohn, 1974. "Brand Choice Behavior as a Function of Information Load: Replication and Extension," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 1(1), pages 33-42, June.
    3. Marco Loos & Joasia Luzak, 2016. "Wanted: a Bigger Stick. On Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts with Online Service Providers," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 63-90, March.
    4. Marco Loos & Joasia Luzak, 2016. "Wanted: a Bigger Stick. On Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts with Online Service Providers," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 63-90, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. F. Lagioia & A. Jabłonowska & R. Liepina & K. Drazewski, 2022. "AI in Search of Unfairness in Consumer Contracts: The Terms of Service Landscape," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 481-536, September.
    2. Hans-W. Micklitz & Przemysław Pałka & Yannis Panagis, 2017. "The Empire Strikes Back: Digital Control of Unfair Terms of Online Services," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 367-388, September.
    3. Persson, Petra, 2018. "Attention manipulation and information overload," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 78-106, May.
    4. Jin P. Gerlach & Ronald T. Cenfetelli, 2022. "Overcoming the Single-IS Paradigm in Individual-Level IS Research," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(2), pages 476-488, June.
    5. Anna Fielder & Riina Vuorikari & Nuria Rodriguez-Priego & Yves Punie, 2016. "Background Review for Developing the Digital Competence Framework for Consumers: A snapshot of hot-button issues and recent literature," JRC Research Reports JRC103332, Joint Research Centre.
    6. Chen, Xuqi & Shen, Meng & Gao, Zhifeng, 2017. "Impact of Intra-respondent Variations in Attribute Attendance on Consumer Preference in Food Choice," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258509, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Erevelles, Sunil & Roy, Abhik & Yip, Leslie S. C., 2001. "The universality of the signal theory for products and services," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 175-187, May.
    8. Anna Conte & M. Levati, 2014. "Use of data on planned contributions and stated beliefs in the measurement of social preferences," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 76(2), pages 201-223, February.
    9. Mark Heitmann & Andreas Herrmann, 2007. "Die Zufriedenheit mit dem Entscheidungsprozess als Determinante der Kundenbindung," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 59(5), pages 530-566, August.
    10. Chan, Nathan W. & Wolk, Leonard, 2020. "Cost-effective giving with multiple public goods," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 130-145.
    11. Shu-Heng Chen & Ragupathy Venkatachalam, 2017. "Information aggregation and computational intelligence," Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 231-252, June.
    12. Huddleston, Patricia T. & Behe, Bridget K. & Driesener, Carl & Minahan, S., 2018. "Inside-outside: Using eye-tracking to investigate search-choice processes in the retail environment," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 85-93.
    13. Kick, Markus, 2015. "The Price Premium Induced by Branding: A Health Care Case Study," EconStor Preprints 182504, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    14. Xiuping Zhang & Jaewon Choi, 2022. "The Importance of Social Influencer-Generated Contents for User Cognition and Emotional Attachment: An Information Relevance Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-18, May.
    15. Peter Gordon Roetzel, 2019. "Information overload in the information age: a review of the literature from business administration, business psychology, and related disciplines with a bibliometric approach and framework developmen," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 12(2), pages 479-522, December.
    16. O. Seizov & A. J. Wulf & J. Luzak, 2019. "The Transparent Trap: A Multidisciplinary Perspective on the Design of Transparent Online Disclosures in the EU," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 149-173, March.
    17. Lior Fink & Daniele Papismedov, 2023. "On the Same Page? What Users Benefit from a Desktop View on Mobile Devices," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 423-441, June.
    18. Lechner, Andreas T. & Paul, Michael, 2019. "Is this smile for real? The role of affect and thinking style in customer perceptions of frontline employee emotion authenticity," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 195-208.
    19. James Carroll & Eleanor Denny & Ronan C. Lyons, 2020. "Better energy cost information changes household property investment decisions: Evidence from a nationwide experiment," Trinity Economics Papers tep1520, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
    20. Liang Guo, 2016. "Contextual Deliberation and Preference Construction," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(10), pages 2977-2993, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jcopol:v:46:y:2023:i:4:d:10.1007_s10603-023-09546-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.