Technology

34451 readers

679 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.

Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.

Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

MinutePhrase@lemmy.ml

191

Canadian judge rules the thumbs up emoji counts as a contract agreement (www.engadget.com)

submitted 1 year ago by cyu@sh.itjust.works to c/technology@lemmy.ml

31 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/1255003

A Canadian judge has ruled that the popular “thumbs-up” emoji not only can be used as a contract agreement, but is just as valid as an actual signature. The Saskatchewan-based judge made the ruling on the grounds that the courts must adapt to the “new reality” of how people communicate, as originally reported by The Guardian.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] kevincox@lemmy.ml 32 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This article references another article: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/06/canada-judge-thumbs-up-emoji-sign-contract

Apparently the message was an image of the contract and "please confirm flax contract". Seems like the most likely interpretation of the 👍 is agreeing to the contract, not confirming receipt.

[–] CmdrShepard@lemmy.one 14 points 1 year ago

And the farmer had done the same with other contacts multiple times before.

[–] DarraignTheSane@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ah, well then yeah he should have been more explicit, or simply not replied.

[–] zumi@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 1 year ago

Exactly. But I think the farmer actually did want to agree and lock in the price of the flax.

Only reason they were looking for a way out was because flax had skyrocketed and they wanted to sell to someone else.

Three times prior they replied with “Looks good,” “Ok” and “Yup.”, and then delivered the flax per the contract. It was only when the price went up they wanted to say they were not agreeing to it.

In either case the judge was pretty specific that this was not a precedent for the thumbs up emoji, but just that in this particular case it sure looked like consent based on past actions.