Article
Mar 26
Back

HOW TO PROTECT CONSUMERS IN THE DIGITAL ERA: AN EXAMPLE OF THE ONLINE CHOICE ARCHITECTURE

Mateja DUROVIC

10.51204/Anali_PFBU_24101A
ABSTRACT /

The ongoing process of digitalisation has brought a number of new challenges to the existing regulatory frameworks for consumer protection. One of these major challenges is the phenomenon of the online choice architecture, which is used to push consumers to make specific economic decisions while acting as participants of the digital market. In the majority of cases, such pressures should not be allowed as they rely on consumers’ vulnerability. This paper examines the phenomenon of online choice architecture and the fact that the existing consumer law framework does not provide adequate legal protection to the consumers from online choice architecture, calling for a consumer law reform that would enable better protection of consumers.

DOWNLOAD COMPLETE ARTICLE /
English  
REFERENCES /
  1. Allcott, Hunt. 2011. Social norms and energy conservation. Journal Public Economics 95: 1082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2011.03.003
  2. BEUC. 2022. “Dark patterns” and the EU consumer law acquis. BEUC Position Paper: 1–15.
  3. Competition and Markets Authority (UK). 2022a. Evidence review of online choice architecture and consumer and competition harm. https:/www.gov.uk/government/publications/online-choice-architecture-how-digital-design-can-harm-competition-and-consumers/evidence-review-of-online-choice-architecture-and-consumer-and-competition-harm, last visited January 21, 2024.
  4. Competition and Markets Authority (UK). 2022b. Online Choice Architecture: How digital design can harm competition and consumers. CMA Discussion Paper.
  5. Duggan, Geoffrey, Stephen Payne. 2011. Skim reading by satisficing: Evidence from eye tracking. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems: 1141–1150. https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979114
  6. Durovic, Mateja, Franciezsck Lech. 2021. A Consumer Law Perspective on the Commercialization of Data. European Review of Private Law 29/5: 701–732. https://doi.org/10.54648/ERPL2021038
  7. Esposito, Fabrizio, Mateusz Grochowski. 2022. The Consumer Benchmark, Vulnerability, and the Contract Terms Transparency: A Plea for Reconsideration. European Review of Contract Law 18/1: 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1515/ercl-2022-2035
  8. European Commission. 2021. Guidance on the interpretation and application of Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52021XC1229%2805%29&qid=1640961745514, last visited December 28, 2023.
  9. Gray, Colin, Yubo Kou, Bryan Battles, Joseph Hoggatt, Austin L. Toombs. 2018. The Dark (Patterns) Side of UX Design. CHI ‘18: Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems: 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174108
  10. Hacker, Philipp. 2021. Manipulation by algorithms. Exploring the triangle of unfair commercial practice, data protection, and privacy law. European Law Journal 29/1–2: 142–175. https://doi.org/10.1111/eulj.12389
  11. Jachimowicz, Jon, Shannon Duncan, Elke U. Weber, Eric J. Johnson. 2019. When and why defaults influence decisions: A meta-analysis of default effects. Behavioural Public Policy 3/2: 159–186. https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2018.43
  12. Johnson, Eric, Daniel Goldstein. 2023. Do Defaults Save Lives? Science 302: 1338–1339. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1091721
  13. Kaprou, Eleni. 2023. Aggressive commercial practices 2.0: Is the UCPD fit for the digital age? EuCML 12/2: 76–84.
  14. Keller, Punam, Bari Harlam, George Loewenstein, Kevin G. Volpp. 2011. Enhanced active choice: A new method to motivate behaviour change. Journal of Consumer Psychology 21/4: 376–383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2011.06.003
  15. Kemp, Katharine. 2023. Your Body, Our Data: Unfair and Unsafe Privacy Practices of Popular Fertility Apps. UNSW Law Research: 1–33. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4396029
  16. MacKinnon, Eli, King Jennifer. 2022. Do the DSA and DMA Have What It Takes to Take on Dark Patterns? https://www.techpolicy.press/do-the-dsa-and-dma-have-what-it-takes-to-take-on-dark-patterns/, last visited January 23, 2024.
  17. Mathur, Arunesh, Gunes Acar, Michael Friedman, Elena Lucherini, Jonathan Mayer, Marshini Chetty, Arvind Narayanan. 2019. Dark patterns at scale: Findings from a crawl of 11K shopping websites. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 3/CSCW: 1–32. https://webtransparency.cs.princeton.edu/dark-patterns/, last visited January 23, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1145/3359183
  18. Sanchez-Rola Iskander, Matteo Dell’Amico, Platon Kotzias, Davide Balzarotti, Leyla Bilge, Pierre-Antoine Vervier, Igor Santos. 2019. Can I Opt Out Yet?: GDPR and the Global Illusion of Cookie Control. Asia CCS ‘19: Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Asia Conference on Computer & Communications Security: 340–351. https://doi.org/10.1145/3321705.3329806