A Theory of Exploitation for Consumer Law: Online Choice Architectures, Dark Patterns, and Autonomy Violations

Author:

Brenncke M.ORCID

Abstract

AbstractCommercial practices that exploit consumer behavioural biases (behavioural exploitation) are an increasingly prevalent issue in online choice architectures. EU policymakers have started to expressly regulate such practices. What remains unclear about this type of regulation is when an online choice architecture exploits biased consumers. What is the legal meaning and significance of exploitation in the digital environment? Even though the concept of exploitation is frequently used in scholarship concerning behavioural exploitation such as “dark patterns”, it is rarely defined. The concept’s normativity is mostly ignored, remains underdeveloped, and lacks solid foundations. This Article aims to close this gap by developing a theory of exploitation for (behavioural) consumer law in the EU that applies to online choice architectures and unfair commercial practices in general. The Article eschews welfare analysis and instead relies on the philosophical discourse on exploitation theory. Even though this discourse is mostly ignored by the literature, the Article submits that this analytical framework fits better with the existing goals and scheme of EU consumer law compared to an approach to legal analysis that is driven by promoting consumer welfare through market efficiency. Ultimately, the Article defends the autonomy theory of exploitation and contends that regulating behavioural exploitation in online choice architectures means regulating for autonomy.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Economics and Econometrics,Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous)

Reference128 articles.

1. Ahmetoglu, G., Furnham, A., & Fagan, P. (2014). Pricing practices: A critical review of their effects on consumer perceptions and behaviour. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21, 696–707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2014.04.013

2. Amin, F. (2019). A vulnerability theory of exploitation (Doctoral dissertation, University of Limerick, 2019). https://researchrepository.ul.ie/articles/thesis/A_vulnerability_theory_of_exploitation/19834183

3. Arkes, H. R., Gigerenzer, G., & Hertwig, R. (2016). How bad is incoherence? Decision, 3, 20–39. https://doi.org/10.1037/dec0000043

4. Arneson, R. (1980). Mill versus paternalism. Ethics, 90, 470–489. https://doi.org/10.1086/292179

5. Arneson, R. (1994). Autonomy and preference formation. In J. L. Coleman & A. Buchanan (Eds.), In harm’s way: Essays in honor of Joel Feinberg (pp. 42–75). Cambridge University Press.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3