On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 9:11 PM, Nicholas Alexander <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hey Tarek, > > On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 6:38 AM, Tarek Ziade <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hey >> >> Someone tweeted me: https://twitter.com/johnke/status/566570679123058688 >> > > Wow, that's quite a thread! > > >> >> and looking at a recent change in b2g about that >> >> >> https://github.com/mozilla-b2g/gaia/commit/3afef63b0389b066f2bc1cc05944ffe1633caec9 >> >> I am wondering: what's the rational behind "1990".. shouldn't it be 2002 ? >> shouldn't we dynamically pull the "19xx and earlier" choice ? >> > > I think jgruen and rfeeley have the most UX context here, and presumably > there's a legal person with legal context we could ask. I believe some of > the language in the Act requires service providers to not make it "easy" to > avoid the requirements of the act. I know one concern was that identifying > exactly the magic year might be construed as violating COPPA. That, for > example, is why essentially zero sites ask: "Are you 13 or older" -- it > leads the user too clearly. There is some doubt as to whether asking per > year up until 13, and then having an "I'm old enough" category is also > violating. > Interesting.. (and quite odd :)) - we should simply display a floppy disk picture and ask them what it is. ;) I am adding Fernando to this thread since I guess b2g seems now slightly different in that aspect. > > Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer! > > > > Nick > >
_______________________________________________ Dev-fxacct mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxacct
