My apologies in advance for such a childish manner of asking a question here. If it deserves a downvote - go ahead. Yet for me it is that simple, but so lethal.

As far as we all human beings, I am pretty sure, we all know, what is meant to be said in certain legal documents, nor in privacy policy. Moreover, the GDPR (taken for example) has already put down every legal detail of holding data on servers. Wouldn't it be a better to come from this (from Reddit privacy policy):


To a more "chill":

We may log IPs and your location from our app.

? This clearly will not be the object of litigation until the term IP imply a different meaning? What is your thought?


In writing, the prime objective is clarity

This is particularly true of legal writing because large consequences can hang on their interpretation including loss of liberty or life.

Overly verbose writing is generally not clear, however, overly concise writing isn’t necessarily clearer. For example, the Reddit clause you quote explains that location data is collected from a number of sources including GPS and Bluetooth, your proposed alternative doesn’t mention these - a person who read yours might think that a VPN would prevent this when it actually wouldn’t.

You need to say everything you need to say in a way that is easy to understand. Leaving people to “fill in the gaps” is a good way to end up in dispute.

By the way, you clearly don’t understand what the GDPR requires.

  • Thanks for response! I investigated the GDPR and privacy details before though - as far as I know, one of not the first-line requirement is to state all the possible collactable data, the ways of getting it etc, while other-government common policies are more pure. But yet, sometimes clarity is overused with such terms, as who are "us", "we" and more. – chzzh Jul 23 '19 at 6:48
