www.chinwag.com - uk-netmarketing - roundup

Are Users Stupid?
UK-Netmarketing Weekly Round-up - February 16, 2001

In the heat of the moment, usually in the last minutes before a website is ready to go live, some smart Alec will pounce and ask why it's so difficult to use. Usability, essentially the practice of making something user-friendly [I'm paraphrasing a lot before all the experts pile in with length definitions], can help alleviate these problems.

Charles Meaden asked the list for comments on a recent article from, the grand-daddy of usability, Jakob Neilsen, entitled 'Are Users Stupid'? Neilsen wrote, "Opponents of the usability movement claim that it focuses on stupid users and that most users can easily overcome complexity. In reality, even smart users prefer pursuing their own goals to navigating idiosyncratic designs. As Web use grows, the price of ignoring usability will only increase."

Marcus Exall replied, "While I object to the term 'stupid people' I agree with the thrust of the argument. So many designers and online agencies recommend complex plans, mechanics and designs to bolster their credentials and soak up budget but fail to deliver the public - the 'stupids'... To succeed a business - any business - needs these 'stupids'... Your survival depends on them, so treat them (i.e. your potential customers) with respect."

Ray Taylor shared an anecdote, "In the dim and distant past I had the dubious honour of being editor of various technical magazines. At one point we took a decision to implement DTP with the help of Apple Mac/Quark technology. We had no doubt that the techies would take to the then new technology like ducks to water. But we were concerned about the magazine designer, who had never in his life sat in front of a computer... Although he agreed DTP was the way to go, he insisted on keeping his big drawing board 'for doing the cover designs, etc.' However, after the first few weeks of getting used to using a computer instead of a pencil to design pages, the guy never again used the drawing board again, and it was ditched a short while later."

Chris Heathcoate added, "As Arthur C Clarke said, 'any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic'. If people have been so slow to turn to (un)advanced technology when it can positively benefit them day in day out (typewriter, fax, computer), why should they spend time with some clunky Internet site that makes them feel stupid? The mobile phone sold itself to markets unthinkable when first imagined. Email, as a killer app, has done similar for the Internet. It is slightly ironic that the only remotely killer site of the web is Hotmail."

The debate on the usability's usefulness will no doubt rumble on, what is clear however, is wherever the marketing is directing user's they'd better understand how to use it.

Chinwag has recently launched an email discussion list covering the techniques involved in usability, subscribe by sending a blank email to subscribe-uk-usability@chinwag.com.

Offline Verification of Credit Cards

If getting customers to come to an e-tailer and actually buy something is hard enough, but how do you avoid the pitfalls of credit card fraud? Seeking some help, Will Simmonds asked, "How else can credit cards be verified in Card Holder Not Present transactions. It has been suggested that you can check details against directory enquiries and the electoral role to ensure that the address/phone number details do match up. Is there anything else that can be done?

One of our sites has been having a lot of chargebacks due to fraudulent use of credit cards where the transactions have been authorised as the credit limit is available and the card is not yet reported stolen/cloned, etc. When the transaction is later highlighted as fraudulent it is then charged back by the credit card company to the Merchant account. Obviously some off line checks are required - but what?"

Ben Thompson outlined a detailed solution from numerous discussions with credit card companies:

Check everything, trust no-one.
Leave the authorisation of each transaction to as late as possible. If possible only authorise just prior to the goods being despatched. Note we are talking about authorisation not capture.
Delay everything. 96 hour delivery rather than 72 hours won't really upset anyone but gives more time for the card to be reported stolen.
Validate addresses. Check the postcode to the address and ensure it matches. Check the house number against the list of valid numbers for that postcode.
Validate the name with the address.
If it doesn't match give them a ring (try between 7 and 8 rather than during the day). Use a prepared script (it makes things easier).
Compare Credit Card numbers with the ones you already have. If you've already seen the card don't accept it (unless the email address and postcode match). (You can do this without storing the actual credit card details, we do it all the time).
There are various tricks you can do with credit cards. I'm not going into those here (and to be honest, I don't think I'm allowed to anyway).
Above all else apply commonsense.

Finally, remember it may take 3 months for a stolen card to be noticed and 9 months for you to be told (holders have up to 6 months to initiate chargebacks, banks 3 months to pass that information the merchant). Just because someone has already made 2 purchases in the past month doesn't mean that the card isn't dodgy. It may just mean that no statement has appeared yet."

Robin Edwards asked about merchants where time to delivery is critical, "I wonder if they are hit by a higher percentage of fraudulent transactions as a result... high volume guys, such as Amazon, would find it very difficult to manually check every name, address and phone number against the electoral register. I know they use fraud screening services, such as Cybersource, but can that validate name against address and telephone number automatically?"

Ken Cowley replied, "Cybersource and similar services will check patterns of attempted card usage versus predicted 'normal' patterns. These can be very accurate, and essentially the 'dial' can be turned to give whatever threshold required. The result of requiring less than 1% chargebacks will be higher 'false positives', with the false positives (legit customers turned down) dropping the more extensive the data. Also you don't have to manually check against the electoral roll - there are on-line services around charging 'per check' and you can buy CD and server licences from the likes of Capscan if you are reasonably competent (you can do ASP programming) and want to set up an automatic check yourself."

Logo Infringement

D. Dias asked UKNM for some advice, "It seems like every magazine/newspaper I pick up has an advert for a company promoting those tacky operator logos/group icons that you can download to Nokia phones by phoning a £1.50 per minute premium rate number. I didn't pay much attention until I picked up a magazine today and found our logo/trademark available for download and that the service provider was doing a revenue share with the magazine. The cheeky ****ers! Has this happened to anyone else and how have/are you responding?"

Alex Briffa replied in detail, "Sounds like there are a few issues here - copyright, passing off and trade mark infringement are all possibilities - though each case does turn on its facts and I can't stress that enough - certainly I cannot comment on the facts or circumstances in D's posting earlier but I have set out below some advice on what rules might apply if someone did use a logo that wasn't their's.

The most important thing to note at this point is not to make any threats or suggest that you will sue in relation to the use of a logo until you have taken advice as to the merits of your case. This is because there is a provision in the Trade Marks Act 1994 that allows the person on the receiving end of a 'groundless threat' to sue the maker of it. Insofar as potential causes of action are concerned consider the following:

There is no copyright in a name or word. However there will be copyright in the logo if it is an original artistic work (for something to qualify as artistic it doesn't matter how good it is). For a claim you will need to show that you own the copyright and the other party has copied or is distributing copies without your consent (is anyone else able to authorise use?).

However there needs to be copying and if the other party has come up with something similar independently then a copyright claim will fail. Trademark rights do not require copying though. They exist in both registered and unregistered form and in words, logos and various other devices 'capable of graphical representation'. So every slogan, device, logo, name etc you have used in the course of your business has potential trademark rights. Such rights protect the goodwill and reputation in your business.

Unregistered rights are not easily enforceable but they have value, as they may give rise to claims in 'passing off' - for example if a third party does something the same or similar and in doing so:

misrepresents itself,
creates confusion,
causes (or is likely to cause) damage to goodwill or reputation.

The value in unregistered marks lies in these rights. Registered marks are more easily enforceable and therefore instantly more valuable. Protecting these rights requires an application to the Patent Office (Trade Marks Section) and payment of fees. There are a possible 42 classes (covering all goods and services) and fees increase in accordance with the number of classes covered. However having registered rights means that you can stop and claim damages in relation to another person using a mark that is:

identical to yours for identical goods and services;
identical or similar to yours for identical or similar goods and services and is there a likelihood of confusion;
identical or similar to yours for unrelated goods and services and causing damage to the goodwill and reputation you have in the mark (where that reputation is considerable - i.e. generally a well known brand).

Again I should stress that every case turns on its individual facts but to all on the list I would say that if the above criteria are met you should then talk to a lawyer if you want to take the matter further (if there is a possibility that you do then most will give you free initial advice - and if they don't go to some one that will - we are a service industry just like any other)

Finally I should say the guiding principal in all litigation should be 'is it worth it?'

LINKS OF NOTE:
A quick round up of interesting, funny, useful and other links gleaned from the uk-netmarketing list, office gossip and other nefarious sources...we take no responsibility should you chose to click...basically, it's not our fault. Enjoy:

receive uk-netmarketing-roundup by email, every week
Just pop your email address in the form below and receive the uk-netmarketing roundup via email each week. You'll receive an email with details on how to confirm your subscription.

return to top