Dismantling Dark Patterns Using TDD via Discovery and Injunctions
by marc_litchfield | 2026-01-23 19:22:24+00:00
I am proposing to use TDD to get a set of tests to pass in a system I do not control or have any internal knowledge of. The system contains "dark patterns" that must be dismantled.

To run the tests, I'm planning to move for a Technical Special Master in my active federal lawsuit against the company, which prays for permanent injunctions to compel the code changes required to get the tests passing. I've proposed ESI Protocols for discovery that will give the special master access to the code and data needed to evaluate the proposed "tests" (stipulated binary interrogatories):

‣ 1) Login Verification Email Delivery: Will login verification emails be delivered to input email addresses that do not have a prior user identity when the login form is submitted? (YES|NO).

‣ 2) Account Completion Form Presentation: Upon submission of a valid code from the login verification email for an input email address that did not have a prior user identity, will an account completion form be presented? (YES|NO).

‣ 3) HomeAdvisor "Welcome Back" Banner Display: Upon valid submission of the account completion form and subsequent initial login when no prior user identity existed, will a message banner containing the phrase "Welcome Back" be displayed at homeadvisor.com? (YES|NO).

‣ 4) User Identity Registration: Upon valid submission of the account completion form when no prior user identity existed, will a user identity associated with the input email address be registered? (YES|NO).

‣ 5) Payment Method Deletion Presentation: Do the payment method controls lack, omit, or hide an interface element to remove or delete an existing payment method? (YES|NO)

‣ 6) Payment Method Deletion Capability: Does the functionality for managing payment methods lack a capability to delete the payment method associated with a registered user without requiring a replacement? (YES|NO).

‣ 7) Payment Token Storage: Does the system store a payment token associated with the user's payment method after cancellation of the service? (YES|NO).

All would fail now with "YES" answers. If the judge grants the injunctions and the company were compelled to remediate, all 7 tests would pass (NO=GREEN). This would result in the verifiable dismantling of two "dark patterns" (UTPA violations) that are currently capable of harming consumers.

■ Pattern 1: The deceptive login registration funnel at homeadvisor.com will be replaced with a non-deceptive login experience (bits 1-4).

■ Pattern 2: Forced financial data retention at angi.com will be curbed by the addition of payment method deletion functionality (bits 5-7).

This is the model I'm proposing for TDD via electronic discovery. The defendant will resist, but I believe I am proposing a reasonable model, and I'd like to see this approach used in FTC and SEC litigation as we begin dismantling the dark patterns around us.

For more background, see my federal lawsuit, Litchfield v. Angi Inc. (3:25-cv-02394-SI). Please be aware that I have a financial incentive here, a transparently disclosed active bearish position on ANGI stock. My investment thesis followed my discoveries of deceptive practices at Angi Inc.. My position is a measure of my conviction to the truth of my evidence, and is in no way investment advice for others.

The full case and all evidence is available to the public via the RECAP archives: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72074717/litchfield-v-angi-inc/