The specific written approval pursuant’article 1341, comma 2°, cod. civ. for unfair contract terms unilaterally prepared by a farmer makes use of the virtual platform for the sale of its products it is certainly also applicable to computer contracts, also in the light of 'article 13 of Legislative Decree 70/2003, on electronic commerce, according to which "the rules on the conclusion of contracts shall also apply in cases where the recipient of a good or a service of the Information Society places his order via internet”.
In particular, to ensure the transparency of the contract point and click, Legislative Decree 70/2003 requires that the person providing goods or services must, without undue delay and telematic, send to the recipient a receipt of the order in which they are inserted:
1. A summary of all the contractual conditions, general and specific;
2. information about the essential characteristics of the goods or services;
3. detailed indication of the price, means of payment, withdrawal, delivery costs and applicable taxes. 
THE UNFAIR
If in practice it seemed easily solved the problem of ensuring the ability to know the general terms and conditions under 1° comma dell’art. 1341 cod. civ., through the preparation of appropriate screens containing all the terms intended, or by organizing special link through which the member can access before the conclusion of the contract to a specific web page to read the clauses, much more complex appears the question of the specific approval in writing of those unfair.
E-commerce, which is the area in which it is relevant that the form of agreements, It is not in any way exempt from the provisions on unfair terms dictated by Articles 1341, 2°co, e 1342, 2°co, c.c. 33ss and the articles of the Consumer Code, with the consequence that unfair terms are void if they are not specifically subscribed.
This place, for the majority jurisprudence simple point and click mode is not enough to make unfair contract terms appropriately approved a contract negotiation and the virtual button is not eligible to conclude a contract containing unfair terms.
To this end it is necessary to use the digital signature or resort to traditional methods and, then, the signature on the paper document.
Particularly relevant, in this sense, it's a’order of the 30 April 2012, of the Court of CatanzarO, which states that in relation to unfair contract clauses must be considered that online “is insufficient signing the contract text, but it is necessary in the specific subscription of individual clauses, that has to be paid with the digital signature. therefore, by telemarketing contracts freeform the contract is executed by the virtual key negotiating, but unfair contract terms will be effective and binding only if specifically approved by the digital signature“.
As mentioned Article 1341 c.c. prescribes a complex requirement that, in an analytical perspective, it can be broken down: 1°) the specific approval of the clauses and 2nd) in writing of such approval.
With respect to the first element, implying the need for showing a manifestation of will to accept the clauses referring especially to them and therefore separate from the declaration of acceptance of the overall contract proposal, the initial technical difficulties have proved to be overcome through the provision of two distinct form, one for the approval of the overall negotiating Regulation through the "pressure" of the c.d. Virtual negotiating button (special acceptance icon), and another containing unfair terms to be approved through a further "pressure" of an appropriate acceptance icon. In respect of the need for such acceptance is issued in writing, in practice the issue is particularly thorny, since it is substantially unthinkable that in these types of trading can be requested and obtained dall'aderente the use of a digital signature (or otherwise qualified) or an advanced signature. So if you were to conclude that the need, on the substance, one of these electronic signatures c.d. strong, It would become de facto impossible for contractors to insert unfair terms in this method of on-line conclusion.
DOUBLE CLICK
In practice, despite the tougher stance of the law, They have spread the remedies, involving a double and separate clicks: one with which approves the entire contract, the other with whom you approve the individual unconscionable clauses.
It is practiced by a different web sites solution, although its legal validity is still controversial.
A step forward towards his eligibility was done, however, with changes in 2016 Digital Administration Code (CAD), what time, all’article 21, It expected to “IT documents that bear an electronic signature satisfies the requirement of written form and in terms of evidence is freely assessed in judgment held account of its objective characteristics of quality, safety, integrity and immutability“.
There is no reference to the advanced electronic signature (qualified or digital), but it gives a generic electronic signature value of the suitable instrument to satisfy the written form.
Even the "point and click" mode so, according to an interpretation of evolution, It could be considered relevant in this sense, giving greater support to the option of two separate clicks.
Indeed, - as repeatedly noted by case law - the double-subscription ratio, in B2B relationships, is to ensure that, anyhow, the onerous contract terms and unfair bargaining and made subject to an approval of a true and proper, security guaranteed by the technique of the double point and click does not seem certainly less than that provided by the double signature requirement.
On one side, or in Law or equivalent, in commercial practice the double signing of affixing not always guarantee particular attention to unfair terms, especially where these are only recalled by the number or title of reference article.
On the other, modern technology certainly would be arrangements for which the contractor should actually read the unfair terms before accepting them through Point and click.
Pronunciations JUDGES
Jurisprudence, until now, He has had occasion to rule on the issue only on a few occasions.
With the judgment 15/2002, the Justice of the Peace of Partanna It did not consider valid a clause on jurisdiction - entered by the seller in an online purchase agreement - which provided for an exception to the Judicial Authority's buyer, in the absence of its specific acceptance, these are “clause vexatious” ex art.1341, comma 2, c.c..
Indeed, according to the hearing body it would have been necessary and sufficient "get a double assent, by pressing the appropriate button: an accession and the other to approve the so-called unfair terms ".
According to the Judge the provisions on the conclusion of contracts electronically, including those on electronic and digital signature, They have not repealed the so-called rules on unfair terms in an electronic contract.
To the objection of the seller that the contract, Unlike, consideration should be concluded with the sending of the order, by clicking on the field, thus demonstrating the acceptance of the general conditions of contract, the judge would have replied that in any case confirms with a single click is not sufficient for the purpose dell'art.1341 cc: at least it would have been necessary to get a double approval, by pressing the appropriate button: an accession and the other to approve the so-called unfair terms.
Only with the adoption of the digital signature you will have the perfect legal equality (imperfect though it has about the electronic signature) hand-written signature and thus the equalization between the contract / electronic document and contract / paper document.
viable solutions
A. Preparation of a special form with the specific recall of all unfair terms of Regulation, for the acceptance of which is required an appropriate pressure of the "virtual key", perhaps accompanied by a further login with the username and password you type of the member, that applies to electronic signature (simple), recalling in particular the focus on the act of acceptance that is taking place, It would already be sufficient to satisfy the ratio of protection which underlies Article. 1341, comma 2°, cod. civ. otherwise specified by autograph signing of the paper document;
B. Anticipating the requirement that unfair contract terms appear on the contractor videos in a particularly clear form, through a highlight of the same or the use of different fonts or colors, perhaps requiring the contractor to "scroll" through the entire page in such a way as to be forced to read as well as highlighted;
C. Provide two specific, separate and autonomous fields to the general conditions of contract and unfair contract terms, so that the conclusion of the contract will not occur in the event that the customer click on the field “AND” the general terms and conditions, then accept without specifically - by clicking on another, separate and distinct field, often within the same Web page - unfair contract terms.
D. Send the customer copy of the written contract with all the terms approved web and get from them a signed copy.