@otte_homan @pluralistic All that being said, it's been explained to me by actual lawyers that judges are specifically trained to avoid "making law." They rule narrowly on statute and precedent essentially until you get to Supreme and/or Appeals courts (depending on how they're named where you are). Those courts' job is to "make law."
@otte_homan @pluralistic It would be a great thing for society if one of these "click to give up half your rights" cases went to the Supreme Court and they found that such "contracts" are not enforceable. With today's US Supreme Court, that would not happen, of course.
@OrionKidder I could imagine a French Supreme Court or a European High Court to decide this way though, if annoyed enough by US companies. And then declare it once and for all settled that a European resident on a computer in Europe connected to a network in Europe would not simply waive all rights when clicking a button, irrespective of where the supplier's HQ is domiciled. Many of those are in Ireland for tax avoiding/optimizing reasons anyway, so we could tickle the Irish High Court into such a decision, LOL. @pluralistic
@otte_homan @pluralistic Sure. I can also imagine the Canadian Supreme Court finding that these contracts are corporate wishful thinking. It's pretty reasonable to go, "No, these flash by in seconds, you know nobody has time to read them, there's essentially no choice in the matter. These are not 'contracts' in any real sense. Bugger off."