[gizajob]

I wonder if any legal minds here could comment on whether they owe me $1.5billion if I sign up for this. Technically it's an offer with consideration that I'm accepting, and happy to pay $-1.5billion for this service, even though I know that trying to get this to stand up in court would be a fools errand.

[wodenokoto]

There are all sorts of things in law about “reasonable persons” and contracts needs to be beneficial for both parties. I am sure this would not be binding.

[imroot]

If you've ever used JIRA, I'd say getting paid to use their software is beneficial for both parties...

[wodenokoto]

I think everyone who uses Jira gets paid to do so and their employer pays both atlassian and the user …

[tialaramex]

And Mistake. Mistake is totally a thing in contract law.

You can't void for Unilateral mistake unless it's egregious, but this is egregious.

[gizajob]

The only thing is though that the "reasonable persons" have seen it fit and reasonable to let an algorithm set their pricing. This will generally work in their favour but why shouldn't I as a customer be able to take advantage if they've purposefully chosen to let an automated process set the pricing of their contract?

[soco]

How about the current price of 0$/month? At least for the standard tier?

[snadal]

I'd bet that the current price of $0/month would be valid in court.

However they did not state for how long is offer valid, so they will be able to change pricing tiers later.

[christophilus]

For $1.5B / month I’d use Jira. But only for a month.

[robertlagrant]

Longest month ever.