| Except... It's baked into every contract that you must have a neeting of the minds. Yet there is no pipeline for back and forth in most of these agreements. The fact is, a system is both what it is, and what it isn't. Both are positive things. Technology, and the EULA in particular, has turned the idea of a contract, which is the end product of a negotiation brokered between two parties, into a one-way dicta. Think about the selection bias here. If you don't accept service X because their ToS has clause Y, and everybody else has clause Y, so clause Y is essentially normalized. 90% of people that didn't give a shit are doing whatever, the businesses are off to the bank with it, enjoying their network effect, and decreased legal costs/simplified legal pipeline/accounting/bookkeeping process, and you're just SOL. Want to negate the clause? Sorry. Either
A) No standing. You didn't sign it therefore you aren't in a recognizable position to claim damages/relief Or B) You signed it, it's a contract, you should have known what you were getting into. (If you accept the current zeitgeist on EULA in some jurisdictions) Guess you'll just have to make your own thing if you want it so bad... Or work through legislators/regulators, where you're still likely having to rely on some stack of EULA to even coordinate that. |