[asnyder]

Still surprises me that tactics like these are legal. There shouldn't be a concept of fine print... The whole notion is ripe for abuse.

Same with elder scams. Too many potential avenues for scams via contracts.

[retrac]

It's probably not a valid contract, assuming a fair hearing. The scammers would not sue the victim here, most likely. They get their money from these schemes purely through fear and anxiety and vague legal threats. A simple, pay us what we tricked you into signing or we'll sue you, often gets an impaired or naive victim to pay up even though they owe nothing legally or morally and the threat is empty.

[amelius]

This is where dot-matrix printers shine: they destroy the fine print.

[beebmam]

This is a delightful nerd joke that I have decided to steal

[flangola7]

These scams often aren't. They rely on a certain % of people to give in without a fight.

[permo-w]

are they legal? ianal, but surely that kind of contract doesn't hold up legally

[ClumsyPilot]

the concept of fine print, i believe, is to provide more detail on terms you already agreed to. Like "what happens if the delivery is late"

It is not to introduce entirely new terms, like "actually you have to pay for this"