[greenyoda]

"The average person reads at 250 words per minute, and slower than that when reading and comprehending on-screen text. This was part of a 6082 word agreement, which would take at least 24 minutes to read."

Is any court going to take seriously the assertion that clicking on "I agree" underneath a 6082 word agreement really establishes a binding contract to transfer intellectual property? Doesn't a contract require a "meeting of the minds"[1], i.e., intent by both parties to enter into the contract? In this case, it would seem that the person who agrees to the TOS will have been tricked into accepting an unusual condition that's not generally part of such agreements. (If a delivery person asked you to sign to indicate receipt of a package, but buried in the fine print was a clause saying that you were transferring the title to your car to FedEx, would that be a valid contract?)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meeting_of_minds

[chc]

The term you're looking for is "contracts of adhesion," and yes, courts do acknowledge the potential for unfair treatment there. (That isn't to say that they'd strike this particular clause — just that they do recognize and account for the power inequality inherent in this kind of contract.)