As mentioned, legal language is (supposed to be) clear and concise. You'd have a strong argument that the merger doctrine should apply. The merger doctrine hol

As mentioned, legal language is (supposed to be) clear and concise. You'd have a strong argument that the merger doctrine should apply. The merger doctrine holds that when there is only one way to say something (or a limited number of ways), then it cannot be copyrighted. One common example from the case law is game instructions. Just as there's really only one way to say "The player who rolls the highest amount goes first", there's really only one way to say "Florida law governs any dispute". Certainly run it by a lawyer willing to make the advice official. Good luck.