I did a semester of contract law at University and what they were trying to say is that in Software, we have the problem that we all got bamboozled by idiotic l

I did a semester of contract law at University and what they were trying to say is that in Software, we have the problem that we all got bamboozled by idiotic lawyer departments that apply to everything the same recipe. It would be much better for everyone to give good willing contracts, more open and well-intentioned, that the current model of unenforceable but scary lock-everything clauses. It would however probably mean a change of business model. Whatsapp could say "we'll never profit from you data, we'll only give them to law enforcement after review of the request and we delete all after 5 years", 3 lines and easy to enforce in front of a judge. In truth, none of those auto-approved contracts nobody reads can fully be trusted to be enforced by a judge. The excuse of "I misunderstood it and just clicked anyway to talk to my children" could very well be a defence. You can't say "if you breath, it means you accepted this contract of 2000 lines of legalese". One day I suspect, at least the EU, they'll think of doing something where you can't deny service for non-respect of a new contract and will have to offer a multi layer service for each contract level. That sounds rational and I can't believe a company can lock me out of an email service or whatever just because I can't accept a contract change I don't even understand.