The author hits on the crux of the problem within the first few paragraphs: Almost all of us have experienced a situation where we had to sign a document witho

The author hits on the crux of the problem within the first few paragraphs: Almost all of us have experienced a situation where we had to sign a document without paying too much attention to the important lines. I found the post fluffy, but agree most companies fail to draft legal contracts in language consumers understand or lengths they find palatable. And most consumers are conditioned to just blindly hit "I Agree" without actually reading any of it. I guess I'm one of those few people who DO tend to READ what I'm signing. I've flatly refused to use services because of objectionable terms in their ToS. When you become obstinate against tolerating commercial inequity, it's amazing how many services you discover you can live without. I recognize not all of us are in a position where we have the luxury to say NO. Where I have no choice, I've communicated with vendors immediately after clicking the "I Accept" button and informed them I'm withdrawing my consent to whatever term is unreasonable. Only once have they actually asked me to stop using the service. Typically the agent doesn't know how to handle the request and just ignores it. No guarantee that would offer you any protection in the event of litigation, but it might muddy the waters - especially if the judge agrees the term in question is too onerous. I also regularly notice mistakes in about 80% of the legal documents I read - recently my bank (one of the "Big 5" in Canada) had a term that included a double-negative effectively reversing the intended meaning and, strictly speaking, saddled them with more liability and risk exposure instead of sheltering them from it. It's not uncommon to find typos, placeholders not filled in, etc - my point is, not even companies' own lawyers are reading their contracts closely enough. In Canada at least, there's case law to support the validity of website terms of service (although if you get into the weeds there can be a subtly different bar for e.g. Browse-Wrap vs. Click-Wrap ones). There are also examples where complicated language and the unequal bargaining power between the company and consumer had the effect of watering down the agreements - or judges ruling no consensus ad idem was reached and throwing it out altogether. Some companies are beginning to recognize human-friendly legalese is not only considerate, but in their own best interest to maximize enforceability. I applaud projects like ToS;DR (https://tosdr.org/ https://tosdr.org/) for shining a light on the terms of popular sites.