Exactly. But there are legal issues with that, if you say "Here is our legal agreement, here is another agreement I want you to read" in court people will argu

Exactly. But there are legal issues with that, if you say "Here is our legal agreement, here is another agreement I want you to read" in court people will argue they should only be held to the agreement they were asked to read. I agree with you, but we cant solve the problem with having a 'legal' and a 'human readable' version, we need the legal version to be human readable (ok ok lawyers are humans also :) ) It's claimed that legal language is needed because it's more precise, that's not true. Take a relatively simple legal case in which no facts are in disputer, ask 5 highly paid barristers for an opinion on the case and compare.