Factual scenario:

In the article "Rules of Engagement in the Conflict between Businesses and Consumers in Online Contracts," do you agree with the author's description of the problem with online contracts or the solutions he proposes? Explain your position.

Instructions:

Do you agree with the following? Conclude "yes" or "no" and explain why. In your explanation, be sure to provide the rule and apply the law to the facts:

I agree with all of the issues highlighted by the author regarding the current nature of online contracts. I would venture to say that the vast majority of people do not really read online contracts when they sign up for new services, accounts, social media platforms, etc, and because companies know this, they are able to add a lot of unconscionable and invasive terms into contracts. Even when people do want to read the contracts, the language is often so complex that it is impossible to understand if you are not very familiar with law terminology in that specific industry. I also liked that the author pointed out that in many situations, like using free web search platforms and other "free" websites, people do not expect that they are entering into any contract, but companies will place a tiny "T&C" hyperlink on the page and count it as sufficient notice of the existence of terms. All of these issues lead to potential privacy and security issues for consumers nowadays. Though I agree that the unconscionability doctrine and consumer education are both steps in the right direction in solving for the severely tilted power dynamic between businesses and consumers in terms of online contracts, both of these solutions rely too much on individual consumers to be proactive and make a lot of additional effort to protect themselves. I do believe that legislative intervention will the best way to have widespread protections for consumers.