We must put an end to absurd boilerplate contracts
Rep. Kristine C. Howard September 5, 2024 | 1:11 PM
A man signs up for a free trial of a streaming platform and agrees to the terms of service. Years later, the man and his wife dine at a restaurant after receiving assurances from an app owned by the streaming service that the restaurant can accommodate his wife’s allergies.
Something goes wrong, promised accommodations aren’t made, and the man’s wife dies as a result. This is where things go from tragic to absurd.
The man brings wrongful death suits against the restaurant and the company that recommended the restaurant, but the company argues the man’s suit is improper, as he agreed to settle any and all disputes against the company through a different legal process when he consented to the terms of service for the streaming service years earlier.
This is no mere hypothetical – the company is Disney, which, after public outrage, vacated their motion to dismiss, though they were not legally obligated to do so. A judge could easily have ruled in Disney’s favor.
American consumers face this bizarre legal hellscape every day. How many “Terms of Use” or “Service Agreements” have you signed or consented to without reading?
Evidence shows almost nobody actually reads these agreements, and the scant few who do rarely understand them. Further, consumers have no means of modifying these contracts.
Doesn’t sound like “consent” as anybody but a lawyer would understand the word, let alone “informed consent.”
Yet, courts regard these contracts as valid, considering your checking that “I Agree” box as genuine and informed consent.
As the Disney case makes clear, this can lead to unimaginably callous and ridiculous legal maneuvers that are, nonetheless, legal and enforceable.
The plaintiff in the Disney case – the poor man who lost his wife – benefited from public outcry. Not everyone gets that support.
This must stop.
To correct this, state Rep. Scott Conklin and I have co-authored H.B. 2290, which would allow Pennsylvania’s consumers to render surprise terms in so-called “boilerplate” contracts unenforceable if they bear no obvious relation to the object of the agreement.
I understand this is not dramatic and exciting legislation on its face, but, as we’ve seen, these contracts are abusive, absurd, and fundamentally coercive.
Let’s put an end to these ludicrous terms of service. Everybody has inadvertently waived rights without reading the fine print at some point. Let’s reclaim those rights.