You’ve probably heard the expression “read the small print” before. It refers to making sure you read any terms or restrictions in something you are agreeing to. This expression implies that if whoever wrote the agreement tries to screw you over in the future, it’s entirely your fault. It implies that to avoid getting screwed, you need to spend many hours of your time carefully scrutinising dense legal documents written deliberately to be as hard to understand as possible.

Obviously, there are times in life where you would want to carefully read a legal document, especially if the legal document is about an important life decision. However, if the document is the terms and conditions to a streaming service, for example, then obviously you aren’t going to want to spend a lot of time reading the terms. Why then, are companies allowed to include things in their terms and conditions that you would never agree to if they were on the front page?

These companies are clearly taking advantage of the fact that people don’t read their terms and using that to screw over their customers. This frustrates me a lot. In this post, I want to outline what the problem is, and what you can do to make things at least a bit better.

“People who are worried about companies taking advantage of them should just read the terms!”

I can understand why you might have this response, especially if you aren’t too worried about what companies can do. But there are people who might be worried, but simply don’t have the time to read terms.

As a university student, my time is not very valuable. I happily spend many hours configuring my Linux computer and not changing anything meaningful. I spend many hours watching YouTube videos that don’t substantially contribute to my knowledge. I would happily spend several hours reading the terms of a company’s service if I wanted to.

However, most people’s time is much more valuable than mine. People have important things to do. People have lives. Some people work long hours at jobs so they can earn enough money to cover essential living costs. Would it really be fair for those people to have to read long legal documents if they want to watch a movie in their free time?

Companies are able to get away with many problematic things because their terms of service allow them to do so. The problem is the existence of those questionable terms, not people’s unwillingness to read them.

“But what do these terms of service have that’s so concerning?”

A lot of things, here are just some examples.

Taking away your ownership

When you see the word “purchase”, you would probably assume that you are acquiring ownership of something in exchange for money. However, the terms of many companies redefine this common English word to take away your ownership. For example, many companies say that the content you ‘purchase’ from them is licensed and not sold (e.g. Amazon Kindle, Steam). This means the company can take away that content from you if they feel like it.

That’s right, many companies will sell you revocable licenses to content and still have the audacity to say it’s a purchase!

If you saw the word ‘license’ instead of ‘purchase’ when you next went to buy a movie, e-book or video game, would you still buy it? There is no right or wrong answer, it’s your money so you can decide whether or not you are okay with that. Importantly though, you should be given that information so you can make an informed decision without reading several pages of legalese.

Unfortunately, most companies decide to write ‘purchase’ on their front page and redefine ‘purchase’ as ‘license’ a few pages into their terms of service. When this happens, companies are deliberately withholding information from you in the hopes that you ignore the terms and buy the product, even though you won’t be able to own the product you have paid for.

Arbitration clauses

I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice

Simply thinking about the idea of arbitration clauses for too long makes my blood boil. This is when a company includes a clause in their terms of service that says you cannot file a lawsuit against them and take them to court. Instead, any disputes you and the company have are settled in a process known as arbitration.

Arbitration is a legal process involving a neutral third party who makes a legally binding decision. Doesn’t seem so bad, so what’s the problem?

To be clear, if a case is sent to arbitration it doesn’t mean no one will hear it. Your case will be heard by an arbitrator, often a retired judge, and you can still win against a company in arbitration. The problem with arbitration is that it is a private process (court cases are public) which means your case can’t set a precedent. So if you win against a company in arbitration, other people won’t be able to use your case as an example if they are trying to resolve the same problem. This means companies can’t be held accountable as easily. It’s also much harder to appeal a case in arbitration.

The main issue I have with arbitration clauses is that arbitration is supposed to be a mutually consensual process, where both parties agree to arbitration. Despite this, clicking ‘accept’ on the terms of service of a company is apparently sufficient to count as consent to waive your right to a judge-jury trial. Would you still click ‘accept’ if you knew this?

Arbitration clauses are common in the US since the Federal Arbitration Act allows them. I am not sure whether or not they are legal in the UK, but I haven’t seen any UK-only companies use them.

How companies get away with this

The biggest problem about these problematic terms is how common they have become. This angers me, but doesn’t surprise me much. Since people very rarely read the terms, companies can update them at any time and see if people react. For instance, one or two companies might have successfully inserted an arbitration clause into their terms and received no backlash. This results in other companies following suit. This is how we ended up where we are now, when so many companies have problematic terms, and the average consumer would sometimes struggle to find companies who don’t have such terms.

What can people do about this?

If you’re reading this right now, you may think that it’s pointless for me to rant about these issues since there doesn’t seem to be a solution to them. To an extent that’s true, I’m mostly writing this post to get my feelings about these issues written down. However, there are still things you can do to help.

One thing you should do is raise awareness if a company tries to screw you over, since the company can backtrack on their decision and make things better.

For example, in 2023, Sony announced that they would remove Discovery shows that people had paid for. They would legally be able to do this due to their terms of service, which redefine ‘purchase’ as I mentioned earlier on. However, because people saw this and rightfully got mad, Sony cancelled this content removal so people could continue to watch the content they ‘purchased’. People didn’t have their content removed because people discussed the issue online. This shows the importance of discussing issues like this when they happen.

Another thing you can do, and I’ll admit this is probably a stretch for most people, is to stop being a customer of companies that abuse their users (if it is practical to do so). For example, if enough people cancel their subscriptions to a streaming service because the terms contain an arbitration clause, it is likely that the company will remove that clause since it would be more profitable to allow people to sue in court than to lose a significant percentage of their user base.

But wouldn’t this require you to read the terms? Well, sort of. I’m not suggesting you should read the terms in their entirety, but you might want to consider checking for things you know are harmful. For example, you might want to press CTRL+F and search for words like, ‘arbitration’, ‘dispute’, ‘purchase’ or ‘license’ to see whether the company engages in the dodgy practices that I have talked about. Obviously, there are other things these terms could contain; my post is not an exhaustive list. Despite this, checking for the things I’ve listed will help you to spot immediate red flags.

Ultimately, none of these solutions are ideal and are unlikely to solve the problem entirely. It would be more useful if legislation could be enacted that prevents companies from including problematic terms and misleading their customers. Companies would likely find loopholes in any new legislation, but it would still help stop the shadiest of practises. If you’re involved in politics, maybe try to push for legislation that would require companies to disclose whether something is a ‘purchase’ or a ‘license’ on their front pages, or legislation banning arbitration clauses (I doubt any politicians will read this, I’m just putting these optimistic ideas out there).

I would also like to mention a project that I am really excited about called the Consumer Rights Wiki. This is a wiki where people document instances where companies abuse their customers. The idea is that you should be able to look up a company on this wiki and get an article detailing all the problems this company has regarding how they treat their customers, including the issues I have mentioned. This wiki is very new, and not all the articles on it are polished, but I can see this wiki becoming a valuable resource for consumers who want to make more informed decisions about what products to buy and which companies to support. Since it is a wiki, anyone can create and edit articles so you can document your experiences assuming it meets the criteria.

Final notes

I hope this post has made you aware of some of the issues that companies’ terms can have and shown you why I believe that people should not be expected to read them. I believe that if more people are aware of these problems, it is going to be easier to find solutions.

A lot of the things in this post have been quite negative. When I first learned about these things myself, it made me feel pessimistic and I have probably spent too much time thinking about all these issues. Don’t take these things companies do too close to heart, and remember that there are still businesses who want the best for their customers, even if they are hard to find.