Re: Non-story
"They could easily put "To use this WiFi you agree to providing this coffee shop with your full name and address, bank details, and you also agree to setting up a standing order of £10 a month to use this WiFi". Realistically, you wouldn't accept these terms. But if you do, you couldn't then say to the judge "Your hounor, I didn't read the small print". Tough shit, you agreed to this to use the WiFi. Pony up."
Oh dear god, they have let the children out to pay today. No, that is manifestly NOT what would happen. To begin with, those terms are not reasonable (i.e. a reasonable person would not expect them to be there). As such they are going to have to be obvious. Very obvious. To the point of needing entry at the time of use, not after the fact.
Burying them many paragraphs down would allow the defence of "I didn't know that was there". This is a completely valid defence as shysters /have/ in the past tried to hide additional terms (on the back, in an addendum, whatever). Judges throw this crap out.
By reading this post you have agreed to pay me £10. Pony up. See...that kinda crap just doesn't fly.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
