# Coporate America, I have a request...

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/coporate-america-i-have-a-request/187878>\
**Category:** The BBQ Pit\
**Created:** [July 12, 2003, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/coporate-america-i-have-a-request/187878 "2003-07-12T01:54:56Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 5

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Binarydrone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3da27b/32.png) [@Binarydrone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Binarydrone)\
**Post date:** [July 18, 2003, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/coporate-america-i-have-a-request/187878/81 "2003-07-18T17:09:07Z")

</div>

See, I do get that the consumer has the responsibility to read the terms of use before agreeing to anything. The problem is that the deck is stacked.

What is being lost in this discussion is the fact that the very presence of fine print _at all_ is problematic and designed to confuse the consumer about what he is agreeing to. Perhaps a better gripe would be how difficult it is to find goods and services that are easy to understand and that don’t have a bunch of hidden surprises.

Now I know that the corporate apologists will be quick to point out that the consumer can always choose to not use products and services that are not to his liking, but I would point out that this is not really realistic.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Fin\_man](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/51bf81/32.png) [@Fin\_man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fin_man)\
**Post date:** [July 18, 2003, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/coporate-america-i-have-a-request/187878/82 "2003-07-18T17:58:34Z")

</div>

**TaxGuy** , thank you.

**Binarydrone** , I agree. A completely valid and maybe GD topic. However, not the OP and therefore not discussed here. 🙂

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/coporate-america-i-have-a-request/187878.md?page=4)