Step 1: Write a .dll that interposes on common windows controls used to display EULA messages.

Step 2: Whenever this .dll sees common EULA agreements, it randomly modifies them before displaying them. Changes "SHALL" to "SHALL NOT", changes "GPL" to "Public Domain", changes "may not be duplicated" to "ok to post to piratebay", etc.

Step 3: Embed this DLL in a self-replicating, self-destroying virus/worm. It spreads, stays on a computer for a random amount of time, then erases all evidence it was ever there.

Step 4: "Your honor, there's no way of knowing what I agreed to, since there is no permanent record and the current license does not match what I remember. Perhaps I had the EULA-modifying virus at the time."

I think you are confused about how courts work. If you did this, the judge would just say "sucks to be you", and move on.

Step 4 does not matter when every EULA starts with 'This Agreement may be modified at any time'. What's the point of having contracts with terms like that?

Judges typically strike down EULAs with provisions like that, at least in the states. So really, if they try that, it just makes it easier to ignore the EULA.

I used to look at Steam as a good example of DRM; works, does what it says on the cover, cross platform, etc.

Then I bought 'Dwarfs!?' for OSX. I painstakingly downloaded 1.5GB on a third world connection. And it didn't work. Not just "had issues" or "crashed sometimes" but literally didn't even start. Multiple complaints through Steam forums, the developer's forums, etc. came to nothing. Emailing the developer personally with an appeal to resolve the issues also came to nothing.

And they have a 'no refund' policy.

What a scam!

As much as I love Bitcoin, here's an example of a situation where credit cards provide some protection for the consumer; I can issue a chargeback on the transaction.

Sorry but I'm not seeing the relevance of this post to OP.

So a single game didn't start/work for you on Steam so not only is all of Steam and their DRM broken and a scam but Bitcoin is somehow also slighted as a result?

Steam terms are highlighted in the post.

Bitcoin is an area of interest to the wider community that effects the removal of financial services terms.

The example highlights that simplistic financial services sometimes fail to meet consumer expectations.

The killer of this site to me:

Nothing here should be considered legal advice. We express our opinion with no guarantee and we do not endorse any service in any way. Please refer to a qualified attorney for legal advice. Reading ToS;DR is in no way a replacement for reading the full terms to which you are bound. Disclosure: a list of donors and supporters is published. All legal information and Imprint.

----------- Get me a service with real lawyers writing up info and now you have something.

Not sure if you're trying to imply that information written by lawyers wouldn't have such a disclaimer. If so, that's nonsense. The language is there to make clear the site doesn't put its authors in a lawyer-client relationship with its readers, and directing them to retain a lawyer themselves if they want Advice they can rely on. No lawyer is going to offer free advice in a manner that makes them liable to every one of tens of thousands of readers in the event that the advice is negligent. (IANAL).

Could installing this extension, and therefore being "aware" of the TOS of a given site, make you more liable in the event that you inadvertently violate it? I.e., does it make a TOS any more legally binding than it already is?

Good question. I'm tempted to just allow the courts to nullify TOS provisions. They periodically do, calling them "unconscionable."

Previous discussion: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4350907

Very nice, but I think you should put somewhere on the website what Class A, B, C, D and E mean. It's not on the main page, and it's not on the "Learn more". This is something very interesting to know though...

Also, due to how the web looks in recent years, my mind is trained to ignore anything containing Facebook, Twitter, etc... at the bottom of webpages because it's usually meaningless footer content. However the "Ratings" part on your site looks exactly like that. I only discovered the second time that it is content.

If more people unconsciously ignore such stuff, you may want to present it in a different way.

Wanted to submit a review of WhatsApp's ToS (spoiler: they're horrible), but the method of communication is so untransparent... They use mailing lists apparently, and there are a dozen threads on Whatsapp's ToS already. I don't get it. This needs fixing if they want non-techies to contribute.

The problem with terms of service is not that you can't read them or that you don't. The problem is that even if you do you're going to have to come back to reading them every couple of weeks in case they suddenly change and pull out the rug from under you.

Terms of service from the time of signing up should be binding and a service should be suspended until you accept new terms of service should they change. That way at least you'd have a loud and clear warning.

Most online games make you agree to an updated ToS (Apple do as well with the App Store) when they come out, not that anyone is actually going to spend hours reading 27 pages of legalese, but still.

http://www.docracy.com/tos/changes provides part of this. They constantly crawl the various terms of service for popular sites and generate diffs. Using something like that it would be pretty easy to get an email every month of the things that have changed in services one uses.

You could just take the obvious shortcut and rate them all as 'D's or 'F's, because you know they pretty much all will be 'D's or 'F's.

What's the point? Oh no, G or FB have evil terms. Where are you going to go now? They've got you. You agreed to the terms.