SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Several Britons agreed to give up their eldest child in return for the use of free wifi, in an experiment to highlight the dangers of public Internet, published on Monday.
Londoners were asked to agree to terms and conditions as they logged on to use free wifi in a cafe in a busy financial district and at a site close to the houses of parliament.
The terms included a "Herod clause", under which the wifi was provided only if "the recipient agreed to assign their first born child to us for the duration of eternity."
Only six people agreed to the terms and conditions, however:
In just 30 minutes, 250 devices connected to the hotspot -- some of them doing so automatically due to their settings.
The company was able to collect the text of emails they sent, the email addresses of the sender and recipient, and the password of the sender.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Leebert on Tuesday September 30 2014, @12:32PM
What you believe or don't believe about the degree to which such agreements are legally binding is pretty much irrelevant. You should care very much what a court will believe.
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Tuesday September 30 2014, @03:15PM
A court requires evidence that a meeting of minds has occurred. A signature does not constitute a legally binding agreement, it is merely widely accepted evidence that a meeting of minds has taken place. Pieces like this are good evidence if you need to argue in court that one has not: they show that such agreements are usually clicked through without reading or the person being aware of the terms.
sudo mod me up