← Back to context

Comment by ytoawwhra92

11 days ago

It's perfectly normal for contracts in different jurisdictions to use different wording and include different clauses.

Even within the US, employment contracts with the same organisation may contain different wording depending on the state in which the employment is occurring.

> It's perfectly normal for contracts in different jurisdictions to use different wording and include different clauses.

Before signing, yes, but once signed the contract stays constant. Mutating terms of service are weird - I would expect them to be locked to a canonical URL at least, like "https://.../tos?region=eu" or ideally something that locks the version too, like "https://.../tos?version=eu-002".

Let me pose a question from a different angle - these are legal contracts we are talking about, and the version they present to the user apparently changes based only on the client IP address. So if the terms in the EU ToS are better than in the US ToS, what would prevent me from signing up with an EU IP Address the first time? I would expect to be bound to the contract I actually agree to, not just the one they "intended" to show me.

My issue isn't with them having different verbiage for different jurisdictions. It's with the way they sneakily change the verbiage in a manner nobody would expect.

The correct way to do this is to clearly distinguish them e.g. two different contracts, one titled "US Terms of Service" and another "European Terms of Service". Both with static content. Preferably PDF's or some other fixed format which you can download to redline changes when they inevitably tweak it every couple years, and properly print in the event you need to embark on litigation.

Not some "Global Terms of Service that silently change depending on quasi-pseudorandom network stack effects"

How the hell are you supposed to have confidence you're even looking at the right document? Contracts are meant to be clear and unambiguous, this dark pattern works against consensus ad idem.