Well, a contract is a "meeting of the minds", and the situation becomes quite interesting when one of those "minds" (as in this case) has (almost certain) knowledge that the other party has not read the "user agreement"...

Actually it's pretty normal. Existing cases have found that the phrasing and website design matters significantly.

See for example:

https://termsfeed.com/blog/how-not-place-i-agree-to-checkbox...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nguyen_v._Barnes_%26_Noble,_In....

http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2014/07/23andmes-browse...

Agreed. This is likely the judge "protesting" what he believes to be unjust law, even though he knows his decision will likely be overturned on appeal. EULAs and forced arbitration provisions have been upheld many times.

And just to follow up, "protesting" isn't really the right word. A lot of times district court judges will write opinions supporting minority positions in the law in an attempt to influence higher judges and to provide a "template" legal reasoning for higher judges should they want to overturn precedent.

There's already precedent, but "activist judges"