Right, because people don’t actually want to pay for anything.

> but that often times people dont have any other choice but to use that software/service, and are forced to accept the EULA because of it.

What? When have you ever been forced to use software X? Even with google, msft, apple, etc. you can always just not use their products. It might be inconvenient for you i.e. you have to buy a real map to figure out how to get from A to B but that's completely different than forced coercion.

I go to a university that uses office 365 for email/document sharing etc. I have friends who go to universities that use the equivalent Google products. I went to a high school that used Google classroom for a variety of assignments.

Well, EU ruled citizens can not be forced to give up their privacy to use a product/service. Google, msft, apple etc can play by the rules (which Google clearly does not according to this research) or accept the consequences.

As you might guess, the legal interpretation of "not being forced" will be more nuanced than "theoretically the guy could abandon a normal life in society to not have to use this".

For example, not being able to use a smartphone is generally not considered a sensible state for a citizen to be in. Even only being able to choose from one offering, because the other is criminally bad in terms of privacy, is generally not considered sensible.

I'm saying "sensible" here, with which I mean that it's not in the interest of the population as a whole for individual persons to feel impeded like that. Often enough rulings don't come down to right or wrong, legal or not, but rather to this type of sensible.

EULA's are worthles pieces of digital paper in any EU court.

"EULAs are worthless in any EU court."