We need “anything sketchy about this 20-page contract” as a service (for something less than the cost of retaining a lawyer).

Honestly, it probably needs to be roped into something like the certificate authority system. Like, if you have a deceptive licensing agreement, the certificate is revoked. And similarly, being asked to sign something that isn't tied to a certificate would be a huge red flag.

This seems a perfect use for LLMs.

Rather than increasing the complexity even further, we need laws that anything longer than two standard pages of 12 point text is prima facie invalid. Exceptions for when attorneys are involved, or negotiated contracts that go back and forth a few times with substantive changes. Subjecting individuals to unbounded contract terms, often by contracts of adhesion, is an anti-feature.

And the kids should floss their teeth daily too.

I mean, at one level, yes?

If someone seemingly legit asks me to appear on a webinar--I'd be asking more questions about traveling to an event--I'm pretty much going to say yes. And if they send over some apparently routine paperwork including publicity rights and so forth, it's realistically only getting a quick skim.

You can’t just put anything in a contract and expect a court to unconditionally enforce it. If an included clause is unreasonable and clearly in bad faith (like a buried fee, written in words instead of numbers), a court can choose to annul it. The legal system is run by humans, not robots. (This is also why smart contracts may not be so smart after all — computers can’t use common sense to mitigate unfair smart contracts.)

In the UK I suspect it would qualify as unfair terms (ianal)