How can a TOS tell someone (a minor) that the person is forbidden to accept an agreement, while simultaneously holding that person subject to that agreement?
It's a paradox in the space-time continuum.
Has any court tested the theory that a minor can be held in violation of a TOS? Contracts entered into by minors are void on their face.
This seems a lot like having a "NO Trespassing" sign in the bathroom of a coffee shop, and then prosecutors charging people who walk in the front door.
It's a paradox in the space-time continuum.
Has any court tested the theory that a minor can be held in violation of a TOS? Contracts entered into by minors are void on their face.
This seems a lot like having a "NO Trespassing" sign in the bathroom of a coffee shop, and then prosecutors charging people who walk in the front door.