A fraud in the terms of use has two opposing answers: one said it was a fraud, while some said it was not.

How do I reconcile those answers?

  • 1
    I haven't read your question or the answers, but it is possible that none of the answers is correct. I have seen many questions where nobody got the right answer.
    – Just a guy
    Commented Nov 25, 2019 at 7:48
  • 1
    You don't have any "legal" answers. You just have guesses from two random Internet commenters. If you want a legal question resolved, ask a lawyer.
    – bdb484
    Commented Nov 25, 2019 at 15:02
  • @bdb484 So true, so true. I'd add two friendly amendments, one big, one small. First, the big one: A real lawyer, unlike an internet lawyer, is much more willing to say, "I don't know," if he doesn't know the answer off the top of his head, even if it is in his area of expertise. Internet lawyers, on the other hand, will jump in and answer any question. Second, and less importantly, lots of people besides lawyers can answer questions. But, like real lawyers, they tend to only answer questions they actually know something about.
    – Just a guy
    Commented Nov 25, 2019 at 16:47
  • 1
    You can't get a legal question definitively answered by asking a lawyer, either, you have to litigate to the point of a Supreme Court ruling to get the answer. A real lawyer on the internet, or in a conversation at a party, won't put in the time needed to research a proper answer. On rare occasion you can get a free professionally-researched answer (iff they have an interest in the matter).
    – user6726
    Commented Nov 25, 2019 at 17:01
  • @user6726 well then what about a paid internet lawyer?
    – gudako
    Commented Nov 25, 2019 at 17:17

2 Answers 2


Law is more like sport than mathematics

You don’t know how it will turn out until you play the game.

If a case goes to trial it’s because at both sides believe they can win. Both sides probably have good reasons for their belief. At least one of them is wrong.

  • And with appeals, both parties can win, just not at the same time. The entire reason for the appeals process is that we don't even trust professionals to get it right.
    – MSalters
    Commented Nov 25, 2019 at 8:29

I don't know what you mean by "deal with it". I presume you are not asking how to psychologically cope with the contradiction in conclusions, instead the question is how to evaluate two or more answers, both of which might be wrong. IMO the appropriate question is, what is the best-supported answer. The most important thing to do is not decide that based on which outcome you like the best: you have to be prepared to lose and learn something.

Any answer has not only logical structure, it has or should have empirical support. Look for specific legal evidence, for example applicable court rulings that support a claim, or quotation of statutory provisions. Also look for admissions that legal standards are in flux, when they are. Things that are illegal in Australia are not necessarily illegal in the US, and vice versa.

Especially when a matter depends on "common law" principles, legal reasoning relies heavily on identifying analogous cases (applicable precedent). An answer that identifies analogous court rulings has more evidentiary weight than one that doesn't. In principle, there could be applicable US case law coming from adult "meeting" services which obscurely admit that their service is "for entertainment only".

The rules of criminal versus civil trials are set up so that you get a definite outcome. You must decide, and in a civil trial you ask which proposition is best supported. In a criminal trial, the rule is that you ask if a specific proposition is supported to a specific (higher) level. In evaluating scientific claims (including legal science), you can reason to acceptance, rejection or conclude that there is not sufficient evidence for you to decide between alternatives.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .