It's amazing to me that an attorney -- or anyone else -- can argue with a straight face that the consumers in this class action case actually knew what they were buying. As opposed to what I'm infinitely confident is in fact the case: A clever strategy designed to confuse consumers into accidentally buying something and yet making enough easily overlooked disclosures so that the contract "appears" legal and will thus be enforced.
The Ninth Circuit and the district court take the right approach. This is just a decision on whether the consumers are compelled to arbitrate. But I feel pretty good about how this case is ending up on the merits as well.