Abstract As lines between public and private spaces online continue to blur, contracts are moving closer to the day when government actors will be involved in all of them. When 90%+ of online users do not read the terms-of-service (ToS) agreements of social media sites, they are unaware of possible repercussions of blindly assenting to these unread contracts, including potentially relinquishing a number of their constitutional rights. Primary among these is their First Amendment right to petition the government for relief in a court of law. In most ToSs, the online user must agree to mandatory arbitration in the site owner’s venue of choice. Secondary is their sole right to their intellectual property afforded by the Constitution. Through an online survey (N = 235), this article reports data concerning respondents’ attitudes toward reading ToSs, their demographic information, and their likelihood of accepting a forum-selection term from Twitter, contrary to their potential constitutional rights. Two major findings are that: (a) there was no effect of education on the likelihood of rejecting Google’s unfavorable copyright-related terms; and (b) 63.2% of those who state they would not, under any condition, accept the unfavorable Twitter forum-selection term do, indeed, belong to or have belonged to Twitter.

中文翻译：

---

网络上最大的谎言是：无法通读《第一修正案》的镜头

摘要随着在线公共空间和私人空间之间的界限继续模糊，合同越来越接近政府行为者将参与其中的那一天。当超过90％的在线用户不阅读社交媒体网站的服务条款（ToS）协议时，他们不会意识到盲目同意这些未读合同的可能后果，包括可能放弃其一些宪法权利。其中最主要的是他们的第一修正案权利，可以请求政府向法院寻求救济。在大多数ToS中，在线用户必须同意在站点所有者选择的地点进行强制仲裁。次要是宪法赋予他们的知识产权的唯一权利。通过在线调查（N = 235），本文报告了有关受访者阅读服务条款的态度的数据，他们的人口统计信息，以及他们可能从Twitter接受论坛选择条款的可能性，与他们潜在的宪法权利背道而驰。有两个主要发现：（a）教育对拒绝Google不利的版权相关条款的可能性没有影响；（b）63.2％的人说，他们在任何情况下都不接受不利的Twitter论坛选择条件，的确确实属于Twitter或曾经属于Twitter。