Google Fiber is in many ways ISPs that are radically distinct from the incumbent the firm is threatening to interrupt. But the firm this week made it clear those differences just go up to now.

The largest issue with binding arbitration is because the arbitrator is employed by the ISP, they will rule for their company nearly all the time. For instance, in the credit card sector, businesses that require users participate in binding arbitration win 95% of the time. Businesses are further helped by the fact that most consumers do not read their TOS, or when they do, have no notion what the binding arbitration language means.

One 2015 study in fact found that only 7% recognize that their ability is eliminated by this language. And while the class action system clearly has issues, binding arbitration is an insistently worse “alternative.”

When businesses first start attempting to erode user rights via mouse print before this decade, several lower courts held the conduct broken user rights and was “unconscionable.” And while the conduct of Google Fiber definitely isn’t common, that does not make stripping user legal rights with fine print away .