Basically, yes.
Modern “Contracts” have become so wordy and convoluted that they are used now like magical metamorphical spells to dazzle the target.
Whose dictionary is to be used to hash out the intention of the words? Whose Court would be used as the forum for disputes? Is it so written in the first contract, that the (predator’s) one side can change hands? Is it deep in ‘fine print’ of the first contract, that the predator can change the contract as they wish, and included in such that they have no need to tell you when they have changed to rules or goal posts? On and on and on.
Yes, deception along the way is supposed to void such a contract… however MOST Courts likewise taking advantage of common people, wouldn’t want to set a new precedent of ruling against such deception… lest [They] lose the upper hand [they] still hold.
We need Courts, if we want to peacefully untangle this mess. However the Courts are in the service of people who like the mess, and would gleefully stumble oopsy into War before acknowledging that they have been cheating with Law for a long time. So, there’s that.