Chloe buys a product from Good Times, Inc., that includes a shrink-wrap agreement. After using the product, she decides it is defective and sues Good Times. If the court determines that Chloe learned of the shrink-wrap terms after the contract was finalized, it may conclude that the terms were proposals for additional terms, which then:

c. were not a part of the contract unless Chloe expressly agreed to them.

Explanation:

It can be deducted that the shrink wrap proposals were for additional terms and not in the main contract agreement. And at such Chloe deserves a refund.

The only time She may not. e considered is if she expressly signed the contract without bothering on finding out the terms.

chavez's example shows that nonviolent protest can work well. it shows that one nonviolent man can stop a mob, which proves chavez's point and persuades people to protest nonviolently.

answer; cognitive dissonance;