Did you ever consider the legality of Ursula exchanging Ariel's voice for a new pair of gams? Of course you didn't. However, just because the legal jargon is left out of this Disney classic, doesn't mean it was meant to be ignored. London-based comic and writer Shon Faye — who went to law school and is qualified to practice commercial law, according to BuzzFeed — interpreted Ariel and Ursula's contract, and it turns out this document wasn't even close to legal. There are a lot of things wrong with Ariel's decisions in The Little Mermaid — like the fact that Ariel would give up everything and everyone she knows in order to pursue a guy she's never even spoke to — but perhaps her biggest mistake was not attempting to null the contract she signed. Ursula did some seriously shady things after promising the even exchange of Ariel's voice for a pair of human legs, like deliberately sabotaging Ariel's relationship with the Prince by marrying him herself. (Still a little unclear why she did that, to be honest.) According to Faye, those things would have voided the pair's contract.
Twitter is, obviously, all about this:
Of course, just because Ariel could have legally voided the contract doesn't mean she could have done so in practice. Something tells me that Ursula wouldn't take so kindly to the little mermaid pursuing counter legal action, and would have turned her into a sea snake before Ariel could have told her to lawyer up. Still, this contract analysis is an amazing reminder that legal documents need to be thoroughly reviewed before you give up a major human function.