decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Failure on Google's part? | 118 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Failure on Google's part?
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 06 2012 @ 02:47 PM EDT
Good luck with that attitude.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Try in stead: Just in case one of us gets hijacked, can we put all our promises in writing?
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 06 2012 @ 04:08 PM EDT

As in, just in case one of us gets forced out of our own company by some SOB, lets put all the implicit stuff in writing with all the necessary legal incantations to bind our successors, heirs, assigns, bankruptcy judges, corporate raiders etc. just in case one of us falls victim to such an unpleasant event.

And make it mutual so you also write down lots of promises the other way, even silly little ones, just to convince both the other party and any later judge/jury that this is truly mutual and not slanted to one side.

Done right this might even grease the negotiations as it allows you to give the other side lots of things that won't cost you a dime unless you go insane.

This should not be confused with giving the other side automatic penalties such as forfeiture clauses, statutory damages or late fees. The idea is to give them benefits that won't cost you.

Such as "unlimited internal use copies" of the product they will be reselling. Or "unlimited backup copies" in place of the silly "one backup copy or one install on hard drive" clause still found in EULAs that date back to early PCs where the hard drive was an optional alternative to the "working diskette" that was copied from the original when its predecessor was physically worn out. To you it costs nothing as there is nothing to do and you wouldn't demand payment for genuine backup copies, to them it is one less thing your crazy "successor in interest" could sue them over.

Even one-sided EULAs sometimes contain such clauses to sweeten the deal such as the clauses that state that they don't claim copyright to your contributions, but only request a non-exclusive license to do certain things.

Put in a different way turn it into brazen flattery.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )