4 ms·
I like this idea in general, as a non-lawyer who tries to read things I'm signing, but I wonder if foot-noting or other in-document attribution system is a bett
by russnewcomer 11y ago
I like this idea in general, as a non-lawyer who tries to read things I'm signing, but I wonder if foot-noting or other in-document attribution system is a better answer? I can see struggles where a contract written with LawPatch is consulted in 10-15 years, and there are dead links or other similar technical problems. I don't see where LawPatch addresses that, unless I'm missing something?
- pjbrow 11y agoAgree that foot / end noting is another good way to do it - the important thing is the drafting technique rather than the way it's implemented. We're using Github permalinks to cover the linking issue for now, but we're discussing more permanent options. Would be interested to hear what other ways people think would work. There's also the option for users to download the repos and use the commit hash in the document proper for reference.
- ckluis 11y agoIt feels like the actual contract could be split into two columns for each item (intent & legalese) which would serve the same benefit without requiring looking up external terms.