4 ms·
I didn't see the NDA, but it has this forbidding message (which I think the author of the article ignored): "(II) PURCHASER IS PURCHASING THE PRODUCTS FOR COMM
by bottle2 6y ago
I didn't see the NDA, but it has this forbidding message (which I think the author of the article ignored):
"(II) PURCHASER IS PURCHASING THE PRODUCTS FOR COMMERCIAL USE AND/OR IN A BUSINESS CAPACITY. ORDERS PLACED BY CONSUMERS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED."
- runxel 6y agoI'm pretty sure this is not lawful so you can't be sued if you lied in the first place.
- teraflop 6y agoWhy would it not be lawful?
- runxel 6y agoAsk the other way around: Why would this be lawful? If you sell something you give up any rights on the item sold. You can not any longer demand what the object should be used for, nor by whom it should be used.
- Biganon 6y agoYou can still consider it a breach of the contract.
- nkrisc 6y agoSure, but would that even hold up in court? You can put anything in a contract, that doesn't make it enforceable.
- runxel 6y agoAs nkrisc already pointed out, just because you put something in a contract it doesn't mean it's enforceable, or lawful. See, if it's not lawful in the first place, you can't "breach" it. IANAL, but I had enough law during my studies to know where this will lead. Maybe you can do these kind of shenanigans in the US of A, but I'm confident this kind of contract clauses are not possible in Europe.
- jrockway 6y agoI am sure the author put "Google X" in the "company" line of the order form and they didn't ask any further questions. (Or if they did, "it's confidential", and they probably sent him a couple extras for free.)
- sparker72678 6y agoIt's possible they have agreements with whomever they're supplying that they won't compete by selling direct to consumers.