4 ms·
> They just got what they paid for? Funny, but isn't this totally reasonable grounds for an adverse possession claim against RHEL? If a business claims they'r
by centimeter 6y ago
> They just got what they paid for?
Funny, but isn't this totally reasonable grounds for an adverse possession claim against RHEL?
If a business claims they're going to keep doing something, and you build your business on that claim, and then they change their mind, you can have grounds to sue. Or, at least, that's what I vaguely remember from reading about AP law.
- beervirus 6y agoThat is not at all what adverse possession is.
- dragonwriter 6y agoThat's not adverse possession. I think you are referring to promissory estoppel: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/promissory_estoppel# https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/promissory_estoppel#
- acomjean 6y agoI think the problem is that it’s not like red hat has a contractual obligation with other businesses since Centos is essentially “free” and likely there isnt an agreement.