3 ms·

Putting aside any ethics questions. Sounds like the guys on their way to court did actually sign the contracts. Not sure there is much get out clause for them

Putting aside any ethics questions. Sounds like the guys on their way to court did actually sign the contracts. Not sure there is much get out clause for them tbh, Im not aware of any court anywhere that will take "didnt read the contract" as a get out of jail free card. Always read the contract kids.

sideshowb 3y ago
In the UK I suspect it would qualify as unfair terms (ianal)
frankus 3y ago
We need “anything sketchy about this 20-page contract” as a service (for something less than the cost of retaining a lawyer).
- Enginerrrd 3y ago
  Honestly, it probably needs to be roped into something like the certificate authority system. Like, if you have a deceptive licensing agreement, the certificate is revoked. And similarly, being asked to sign something that isn't tied to a certificate would be a huge red flag.
- ashley93 3y ago
  This seems a perfect use for LLMs.
- mindslight 3y ago
  Rather than increasing the complexity even further, we need laws that anything longer than two standard pages of 12 point text is prima facie invalid. Exceptions for when attorneys are involved, or negotiated contracts that go back and forth a few times with substantive changes. Subjecting individuals to unbounded contract terms, often by contracts of adhesion, is an anti-feature.
ghaff 3y ago
And the kids should floss their teeth daily too. I mean, at one level, yes? But if someone seemingly legit asks me to appear on a webinar--I'd be asking more questions about traveling to an event--I'm pretty much going to say yes. And if they send over some apparently routine paperwork including publicity rights and so forth, it's realistically only getting a quick skim.
tylerhou 3y ago
You can’t just put anything in a contract and expect a court to unconditionally enforce it. If an included clause is unreasonable and clearly in bad faith (like a buried fee, written in words instead of numbers), a court can choose to annul it. The legal system is run by humans, not robots. (This is also why smart contracts may not be so smart after all — computers can’t use common sense to mitigate unfair smart contracts.)

sideshowb 3y ago

In the UK I suspect it would qualify as unfair terms (ianal)

frankus 3y ago

We need “anything sketchy about this 20-page contract” as a service (for something less than the cost of retaining a lawyer).

Enginerrrd 3y ago
Honestly, it probably needs to be roped into something like the certificate authority system. Like, if you have a deceptive licensing agreement, the certificate is revoked. And similarly, being asked to sign something that isn't tied to a certificate would be a huge red flag.
ashley93 3y ago
This seems a perfect use for LLMs.
mindslight 3y ago
Rather than increasing the complexity even further, we need laws that anything longer than two standard pages of 12 point text is prima facie invalid. Exceptions for when attorneys are involved, or negotiated contracts that go back and forth a few times with substantive changes. Subjecting individuals to unbounded contract terms, often by contracts of adhesion, is an anti-feature.

ghaff 3y ago

And the kids should floss their teeth daily too. I mean, at one level, yes? But if someone seemingly legit asks me to appear on a webinar--I'd be asking more questions about traveling to an event--I'm pretty much going to say yes. And if they send over some apparently routine paperwork including publicity rights and so forth, it's realistically only getting a quick skim.

tylerhou 3y ago

You can’t just put anything in a contract and expect a court to unconditionally enforce it. If an included clause is unreasonable and clearly in bad faith (like a buried fee, written in words instead of numbers), a court can choose to annul it. The legal system is run by humans, not robots. (This is also why smart contracts may not be so smart after all — computers can’t use common sense to mitigate unfair smart contracts.)