5 ms·

Some 20 years ago there was a story about a guy who was opening a bank account. The bank sent the contract, the guy ameneded it with things like "you will give

Some 20 years ago there was a story about a guy who was opening a bank account. The bank sent the contract, the guy ameneded it with things like "you will give le unlimited credit that I do not need to repay" (if my memory serves me right). He signed, sent both copies, got his bank signed copy back Went yo the bank, the bank sued him, he won (the judge told the bank that when you play dirty games you sometimes loose) and they ultimately settled.

lucianbr 7mo ago
https://www.rt.com/business/man-outsmarts-banks-wins-court-221/ https://www.rt.com/business/man-outsmarts-banks-wins-court-2... I can never find an article that mentions the final outcome.
- Mathnerd314 7mo ago
  It is on Wikipedia under T-Bank, this seems the best source that announces the resolution: https://web.archive.org/web/20220905212700/https://www.tinkoff.ru/about/news/14082013-conflict-resolved/ https://web.archive.org/web/20220905212700/https://www.tinko...
  - tmtvl 7mo ago
    From the Wikipedia article: > The legal action was later withdrawn by both the parties after an undisclosed settlement was reached.
    - Mathnerd314 6mo ago
      Well, it's a little more than that, like they agreed to issue him a debit card
gamblor956 7mo ago
...In Russia. That wouldn't work in the U.S. Changes to material terms in a contract generally informed consent (meaning, that the modifications are actually disclosed to the counterparty before they sign) or specific consent (such as a initializing the sections of the contract where the modifications occur). This is a basic part of the UCC, which all states have adopted in some form. There are a lot of people on the internet claiming that you can get away with surreptitious material changes to a contract before it is signed. None of them are lawyers.
- lucianbr 7mo ago
  It's depressing to see how the system works. Sure, now there are different kind of terms in a contract, some are material terms and some are... immaterial? And conveniently, you can change some but not others in such a way that the banks and powerful corporations always come out on top. I never heard of a corporation being forced to point out explicitly which lines in their long terms and conditions document have changed. But it's a well known obligation for regular citizens, because material terms. > that the modifications are actually disclosed to the counterparty before they sign Does Microsoft explicitly draw your attention to the fact that Copilot is for entertainment purposes? No, it buries that in a long document hoping you won't see it, and advertises it as the complete opposite, but it's ok when they do it, because those are not material terms, whatever that means. It means it's ok when the big guys do it, in the end.
  - gamblor956 7mo ago
    Material terms are things like price, term, or anything that would change the nature of the overall agreement. When corporations do it (i.e. change TOS) they need to send you notice of the new terms because it's no longer a change, it's a new contract that replaces the old one...if you agree to it by continuing to usetheir service after notice.
    - lucianbr 7mo ago
      The guy sent the bank a contract. It was the first contract between them, it wasn't a "new contract" (as opposed to the old one? no such thing), it wasn't a "change" to an existing contract. Why did he need to highlight some terms? How do you mean "change the nature of the agreement", change from what? They didn't have an agreement before this. > because it's no longer a change, it's a new contract that replaces the old one What sophistry is this? Of course it's a change. Most of the contract is the same, it's not like Paypal changes it's business to selling shoes. They do the same things, and the terms are mostly the same, only they make some changes. There's nothing supporting your claim that it's a new contract. > things like price, term, or anything that would change the nature of the overall agreement That's everything in the contract. Which parts of the contract don't affect the nature of the contract? Why are they there? What the hell is "the overall nature"? If a fee for something changes from $1 to $2, as I understand the english language, "the overall nature" of the contract doesn't change. Just a fee. It's a detail. But this is exactly what you list as "material terms". It's all BS.

lucianbr 7mo ago

https://www.rt.com/business/man-outsmarts-banks-wins-court-221/ https://www.rt.com/business/man-outsmarts-banks-wins-court-2... I can never find an article that mentions the final outcome.

Mathnerd314 7mo ago
It is on Wikipedia under T-Bank, this seems the best source that announces the resolution: https://web.archive.org/web/20220905212700/https://www.tinkoff.ru/about/news/14082013-conflict-resolved/ https://web.archive.org/web/20220905212700/https://www.tinko...
- tmtvl 7mo ago
  From the Wikipedia article: > The legal action was later withdrawn by both the parties after an undisclosed settlement was reached.
  - Mathnerd314 6mo ago
    Well, it's a little more than that, like they agreed to issue him a debit card

gamblor956 7mo ago

...In Russia. That wouldn't work in the U.S. Changes to material terms in a contract generally informed consent (meaning, that the modifications are actually disclosed to the counterparty before they sign) or specific consent (such as a initializing the sections of the contract where the modifications occur). This is a basic part of the UCC, which all states have adopted in some form. There are a lot of people on the internet claiming that you can get away with surreptitious material changes to a contract before it is signed. None of them are lawyers.

lucianbr 7mo ago
It's depressing to see how the system works. Sure, now there are different kind of terms in a contract, some are material terms and some are... immaterial? And conveniently, you can change some but not others in such a way that the banks and powerful corporations always come out on top. I never heard of a corporation being forced to point out explicitly which lines in their long terms and conditions document have changed. But it's a well known obligation for regular citizens, because material terms. > that the modifications are actually disclosed to the counterparty before they sign Does Microsoft explicitly draw your attention to the fact that Copilot is for entertainment purposes? No, it buries that in a long document hoping you won't see it, and advertises it as the complete opposite, but it's ok when they do it, because those are not material terms, whatever that means. It means it's ok when the big guys do it, in the end.
- gamblor956 7mo ago
  Material terms are things like price, term, or anything that would change the nature of the overall agreement. When corporations do it (i.e. change TOS) they need to send you notice of the new terms because it's no longer a change, it's a new contract that replaces the old one...if you agree to it by continuing to usetheir service after notice.
  - lucianbr 7mo ago
    The guy sent the bank a contract. It was the first contract between them, it wasn't a "new contract" (as opposed to the old one? no such thing), it wasn't a "change" to an existing contract. Why did he need to highlight some terms? How do you mean "change the nature of the agreement", change from what? They didn't have an agreement before this. > because it's no longer a change, it's a new contract that replaces the old one What sophistry is this? Of course it's a change. Most of the contract is the same, it's not like Paypal changes it's business to selling shoes. They do the same things, and the terms are mostly the same, only they make some changes. There's nothing supporting your claim that it's a new contract. > things like price, term, or anything that would change the nature of the overall agreement That's everything in the contract. Which parts of the contract don't affect the nature of the contract? Why are they there? What the hell is "the overall nature"? If a fee for something changes from $1 to $2, as I understand the english language, "the overall nature" of the contract doesn't change. Just a fee. It's a detail. But this is exactly what you list as "material terms". It's all BS.