3 ms·
Ask HN: FAQ about technology-related contracts to address on a legal blog?
I’m on the lookout for future topic ideas for my legal blog, http://www.OnTechnologyContracts.com . I like it when I can try to address someone’s specific question – it’s always nice to know I’m writing about something at least one person might actually be interested in.
The general subject of the blog is, naturally, technology contracts and related issues.
I can't guarantee that I can address your specific question, but I do commit to giving it a serious look.
Usual disclaimers: 1. Don’t include confidential information in your question. 2. Your posing a question and/or my addressing it won’t establish an attorney-client relationship between us. 3. Anything I say here or on the blog should not be relied on as a substitute for legal advice. 4. When in doubt, ASK YOUR LAWYER.
Suggestions?
- ScottWhigham 17y agoVery cool - good luck with the site. I had a recent situation in which internally we bickered quite a bit about a contract that a client proposed. The situation revolved around a proposed indemnity clause. My colleagues felt that this was a major opportunity that could really grow our business yet I was unhappy with the wording. The wording of the clause was: "Vendor shall indemnify and hold Distributor harmless from and against any and all claims, damages, liabilities, suits, proceedings, losses, costs and expenses (including reasonable outside attorneys’ fees) brought by a third party, arising out of or related to any of the Materials, information, data, materials or instructions provided by Vendor to Distributor pursuant to this Agreement. This Section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement." My objections were confirmed with our attorney: this clause is one way, it protects them only, it never expires, it does not allow us to choose counsel, and it does not require them to notify us if a suit had been brought. Our attorney brought up the point that we could receive a $5,000,000 bill in the mail 20 years from now and, because of these terms, we would have to pay it. I sent back our rewrites and haven't heard back from them in over a month. I'm not willing to sign their suggested contract and my colleagues are a bit upset. Can you talk about the David v Goliath situations in which large companies try to impose very expansive terms like this on small vendors?
- dctoedt 17y agoThanks - I'll give it a shot.
- dctoedt 17y agoYou might want to ask your lawyer to take a look at some of the indemnity provisions at my site (see http://www.ontechnologycontracts.com/clauses-for-contracts/indemnity-clauses-for-contracts-general/ http://www.ontechnologycontracts.com/clauses-for-contracts/i...), which could give you something to work with. FWIW, in my experience it's not uncommon for a vendor to agree to an indemnity like this in a distributor agreement. You would probably want to (1) delete the "related to" phrase, and (2) carve out of the indemnity anything arising from the negligence, misconduct, etc., of the distributor or its personnel. (This isn't legal advice, ask your lawyer, etc.)
- dctoedt 17y agoScott, I posted a longer response at http://www.ontechnologycontracts.com/2009/07/five-potential-responses-to-a-bigger-companys-onerous-contract-demands/ http://www.ontechnologycontracts.com/2009/07/five-potential-...