4 ms·

I'm curious, at what point in time did you (everyone on HN) learn about contracts? Did your father or teacher sit you down one day and say "here's this piece of

I'm curious, at what point in time did you (everyone on HN) learn about contracts? Did your father or teacher sit you down one day and say "here's this piece of paper that is legally binding and here's how to understand it and here's everything you need to know about contract law and your legal obligations, etc.?" It seems like something that is never taught yet is an ever present part of our lives. It also seems like one would have a hard time accomplishing anything today because there are contracts for everything, many with clauses one would otherwise not want to accept.

snowwrestler 12y ago
There are three levels to understanding contracts. 1) The language itself. Contracts are written in English (at least in the U.S.), so anyone with a strong understanding of English can read one top to bottom and comprehend what it is saying. Experience in analyzing writing (like from a few college English courses) can help a lot, both in learning to quickly parse sentences, and in learning to infer motivations from the language on the page. You always want to be able to answer "why did they write it this way? What are they trying to get?" 2) What is typical and standard in contracts. You can only get this from experience--from reading a lot of contracts--because it's often industry-specific. For example, many software contracts, even 6 figure enterprise deals, include an ALL CAPS DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY. THIS SOFTWARE IS OFFERED AS-IS AND WITHOUT WARRANTY. WE DON'T GUARANTEE THIS WILL WORK FOR YOUR PURPOSES, OR INDEED, WORK AT ALL. I'm exaggerating, but not by much. This is a totally standard clause in the software industry, so whether or not you like it, you generally just have to swallow it if you want to do the deal Likewise, most EULAs are very similar to one another. Once you've carefully read a few of them, you can quickly skim for the important bits (copyright, liability, data sharing) on new ones. 3) What the law says. Contracts can't break the law. For example a contract that contains lies would be fraudulent. A contract that says you need to speed or drive drunk is not enforceable. A contract that says you can commit murder would not protect you from prosecution. This is probably the hardest area to build knowledge, without going to law school. For me, it has helped to read news stories and good forums like HN. For example, I know that non-compete clauses in employment contracts are unenforceable in California, because so many people have said so. There are some lawyers who post here--grellas for example--and AMAs from lawyers on Reddit are helpful too.
- hackuser 12y ago
  Also essential: 4) What is enforceable? What contractual violations will either party invest in enforcing? Enforcement may require too much time or money (e.g., it's not worth suing over $1,000), or it may disrupt valuable relationships (e.g., if the contract is with a customer who accounts for 50% of sales, you are unlikely to sue them).
- Lawtonfogle 12y ago
  Your first point may be better if broken into two. While a contract is written in English, you need a legal specific understanding, not merely a strong understanding of English. For example, consider affirming something. If I affirm a statement, it is generally understood to be me agreeing with/supporting the statement. But if I affirm an appeal, I am supporting the original ruling that was appealed, which is in a very basic sense the opposite of what affirming an appeal would be seen as to most people using the English definition.

snowwrestler 12y ago

There are three levels to understanding contracts. 1) The language itself. Contracts are written in English (at least in the U.S.), so anyone with a strong understanding of English can read one top to bottom and comprehend what it is saying. Experience in analyzing writing (like from a few college English courses) can help a lot, both in learning to quickly parse sentences, and in learning to infer motivations from the language on the page. You always want to be able to answer "why did they write it this way? What are they trying to get?" 2) What is typical and standard in contracts. You can only get this from experience--from reading a lot of contracts--because it's often industry-specific. For example, many software contracts, even 6 figure enterprise deals, include an ALL CAPS DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY. THIS SOFTWARE IS OFFERED AS-IS AND WITHOUT WARRANTY. WE DON'T GUARANTEE THIS WILL WORK FOR YOUR PURPOSES, OR INDEED, WORK AT ALL. I'm exaggerating, but not by much. This is a totally standard clause in the software industry, so whether or not you like it, you generally just have to swallow it if you want to do the deal Likewise, most EULAs are very similar to one another. Once you've carefully read a few of them, you can quickly skim for the important bits (copyright, liability, data sharing) on new ones. 3) What the law says. Contracts can't break the law. For example a contract that contains lies would be fraudulent. A contract that says you need to speed or drive drunk is not enforceable. A contract that says you can commit murder would not protect you from prosecution. This is probably the hardest area to build knowledge, without going to law school. For me, it has helped to read news stories and good forums like HN. For example, I know that non-compete clauses in employment contracts are unenforceable in California, because so many people have said so. There are some lawyers who post here--grellas for example--and AMAs from lawyers on Reddit are helpful too.

hackuser 12y ago
Also essential: 4) What is enforceable? What contractual violations will either party invest in enforcing? Enforcement may require too much time or money (e.g., it's not worth suing over $1,000), or it may disrupt valuable relationships (e.g., if the contract is with a customer who accounts for 50% of sales, you are unlikely to sue them).
Lawtonfogle 12y ago
Your first point may be better if broken into two. While a contract is written in English, you need a legal specific understanding, not merely a strong understanding of English. For example, consider affirming something. If I affirm a statement, it is generally understood to be me agreeing with/supporting the statement. But if I affirm an appeal, I am supporting the original ruling that was appealed, which is in a very basic sense the opposite of what affirming an appeal would be seen as to most people using the English definition.