It's odd the author and the James written about both misuse "weary" for "wary", and the place James supposedly misuses it is in quotes. That makes me question the author's understanding of quotes.
It's more interesting the dispute was about alleged failure to disclose when the relevant paragraph of legalese seems to assess the termination fee for any reason at all:
"5.4 Should for any reason either party withdraw from the negotiations due to information that would hinder an investment being discovered by the Investors or should the Investors withdraw for any reason after the date of this letter, the Investors shall be entitled to recover..."
"We decided we don't like the deal" is a reason. That phrase "for any reason" is the proverbial hole you can drive a truck through.
My heart does go out to this guy, but this is yet another case of "know what you're signing, or hire a lawyer who will."
The perpetrator in this case happened to be an actual fraudster-in-sheep's-clothing, but even among friendly business partners, contracts are drafted for the maximum benefit of the author. If you have any doubt whatsoever about whether a clause puts you in jeopardy, strike or rewrite it until you're 100% sure you're not getting fucked.
Looks like he trying to clean up incase his parole officer finds out (given the sentence reduction), anyone know what court originally convicted him in 2007?
Post-YC, startup founders are pretty young. Would you care if a founder had gotten into legal trouble for a business started before their 18th birthday? I don't know -- given that YC looks for 'naughtiness' that might even be a positive.
Just to be clear: I am not talking about myself, or anyone that I personally know. I know of a case kind of like this, though.
Depending on your jurisdiction, it is generally held to be impossible for persons under the age of majority (usually 18) to enter into contracts for non-essential items (food, clothes, rent etc).
That's why most contracts are actually made with a parent on behalf of the child.
[+] [-] Terretta|14 years ago|reply
It's more interesting the dispute was about alleged failure to disclose when the relevant paragraph of legalese seems to assess the termination fee for any reason at all:
"5.4 Should for any reason either party withdraw from the negotiations due to information that would hinder an investment being discovered by the Investors or should the Investors withdraw for any reason after the date of this letter, the Investors shall be entitled to recover..."
"We decided we don't like the deal" is a reason. That phrase "for any reason" is the proverbial hole you can drive a truck through.
[+] [-] feralchimp|14 years ago|reply
The perpetrator in this case happened to be an actual fraudster-in-sheep's-clothing, but even among friendly business partners, contracts are drafted for the maximum benefit of the author. If you have any doubt whatsoever about whether a clause puts you in jeopardy, strike or rewrite it until you're 100% sure you're not getting fucked.
[+] [-] videoappeal|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] neilk|14 years ago|reply
Just to be clear: I am not talking about myself, or anyone that I personally know. I know of a case kind of like this, though.
[+] [-] jacques_chester|14 years ago|reply
That's why most contracts are actually made with a parent on behalf of the child.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_majority http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacity_(law)
(IANAL, TINLA).