Re^2: MJDs Contract Warnings - courtesy of Perlweekly

in reply to Re: MJDs Contract Warnings - courtesy of Perlweekly
in thread MJDs Contract Warnings - courtesy of Perlweekly

Hi sundialsvc4,

I understand your point, but I still disagree to a large extent with your conclusion.

MJD's point was to say: "Use your mind, be reasonable, don't accept to sign anything." And I agree with him. Should I have a lawyer on retainer? I doubt.

To clarify, possibly unlike you, I do not really own a business. I do not have any employees. I am just a freelance IT consultant, working essentially full-time for a tier-one telecommunication operator (although, technically, this telco is my end client, I am billing my services to an intermediate IT service provider).

I have an accountant on retainer. Although I passed an MBA and have some decent knowledge on accounting, I prefer my accounts and professional tax returns to be prepared by a professional accountant. She can do it much more efficiently that I could, so I should better spend my time working for my client.

But do I need a lawyer on retainer? Probably not. Before I completed my CS master's degrees (one in computer science and one in software engineering), I was a translator for a famous law firm (for 10 years). I think that I understand legalese jargon well enough to be able to understand the consequences of an agreement.

Alright, my profile might be untypical, but I think that reading a contract with good sense should probably enough in many cases. And I think that this was essentially MJD's point.

Je suis Charlie.

Comment on Re^2: MJDs Contract Warnings - courtesy of Perlweekly

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: MJDs Contract Warnings - courtesy of Perlweekly by Anonymous Monk on Apr 02, 2015 at 01:21 UTC
ask for simple english contract ... read it, if you don't understand something ask what it means ... ask why they didn't write that complicated part in simple english ... ask for annotated contract if they're more than 5 employees they'll be able to explain stuff because they do it all the time ... unless you're an intern they'll also ought to be willing to write these explanations down / annotate the contract nobody likes surprise contracts http://developers.slashdot.org/story/02/03/21/0139244/Beware-Employment-Contracts	[reply]
Re^4: MJDs Contract Warnings - courtesy of Perlweekly by Anonymous Monk on Apr 06, 2015 at 02:12 UTC
They have no responsibility in good faith negotiations to expose or expound on elements (or your potential "pain points") that are written in a contract. If the contract states that you need to produce code or they will cut off your hand in the middle of a large fairly tepid paragraph. And you ask them what that means, they don't have any need to point out the fact that your hand will be cut off if you do not produce the code. "Our lawyer wrote this, we can't give you legal advice" "I don't know but we would never use it" "That just goes over some terms" or any matter of responses are perfectly acceptable to a question like that. Basically if you are expecting ANY material benefit from asking the other party for advice/their take when considering a contract you are a little more than drooling on your shoes.	[reply]
Re^5: MJDs Contract Warnings - courtesy of Perlweekly by Anonymous Monk on Apr 06, 2015 at 07:08 UTC
They have no responsibility ...Basically if you are expecting ANY material benefit from asking the other party for advice/their take when considering a contract you are a little more than drooling on your shoes. Sure they do, if you're tricked its called fraud. Even if you're not tricked, it doesn't make everything you sign binding (see non-competes). At the very least you get a feel for what type of business you're dealing with. Then you thank them for their time, and go and consult your lawyer if you really feel you want to work for dicks.	[reply]
Re^3: MJDs Contract Warnings - courtesy of Perlweekly by sundialsvc4 (Abbot) on Apr 02, 2015 at 01:32 UTC
To clarify, possibly unlike you, I do not really own a business. I do not have any employees. I am just a freelance IT consultant, working essentially full-time for a tier-one telecommunication operator (although, technically, this telco is my end client, I am billing my services to an intermediate IT service provider). Heh... “Tom would whip you into shape, fairly quickly,” just as he once did me. “You,” in fact, “do ‘own a business.” Even if that business has exactly one employee ... you ... in the eyes of the law [in any civilized country ...], it does have one employee: you. The “end client” of that [currently, “one-man band”] business is: “the intermediate IT service-provider.” (N-O-T “the telco!”) As Tom himself would be very quick to tell you, there are many forms of business in this world which consist of providing one of two things to “the rest of the world”: either services, based on expertise, or counsel, also based on expertise. On top of these two is a third set, which consists of providing an unpredictable amalgam of both. Well, as it turns out, a great many lawyers realize that they, themselves, properly occupy this “third set.” Therefore, they make it their business to seek-out and to educate other entrepreneurs, that they, in fact, properly occupy this “third set,” too. “Guess what ... Tom’s right.”
Re^4: MJDs Contract Warnings - courtesy of Perlweekly by Anonymous Monk on Apr 06, 2015 at 02:21 UTC
Abrupt and liberal use of Tom out of any context. Is Tom your name that is being used in third person? Creepy.	[reply]

In Section Meditations