On Sun, 02 Mar 2003, Russell Nelson wrote: > If a contract is ambiguous, Precisely our point. Contracts that require the courtsystem to interpret their meaning because they in themselves are not clear are not contracts which any sane person would sign. [I would have severe misgivings about any lawyer who advised his client to sign such a contract either.] > So, you put on your judge's hat and tell me: what do you think Real > meant to require of people in that case? Requiring a court of law to interpret the meaning of a contract, especially when there seems to be no previous caselaw dealing with the contract or license, is not something that I am comfortable with. Nor am I enough of an expert (or even a novice) at the vagaries contract law to adequately answer this question, or to play as an adjudicator, and I strongly suspect neither are you. Don Armstrong -- Guns Don't Kill People. *I* Kill People. http://www.donarmstrong.com http://www.anylevel.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Attachment:
pgpJSINBCXWSs.pgp
Description: PGP signature