[UA] Occult Hoaxes (old thread with multiple titles--you all know what I'm talking about)

[Royal Minister of Stuff]

My point?

a unilateral contract doesn't stand up too well in
court.  yeah, it established intent, but it doesn't
specify any time in which services or goods will be
fufilled, it isn't clear and it isn't wise to act on
one (or its pretty shark-like)

if someone calls and sells you something over the
phone (and I realize this is a different point, but I
was trying to swerve the subject a little from legal
argument), they have to call back and confirm the sale
in order to establish intent (unilateral contract may
well be a definition, but the precedents surrounding
such deals are something else entirely), you can't use
a recorded conversation as a legal document unless
both parties agree to it that's what it will be
specifically used for and, even then, it's pretty easy
to contend.  

Of course, this may not be useful in all situations,
but you can get a pretty good idea how to fight
ill-advised contracts at

http://www.corpwatch.org

--- Timothy Ferguson <ferguson at beyond.net.au> wrote:
> You -can- make contracts verbally, so what's your
> point?  The signed
> contract is just a record of the verbal contract to
> provide evidence of its
> existence, or a substitute when the individuals
> can't be together

=====
-- Rp Bowman, Royal Minister of Stuff
The Electronic Nation of Yokeltania:
http://www.geocities.com/yokeltania/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

_______________________________________________
UA mailing list
UA at lists.uchicago.edu
http://lists.uchicago.edu/mailman/listinfo/ua