Contract Teardown is a brilliant idea. Take an extremely complicated and well-written contract that a big company spent a lot of money to draft and let's look at the key aspects of it. Maybe we can use some or need to avoid some. I hope LawInsider grows fast. We are certainly enjoying LawInsider at FastUsers.com as we have a lot of legal matters to attend to.
I was the point person initiating a large contract with this company many years ago (8-figures). We fortunately had leverage at the time to fix similar contractual issues given the size of the license (and the timing since we threatened to delay the signing till the following quarter)... Uncle Larry made it happen after we pushed pretty darn hard. Your review flashed me back as we found a similar style of licensing agreement back then. In the end, we fixed a bit of it but I have to say it was tough and we ultimately took on a fair amount of risk due to the nature of the license... Loved this. Thanks, guys!
This was very worthwhile. I have shared it with some clients. I particularly like the selected-provisions, drill-down approach. My own attempts to do video reads of contracts have usually gone top-to-bottom, and they've proven too long for most anyone to enjoy.
I appreciate that, Ricardo. I have the weird advantage of not being a contract pro like the guests are so I get to ask the dumb questions. ;) Those are always the most revealing questions, I find. Thanks for engaging.
Very interesting discussion. Some of this was a bit hard to follow given the lack of context of where it was in the agreement and the use of defined terms that (hopefully) someone who read the whole agreement would understand. Would like to see additional episodes that focus on more negotiable documents as these agreements are often contracts of adhesion and as a result very poorly drafted. Could easily do an deep dive on these provisions highlighting the five main enemies of good contract drafting (i.e., ambiguity, vagueness, wordiness, legalese, and inconsistency). Still always good to hear war stories and discuss potential issues you should be considering when reviewing on behalf of a client. Keep up the good work.
Great feedback, Tim. Thank you. We’re definitely gonna keep playing with the format. I think we could reduce the number of target clauses and spend more time with each. That way we stay under 20 min but can give more context. I appreciate your thoughts.
They are vague when it works in their advantage (encompassing many avenues for them to sue under) and specific where they can be sued, to reduce liability.
First, I really enjoy these series. On this one though, for the indemnity clause, it is important to read and understand the agreement as a whole and understand it from the perspective of both parties. Eg in the agreement, what is the definition of “Provider”to understand what the indemnity options are and whether it is even appropriate to demand for more. For oracle an unauthorized combination of materials with its software may cause an infringement of third party IPR. It may be inconsiderate to demand an indemnity in such a case when they have no control of such combination...in the IPR indemnity clause though, for an actual claim I’d have expected Oracle to take over the control of the claim and settle it if it comes within the indemnification parameters. Please also do something on limitation of liability, governing law and dispute resolution provisions of the licence.
I have a question regarding the article on technical support (from 11:55). It is a standard that SW companies want you to pay for the support of the SW you have purchased. Very often that is how they make their money with costs of purchase being actually quite low and the profit is generated by support & maintenance fees (this is further accelerated by subscription based services). Why is it an issue that Oracle will not guarantee the same level of support for the SW when you are actually not paying for support anymore? If you pay only for one year of support, why should Oracle be guaranteeing any support levels after the period for which you paid? Thank you for your answer.
Sorry for the late supply. It is an issue because in an enterprise setting the expected life time of the software is often much longer than the period you can buy software for at a time. In other industries it is common for vendors to guarantee for instance availability of spare parts etc. for the expected life time of the product.
This is good feedback, Ramesh. Obviously these short videos can’t contain as much as a course, but we want to be useful. Maybe if we did 3-5 clauses and spent more time on them? What do you think? We definitely want to target staying under 20 minutes.
@@mikewhelan9346 The video was good.(I did not tell it is not good). Along with EDX course it added more value to me. The clauses you covered is sufficient to show the importance of points in the agreement.
@@raga2560 I gotcha. Sorry, I misunderstood your comment. I thought you were saying that the EDx course was superior, which I'm sure in many ways it was. But your point that combining the two helped you understand the principles is helpful. Apologies for that mixup and I appreciate your thoughts.
Hi Ramesh, could you please share the name of the course you have attended in edex. I am a beginner into contracting sounds like the course might be helpful
Refer to any Oracle contacts online/available on their sites products. They all are very screwed. Small/Mid tech providers take inspiration from these templates.
Contract Teardown is a brilliant idea. Take an extremely complicated and well-written contract that a big company spent a lot of money to draft and let's look at the key aspects of it. Maybe we can use some or need to avoid some. I hope LawInsider grows fast. We are certainly enjoying LawInsider at FastUsers.com as we have a lot of legal matters to attend to.
I was the point person initiating a large contract with this company many years ago (8-figures). We fortunately had leverage at the time to fix similar contractual issues given the size of the license (and the timing since we threatened to delay the signing till the following quarter)... Uncle Larry made it happen after we pushed pretty darn hard. Your review flashed me back as we found a similar style of licensing agreement back then. In the end, we fixed a bit of it but I have to say it was tough and we ultimately took on a fair amount of risk due to the nature of the license... Loved this. Thanks, guys!
Thanks, Bryan!
This was very worthwhile. I have shared it with some clients.
I particularly like the selected-provisions, drill-down approach. My own attempts to do video reads of contracts have usually gone top-to-bottom, and they've proven too long for most anyone to enjoy.
Thanks and so glad you enjoyed it. We have a lot more episodes. Hope you’ll check them out.
These webinars are very insightful and informative. Thank you Lawinsider.
This is awesome. Please create more. --- Contract aficiondo in US.
More coming soon! Thanks, Colin.
Great content. @Mike, you do such a good job moderating. Thanks for being so clear and concise.
I appreciate that, Ricardo. I have the weird advantage of not being a contract pro like the guests are so I get to ask the dumb questions. ;) Those are always the most revealing questions, I find. Thanks for engaging.
Please add more content. This is amazing.
Absolutely! More coming next week and beyond.
Very interesting discussion. Some of this was a bit hard to follow given the lack of context of where it was in the agreement and the use of defined terms that (hopefully) someone who read the whole agreement would understand. Would like to see additional episodes that focus on more negotiable documents as these agreements are often contracts of adhesion and as a result very poorly drafted. Could easily do an deep dive on these provisions highlighting the five main enemies of good contract drafting (i.e., ambiguity, vagueness, wordiness, legalese, and inconsistency).
Still always good to hear war stories and discuss potential issues you should be considering when reviewing on behalf of a client. Keep up the good work.
Great feedback, Tim. Thank you. We’re definitely gonna keep playing with the format. I think we could reduce the number of target clauses and spend more time with each. That way we stay under 20 min but can give more context. I appreciate your thoughts.
They are vague when it works in their advantage (encompassing many avenues for them to sue under) and specific where they can be sued, to reduce liability.
Great!! More please..
ua-cam.com/video/pFlMPQVQ-fg/v-deo.html
Its a great show for a newbie into the contract world!! Quiet insightful..waiting for more :)
Look forward to more contract teardowns
Next one is already up! ua-cam.com/video/pFlMPQVQ-fg/v-deo.html
Content game strong bois
First, I really enjoy these series. On this one though, for the indemnity clause, it is important to read and understand the agreement as a whole and understand it from the perspective of both parties. Eg in the agreement, what is the definition of “Provider”to understand what the indemnity options are and whether it is even appropriate to demand for more. For oracle an unauthorized combination of materials with its software may cause an infringement of third party IPR. It may be inconsiderate to demand an indemnity in such a case when they have no control of such combination...in the IPR indemnity clause though, for an actual claim I’d have expected Oracle to take over the control of the claim and settle it if it comes within the indemnification parameters.
Please also do something on limitation of liability, governing law and dispute resolution provisions of the licence.
Great feedback, Lavi. Limitation of liability, governing law and dispute resolution are on the list!
This is a great idea - thank you.
Thanks, Jennifer! More coming soon!
This was a very informative video. Would like to see similar inputs on the documents forming part of (I) cross-border transactions; (II) M&A
I have a question regarding the article on technical support (from 11:55). It is a standard that SW companies want you to pay for the support of the SW you have purchased. Very often that is how they make their money with costs of purchase being actually quite low and the profit is generated by support & maintenance fees (this is further accelerated by subscription based services). Why is it an issue that Oracle will not guarantee the same level of support for the SW when you are actually not paying for support anymore? If you pay only for one year of support, why should Oracle be guaranteeing any support levels after the period for which you paid? Thank you for your answer.
Sorry for the late supply. It is an issue because in an enterprise setting the expected life time of the software is often much longer than the period you can buy software for at a time. In other industries it is common for vendors to guarantee for instance availability of spare parts etc. for the expected life time of the product.
Wow someone is fellow drive tribe :)
I was aware of such contract clauses. I got more information from EDX contract course to deal with such unfair clauses.
Sorry we didn't meet your expectations, Ramesh!
This is good feedback, Ramesh. Obviously these short videos can’t contain as much as a course, but we want to be useful. Maybe if we did 3-5 clauses and spent more time on them? What do you think? We definitely want to target staying under 20 minutes.
@@mikewhelan9346 The video was good.(I did not tell it is not good). Along with EDX course it added more value to me. The clauses you covered is sufficient to show the importance of points in the agreement.
@@raga2560 I gotcha. Sorry, I misunderstood your comment. I thought you were saying that the EDx course was superior, which I'm sure in many ways it was. But your point that combining the two helped you understand the principles is helpful. Apologies for that mixup and I appreciate your thoughts.
Hi Ramesh, could you please share the name of the course you have attended in edex. I am a beginner into contracting sounds like the course might be helpful
Refer to any Oracle contacts online/available on their sites products. They all are very screwed. Small/Mid tech providers take inspiration from these templates.
Direct deposit I am