|
|
|
|
|
|
by Scott_MacGregor
5814 days ago
|
|
|
As far as "point 1" is concerned, in our industry it really does seem "outrageous and unconscionable", but as far as case law is concerned I wonder if in the grand scope of new businesses in general it would be viewed as such. The court may be predisposed to believe that people and businesses have freedom to contract, and it seems reasonable to believe that the argument could be made that this clause should be left to stand as written. New York may have been chosen as venue in order to "fit" with known case law on this and other points. Such as the allegation in paragraph 3 that Facebook is a "domestic corporation" in New York (a very basic detail to get wrong about this) seems like it might be an "error-on-purpose" to lay the foundation for using a particular case, either now or later. Sloppy errors do happen, so does venue shopping, and with a case that has this big of a potential payoff, feigned errors on the part of counsel might allow introduction of some "hoped for" piece of a supporting case. It is New York after all. |
|
|