82,882
edits
Let’s go straight to docs: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
“Going straight to docs” is a legal eagle’s high wire act, only the [[client]] is the one who must do without a safety net. To be sure, the first cut of a [[Indenture|trust indenture]] ''may'' capture all the key commercial elements, but probably won’t, and even if it does they will be dispersed, randomly and cryptically, throughout its 290-page heft. | “Going straight to docs” is a legal eagle’s high wire act, only the [[client]] is the one who must do without a safety net. To be sure, the first cut of a [[Indenture|trust indenture]] ''may'' capture all the key commercial elements, but probably won’t, and even if it does they will be dispersed, randomly and cryptically, throughout its 290-page heft. | ||
A 290-page heft which, to find them, one must thereby read, [[In toto|''in toto'']]. The modern ''[[rechtsadler]]'' knows but one way to review a legal contract: she must start at the beginning and work her careful way to the end. Should she meet a cavalier [[indemnity]], [[Limitation of recourse|limitation]], exclusivity or [[warranty]] on the way — however ill-judged, insignificant or uncalled-for — she will be drawn to it as a moth is to a lamp. She will have to ''address'' it. To ''hell'' with the main commercial terms: this existential risk must be addressed, and ''now''. | A 290-page heft which, to find them, one must thereby read, [[In toto|''in toto'']]. The modern ''[[rechtsadler]]'' knows but one way to review a legal contract: she must start at the beginning and work her careful way to the end. Should she meet a cavalier [[indemnity]], [[Limitation of recourse|limitation]], exclusivity or [[warranty]] on the way — however ill-judged, insignificant or uncalled-for — or even a ''typo'', she will be drawn to it as a moth is to a lamp. She will have to ''address'' it. To ''hell'' with the main commercial terms: this existential risk must be addressed, and ''now''. | ||
Whereupon, strap yourselves in for six months of torture as the performance art grinds on: every | Whereupon, strap yourselves in for six months of torture as the performance art grinds on: every definition, cross-reference, [[representation]] and scheduled form of drawdown request notice will waylay progress, so much so that the lawyers may never make it to the gritty commercial terms. They may never even ''find'' them. Most likely, they will never even know what they ''are''. | ||
A good [[termsheet]] is a discipline: a [[cocktail napkin]]; the contextualised essence of whatever the turgid entropic mass of final [[verbiage]] will, in its perverse and circuitous manner, eventually reflect. | A good [[termsheet]] is a discipline: a [[cocktail napkin]]; the contextualised essence of whatever the turgid entropic mass of final [[verbiage]] will, in its perverse and circuitous manner, eventually reflect. | ||
''Never'' go “straight to docs”. | |||
{{sa}} | {{sa}} | ||
*[[Talk, don’t email]] | *[[Talk, don’t email]] | ||
*[[Cocktail napkin]] | |||
*[[Private practice lawyer]] | *[[Private practice lawyer]] | ||
*The [[weeds]] | *The [[weeds]] | ||