Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
joined:June 3, 2007
26 International supply contracts
(2) The terms of such a contract are not subject to any requirement of reasonableness under section 3 or 4: and nothing in Part II of this Act shall require the incorporation of the terms of such a contract to be fair and reasonable for them to have effect.
Or is the mere *possibility* of being paid someday sufficient consideration?
3 Liability arising in contract
(1)This section applies as between contracting parties where one of them deals as consumer or on the other’s written standard terms of business.
(2)As against that party, the other cannot by reference to any contract term—
(a)when himself in breach of contract, exclude or restrict any liability of his in respect of the breach; or
(b)claim to be entitled—
(i)to render a contractual performance substantially different from that which was reasonably expected of him, or
(ii)in respect of the whole or any part of his contractual obligation, to render no performance at all,
except in so far as (in any of the cases mentioned above in this subsection) the contract term satisfies the requirement of reasonableness.
[edited by: cien at 11:52 am (utc) on Mar 17, 2010]
joined:Dec 29, 2003
If you don't think that Google has already paid out beaucoup beaucoup bucks for lawyers to figure this stuff out for every country in which they operate, and craft the entire program to Google's advantage, you're just not thinking.
I suspect this investigation by Italy will lead to nothing. And I don't expect Google to change its policies. But on the off chance that it *does* go Italy's way, Google will just fire the Italian publishers. And the Italian advertisers will have a fit, and probably get the ruling overtuned.
You surely are not thinking about Microsoft, which was hit multiple times by antitrust authorities in different countries over the years.
And don't tell me MS doesn't spend on lawyers.
Adsense agreement is a joke and a disgrace.
I'm not sure Google is as much an advertising monopoly as it is an *easy* advertising monopoly.
Sure I am. Google learns. Don't forget - the pioneers were usually the ones with the arrows in their backs.
So do it already and be done with it.
or on the other’s written standard terms of business.
In other words, Google cannot revise it's payment rates downward unilaterally since this could be regarded as a substantially different performance
(c) whether the customer knew or ought reasonably to have known of the existence and extent of the term (having regard, among other things, to any custom of the trade and any previous course of dealing between the parties);
(b) whether the customer received an inducement to agree to the term, or in accepting it had an opportunity of entering into a similar contract with other persons, but without having to accept a similar term;
Intel, Microsoft, Monsanto, Apple, Amazon, Mastercard, Peugeot, France Telecom
Finally, there are a lot of Adsense publishers in the UK, a lot of whom have problems with Google. Has a single one brought a successful action claiming it is an unfair contract? Any of them could have, if you were right
joined:June 3, 2007
FarmBoy (corrupt and immature)