• @Pheonixdown@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    73 months ago

    Contracts are no where near that standardized, it might just come down to the specific language/clause that was used, either done deliberately or just some lawyer group’s normalized process.

    • @Buffalox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -113 months ago

      Still the contract should be void, when the legal entity ceases to exist.
      When a company is bought, it’s not the same legal entity or “person”.

      Seems to me this is merely arbitrary bullshit, where American courts tend to favor American companies.

      • @SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        183 months ago

        Sounds like a great and easy way to get out of contracts by selling yourself to yourself for $1.

        Why would a contract be null and void due to a sale…? That makes no sense at all.

        • The Pantser
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -63 months ago

          Same reason when companies play the same game with consumers.

          “Non transferable warranties and EULAs”

          • @grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            63 months ago

            You’re not actually trying to paint that as somehow a good thing though, are you?

          • @SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            13 months ago

            As specified in the term, that’s negotiated up front it doesn’t transfer. Not every contract stipulates that, and some do transfer… so there is precedence already.