[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Terms subject to change
- To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: RE: Terms subject to change
- From: "Tony McSean" <tmcsean@hollar.co.uk>
- Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 20:32:57 EST
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
If we're talking tactics, i always found that looking obdurate and saying "it's a dealbreaker because Finance (or Legal) says I can't sign this as it stands" worked fairly well. It works best, of course, if you really are prepared to walk away because any half-decent supplier will read that from your voice. Tony McSean +44 20 7502 1067 (office) +44 7946 291780 (mobile) -----Original Message----- From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu [mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Carden Sent: 21 December 2010 04:38 To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu Subject: RE: Terms subject to change This sounds like standard terms that they would be intransigent about varying. Two negotiating tactics I would suggest: One approach is rather than to try to modify the terms of the clause, just say you want to change the wording so that the agreement is mutual: "EITHER PARTY reserves the right to modify these Terms and Conditions....". It is MUCH harder for them to argue without embarrassment why the contract should give them a right but not make it mutual. You won't win, but it is fun to see them wriggle. The other approach is rather than 'negotiating' with them, simply delete the terms you don't like and then sign the contract. They may find it easier to just file it away and hope for the best while taking your money. Then you can ignore any variations you can tolerate and claim breach of contract for any you can't. Mark Carden EVP Sales & marketing Publishing Technology -----Original Message----- From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu [mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of Hiatt, Derrik Sent: 17 December 2010 23:27 To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu Subject: Terms subject to change Seeking the collective wisdom ... We are working on a license agreement with a large vendor (you would all recognize the name). Their default license includes the following language: "[Licensor] reserves the right to modify these Terms and Conditions, or any aspect of [licensed materials], at any time. The most updated Terms and Conditions of Use will be posted on the [licensor's] website. [Licensor] shall notify Institutional Licensees via email of material modifications. A modification shall become effective for an Institutional Licensee if it does not object in writing to [licensor] within 60 (sixty) days from the time [licensor] emails notice of the modification. In the event of such an objection, the Institutional Licensee shall have the right to terminate the Agreement on 30 (thirty) days written notice." I asked the licensor to change the one-sided right to modification with a statement that the signed Agreement should prevail, and that "Any amendments to the Agreement must be in writing and signed by both [licensor] and the Institutional Licensee." They refused to change the default language. Are any of you accepting language like this, where a licensor has the right to change the terms unilaterally, and the licensee's only recourse is to accept or cancel? Seems to me that a contract that can be modified at will by one party isn't much of a contract. Any advice how to approach would be appreciated. Thank you, C. Derrik Hiatt Electronic Resources Librarian Z. Smith Reynolds Library Wake Forest University Winston-Salem, NC 27109
- Prev by Date: Re: Terms subject to change
- Next by Date: Re: Prosser on Davis
- Previous by thread: Re: Terms subject to change
- Next by thread: Wiley-Blackwell: Breakfast at ALA to talk about Online Books
- Index(es):