| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Microsoft to subborn subversion of the Apache Software Foundation (ars technica)Microsoft to subborn subversion of the Apache Software Foundation (ars technica)Posted Jul 31, 2008 2:40 UTC (Thu) by lysse (guest, #3190)In reply to: Microsoft to subborn subversion of the Apache Software Foundation (ars technica) by AJWM Parent article: Microsoft to sponsor the Apache Software Foundation (ars technica)
As I understand it, it's a little more subtle than that (at least under UK law, which I have studied formally but am not qualified in). If you have the right to enforce a particular contract, or part thereof, and you promise not to pursue that right for a particular length of time, and people rely on that promise, you are estopped from then going back later and saying "actually no, I did want to enforce that clause after all". You can change it in the future - you can say "I will be enforcing this clause from now on"; you aren't bound by your promise then to forever forswear from enforcement - but you cannot pursue action retroactively when you said you wouldn't, even though you legally had the right to do so at the time. But basically, yes - the law frowns on setting contractual bear traps for people, and the doctrine of promisory estoppel is what will prevent your bear trap from catching anyone.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|
||||||||||||