How can you order a farmer to destroy their trees? I hope he fights in a higher court. Wish I’d heard about the nectarine giveaway. I’d have gone to pick some.
How can you order a farmer to destroy their trees? I hope he fights in a higher court. Wish I’d heard about the nectarine giveaway. I’d have gone to pick some.
No, what they have is a morally bereft contract condition.
If you put in effort and money to create a product, you wouldn’t give it away either. If you (or the farmer) thinks the product has no benefit, then don’t use it. Use something else.
Well, the farmer did give away, because he had no other choice after the buyer refused to buy but banned him from selling to anyone else. Sometimes giving away is the only option.
Exclusive rights to something isn’t exactly new. If you have a gym or Costco membership, you can’t just let someone else use it because you won’t be around for a month. If the farmer willingly entered into a contract with the supplier, the terms of the contract are enforceable.
Not exactly the same thing. But any contract that means they can screw you and you have no recourse, is a bad contract that shouldn’t be enforceable. You can’t sell yourself into slavery either. That’s a much closer analogy.
If that’s the case, which is debatable, then take it to court. If the conditions are so obvious, a win is a surety with court costs awarded. You can’t just unilaterally decide which parts of a contract are enforceable and which are not.
A surety in court? That really depends on how justice oriented your justice system is. I’ve heard some appalling stories about that. Where I live, it would probably work. In some other places, possibly not. I have no idea about California. A contract like that shouldn’t hold up, but that doesn’t mean it won’t.
Go to court. If the verdict is wrong in your opinion, then appeal it.
Or maybe have your lawyer read through the contract before you sign it.
Yeah no. Some things benefit the most capable providers when made public. If you are in that position, it’s only a net benefit to dictate the entire market.
Are you suggesting the government make rules on what kind of contracts parties can make in business? Would the government then oversee that? There are many, many contracts where there is an exclusive relationship described in a contract.
They already do?