|
On April 17 2013 13:29 SunDevil wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2013 13:10 -CheekyDuck- wrote:On April 17 2013 12:34 SunDevil wrote:
If Gus could not have performed what he promised with what was given in the written and signed contract then he should not have signed it. End of story. Stop saying we didn't deliver what we promised. We delivered exactly what we legally committed to. You cannot go back to a company and say "well at first you were talking about doing x, y and z, and even though we only have a contract for z, why didn't you deliver x and y?".
Also do not drag Joshy in this. He was my employee and I had direct responsibility for his actions. legally your obligations were only fulfilled once Gus signed the wavier freeing you from x,y,z. that lets be honest that wavier was pressured by Amanda's perceived urgency to receive funds asap. you didn't want to state that XYZ was offered and then withdrawn, and your statements about the event cover any of that up! who contacted ign and pointed them to SC2SEA post, instead of verifying the information, your department decides to just cut all contact and switch off the stream. lets talk about section 9.2 ! of the IGN contract signed. legally at this point you guys are completely at fault. This is the only important part of what you just typed: "Legally your obligations were only fulfilled once Gus signed the wavier freeing you from x,y,z." Sounds like our legal obligations were fulfilled as you just said. Nobody is covering anything up. Your entire argument is relying on twisted facts and assumptions.
9.2. IGN’s Obligations. IGN hereby agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Sponsor, and its directors,
officers, employees and affiliated entities, against any and all Losses arising out of or based on any claim
by a third party related to, involving or concerning (a) a breach by IGN of its representations, warranties
or obligations under this Agreement, or (b) the gross negligence or willful misconduct of its employees or
agents.
tell me how you defended? to me and your posts, you guys sold out.
yeah you guys can't now be forced to "legally" cough up the money, but it still doesn't mean you weren't in serious breach of its clauses.
9.3. Claim Procedure.
10. Term and Termination.
yep and you followed that as well.
contracts work both ways, its not just about the money, it a system set in place that is meant to protect this sort of incident happening.
|
This thread just seems like 5 people arguing in public. If matters are so serious, take up some legal action then afterward you can inform the community of the outcome if you so desire. Numbers have been proven not to be a huge issue thanks to posters doing the math. All that's left after that is arguments about who was right and who was wrong that will go nowhere at all. There really isn't anywhere for this to go.
Honestly this all coming out at such a delayed time after the fact just makes me think it's all to clear Gus's name and pave the way for a PPSL 2 that will attract viewers.
Oh and stream cheating accusations with poor evidence is not something to be taken lightly. Killing off an Australian player is horrible, it's hard enough to grow talent down here already without dealing with half assed accusations.
|
Exactly who is the 3rd party who is bringing a claim against Gus/AZK?
I do not think the hold harmless clause means what you think it means.
|
On April 17 2013 13:50 Ded808 wrote:
This thread just seems like 5 people arguing in public. If matters are so serious, take up some legal action then afterward you can inform the community of the outcome if you so desire. Numbers have been proven not to be a huge issue thanks to posters doing the math. All that's left after that is arguments about who was right and who was wrong that will go nowhere at all. There really isn't anywhere for this to go.
Honestly this all coming out at such a delayed time after the fact just makes me think it's all to clear Gus's name and pave the way for a PPSL 2 that will attract viewers.
Oh and stream cheating accusations with poor evidence is not something to be taken lightly. Killing off an Australian player is horrible, it's hard enough to grow talent down here already without dealing with half assed accusations.
there is no PPSL 2, stop encouraging this rumor.
|
I said I won't post in this thread anymore, but after reading Dox's blog: http://esportsdinosaur.blogspot.com.au/2013/04/how-to-save-life.html, and going through all of Cheekyduck's posts here, I conclude that she's either naive and incoherent with her objectives and the main point she's making or she has a massive vendetta against Dox and some other people that its driven her to great lengths to make accusations and slander based on her own assumptions.
I'm leaning on the latter. Please close this thread.
|
On April 17 2013 13:42 -CheekyDuck- wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On April 17 2013 13:29 SunDevil wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2013 13:10 -CheekyDuck- wrote:On April 17 2013 12:34 SunDevil wrote:
If Gus could not have performed what he promised with what was given in the written and signed contract then he should not have signed it. End of story. Stop saying we didn't deliver what we promised. We delivered exactly what we legally committed to. You cannot go back to a company and say "well at first you were talking about doing x, y and z, and even though we only have a contract for z, why didn't you deliver x and y?".
Also do not drag Joshy in this. He was my employee and I had direct responsibility for his actions. legally your obligations were only fulfilled once Gus signed the wavier freeing you from x,y,z. that lets be honest that wavier was pressured by Amanda's perceived urgency to receive funds asap. you didn't want to state that XYZ was offered and then withdrawn, and your statements about the event cover any of that up! who contacted ign and pointed them to SC2SEA post, instead of verifying the information, your department decides to just cut all contact and switch off the stream. lets talk about section 9.2 ! of the IGN contract signed. legally at this point you guys are completely at fault. This is the only important part of what you just typed: "Legally your obligations were only fulfilled once Gus signed the wavier freeing you from x,y,z." Sounds like our legal obligations were fulfilled as you just said. Nobody is covering anything up. Your entire argument is relying on twisted facts and assumptions. 9.2. IGN’s Obligations. IGN hereby agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Sponsor, and its directors, officers, employees and affiliated entities, against any and all Losses arising out of or based on any claim by a third party related to, involving or concerning (a) a breach by IGN of its representations, warranties or obligations under this Agreement, or (b) the gross negligence or willful misconduct of its employees or agents. tell me how you defended? to me and your posts, you guys sold out. yeah you guys can't now be forced to "legally" cough up the money, but it still doesn't mean you weren't in serious breach of its clauses. 9.3. Claim Procedure. 10. Term and Termination. yep and you followed that as well. contracts work both ways, its not just about the money, it a system set in place that is meant to protect this sort of incident happening.
Cheeky, I'm quite surprised that's how you understood that.
That statement, as per my understanding for 9.2 is that IGN will defend its sponsor, directors, officers etc. How is teamAZk or PPSL a sponsor?
Basically, its like having coke being a sponsor of IGN/IPL in general. And an event like I don't know PPSL botched. IGN/IPL will defend coke from any wrongdoing or any claims by debts caused by an event sponsored by IGN/IPL or whatever. It clearly even states a breach by IGN will still indemnify its sponsors.
|
On April 17 2013 14:01 17Sphynx17 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2013 13:42 -CheekyDuck- wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On April 17 2013 13:29 SunDevil wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2013 13:10 -CheekyDuck- wrote:On April 17 2013 12:34 SunDevil wrote:
If Gus could not have performed what he promised with what was given in the written and signed contract then he should not have signed it. End of story. Stop saying we didn't deliver what we promised. We delivered exactly what we legally committed to. You cannot go back to a company and say "well at first you were talking about doing x, y and z, and even though we only have a contract for z, why didn't you deliver x and y?".
Also do not drag Joshy in this. He was my employee and I had direct responsibility for his actions. legally your obligations were only fulfilled once Gus signed the wavier freeing you from x,y,z. that lets be honest that wavier was pressured by Amanda's perceived urgency to receive funds asap. you didn't want to state that XYZ was offered and then withdrawn, and your statements about the event cover any of that up! who contacted ign and pointed them to SC2SEA post, instead of verifying the information, your department decides to just cut all contact and switch off the stream. lets talk about section 9.2 ! of the IGN contract signed. legally at this point you guys are completely at fault. This is the only important part of what you just typed: "Legally your obligations were only fulfilled once Gus signed the wavier freeing you from x,y,z." Sounds like our legal obligations were fulfilled as you just said. Nobody is covering anything up. Your entire argument is relying on twisted facts and assumptions. 9.2. IGN’s Obligations. IGN hereby agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Sponsor, and its directors, officers, employees and affiliated entities, against any and all Losses arising out of or based on any claim by a third party related to, involving or concerning (a) a breach by IGN of its representations, warranties or obligations under this Agreement, or (b) the gross negligence or willful misconduct of its employees or agents. tell me how you defended? to me and your posts, you guys sold out. yeah you guys can't now be forced to "legally" cough up the money, but it still doesn't mean you weren't in serious breach of its clauses. 9.3. Claim Procedure. 10. Term and Termination. yep and you followed that as well. contracts work both ways, its not just about the money, it a system set in place that is meant to protect this sort of incident happening. Cheeky, I'm quite surprised that's how you understood that. That statement, as per my understanding for 9.2 is that IGN will defend its sponsor, directors, officers etc. How is teamAZk or PPSL a sponsor? Basically, its like having coke being a sponsor of IGN/IPL in general. And an event like I don't know PPSL botched. IGN/IPL will defend coke from any wrongdoing or any claims by debts caused by an event sponsored by IGN/IPL or whatever. It clearly even states a breach by IGN will still indemnify its sponsors.
"This eSports Sponsorship Agreement (“Agreement”) is made and entered into as of September __, 2011 (the
“Effective Date”), by and between IGN Entertainment, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“IGN”), with its principal
place of business at 625 2nd Street, 3rd Floor, San Francisco, CA 94107 and [PPSL], a ______ corporation
(“Sponsor”), with its principal place of business at __________."
in the contract Sponsor refers to Gus that actually signed this contract
and IGN as well, IGN.
...
edit:
IGN hereby agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Sponsor,
Defend. you can't say in any of your many posts, blogs, or davids tweets/reddit posts that this was the case.
i am not a lawyer, but its doesn't say defend hold harmless its defend and. not just in relation to getting sued.
|
On April 17 2013 14:05 -CheekyDuck- wrote:
edit:
IGN hereby agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Sponsor,
Defend. you can't say in any of your many posts, blogs, or davids tweets/reddit posts that this was the case.
i am not a lawyer, but its doesn't say defend hold harmless its defend and. not just in relation to getting sued.
You cannot cherrypick words out of a provision of the contract.
"IGN hereby agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Sponsor, and its directors, officers, employees and affiliated entities, against any and all Losses arising out of or based on any claim by a third party related to, involving or concerning (a) a breach by IGN of its representations, warranties or obligations under this Agreement, or (b) the gross negligence or willful misconduct of its employees or agents."
***THE FOLLOWING IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE***
This is about making good any losses arising out a third party claim against AZK/Gus based on a breach of the contract by IGN's employees or agents. Nothing else.
|
Throughout this whole thread, it's funny how it was never mentioned what happened to the rest of the sponsorship money.
i.e. from the other sponsors of the event. (ones that we were able to secure locally)
Because I know for a fact that IPL wasn't the only sponsor to sign up for the event.
So even though this whole IPL thing was a mess and ended up falling through, it doesn't put them at fault. There was other sponsorship money that was used as Gus's own personal fund. Read my post in page 3 where I mention how Gus took the players and casters out, and footed the bill for everything. That wasn't his own money he was using, it was from other sponsors.
I will repeat what I have stated in this thread over and over again, there is no way that Gus was an innocent in this whole situation. He used funds that were supposed to go to PPSL as if it was his own bank account, for weeks after the event he went into hiding (which is understandable, seeing how much hate he got worldwide), and when the time came when he had to explain everything, he couldn't be found. IPL even took the initiative to set up the "Save Amanda" charity that many from the community donated to.
So, no. Having seen with my own eyes the extent of manipulation and bullshit that came from Gus, I can assure you that IPL was not at fault for the failure that was PPSL. Also, what Alex said was true, the agreement was that IPL would send the sponsorship funds in parts, and not as a whole lump sum.
Like I mentioned in my post on Page 3, we had fixed the budget to allow us to fly in Tastosis and the winner of the first qualifier, which was Sen. That was about it. Everything else was Gus, having gone rogue and power tripping since he knew we got IPL's support, he decided to splurge and spend money that we didn't have, and because of that put PPSL over it's head.
One brightside was that Nvidia, one of the other sponsors that we were able to secure for the event, didn't give Gus the prize money, but instead paid MKP in cash after he won. I guess the Nvidia guy could tell how shady Gus was and decided to hold the money until the day itself, and presented it directly to MKP. Smart choice Nvidia guy, you deserve a raise!
I'm fucking serious, if any of you believe that Gus was a victim, or someone who got gypped in this deal, you are either mentally retarded or absolutely fucking nuts. Excuse my language.
I still get so riled up thinking about it.
|
On April 17 2013 14:05 -CheekyDuck- wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On April 17 2013 14:01 17Sphynx17 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2013 13:42 -CheekyDuck- wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On April 17 2013 13:29 SunDevil wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2013 13:10 -CheekyDuck- wrote:On April 17 2013 12:34 SunDevil wrote:
If Gus could not have performed what he promised with what was given in the written and signed contract then he should not have signed it. End of story. Stop saying we didn't deliver what we promised. We delivered exactly what we legally committed to. You cannot go back to a company and say "well at first you were talking about doing x, y and z, and even though we only have a contract for z, why didn't you deliver x and y?".
Also do not drag Joshy in this. He was my employee and I had direct responsibility for his actions. legally your obligations were only fulfilled once Gus signed the wavier freeing you from x,y,z. that lets be honest that wavier was pressured by Amanda's perceived urgency to receive funds asap. you didn't want to state that XYZ was offered and then withdrawn, and your statements about the event cover any of that up! who contacted ign and pointed them to SC2SEA post, instead of verifying the information, your department decides to just cut all contact and switch off the stream. lets talk about section 9.2 ! of the IGN contract signed. legally at this point you guys are completely at fault. This is the only important part of what you just typed: "Legally your obligations were only fulfilled once Gus signed the wavier freeing you from x,y,z." Sounds like our legal obligations were fulfilled as you just said. Nobody is covering anything up. Your entire argument is relying on twisted facts and assumptions. 9.2. IGN’s Obligations. IGN hereby agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Sponsor, and its directors, officers, employees and affiliated entities, against any and all Losses arising out of or based on any claim by a third party related to, involving or concerning (a) a breach by IGN of its representations, warranties or obligations under this Agreement, or (b) the gross negligence or willful misconduct of its employees or agents. tell me how you defended? to me and your posts, you guys sold out. yeah you guys can't now be forced to "legally" cough up the money, but it still doesn't mean you weren't in serious breach of its clauses. 9.3. Claim Procedure. 10. Term and Termination. yep and you followed that as well. contracts work both ways, its not just about the money, it a system set in place that is meant to protect this sort of incident happening. Cheeky, I'm quite surprised that's how you understood that. That statement, as per my understanding for 9.2 is that IGN will defend its sponsor, directors, officers etc. How is teamAZk or PPSL a sponsor? Basically, its like having coke being a sponsor of IGN/IPL in general. And an event like I don't know PPSL botched. IGN/IPL will defend coke from any wrongdoing or any claims by debts caused by an event sponsored by IGN/IPL or whatever. It clearly even states a breach by IGN will still indemnify its sponsors. "This eSports Sponsorship Agreement (“Agreement”) is made and entered into as of September __, 2011 (the “Effective Date”), by and between IGN Entertainment, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“IGN”), with its principal place of business at 625 2nd Street, 3rd Floor, San Francisco, CA 94107 and [PPSL], a ______ corporation (“Sponsor”), with its principal place of business at __________." in the contract Sponsor refers to Gus that actually signed this contract and IGN as well, IGN. ... edit:
IGN hereby agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Sponsor, Defend. you can't say in any of your many posts, blogs, or davids tweets/reddit posts that this was the case. i am not a lawyer, but its doesn't say defend hold harmless its defend and. not just in relation to getting sued .
(a) a breach by IGN of its representations, warranties or obligations under this Agreement, or
(b) the gross negligence or willful misconduct of its employees or agents.
Those are the two instances where IGN will as you say "defend" PPSL in general. It's not Gus specifically. So did IGN breach anything in terms of payment? Did the contract specify that IGN will commit to bring personnel for the PPSL event (I think this is one of your issues)? So did they breach anything in their agreement to qualify for this clause?
I don't get it Cheeky, I seriously don't get where this is supposed to go.
|
On April 17 2013 13:42 -CheekyDuck- wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2013 13:29 SunDevil wrote:On April 17 2013 13:10 -CheekyDuck- wrote:On April 17 2013 12:34 SunDevil wrote:
If Gus could not have performed what he promised with what was given in the written and signed contract then he should not have signed it. End of story. Stop saying we didn't deliver what we promised. We delivered exactly what we legally committed to. You cannot go back to a company and say "well at first you were talking about doing x, y and z, and even though we only have a contract for z, why didn't you deliver x and y?".
Also do not drag Joshy in this. He was my employee and I had direct responsibility for his actions. legally your obligations were only fulfilled once Gus signed the wavier freeing you from x,y,z. that lets be honest that wavier was pressured by Amanda's perceived urgency to receive funds asap. you didn't want to state that XYZ was offered and then withdrawn, and your statements about the event cover any of that up! who contacted ign and pointed them to SC2SEA post, instead of verifying the information, your department decides to just cut all contact and switch off the stream. lets talk about section 9.2 ! of the IGN contract signed. legally at this point you guys are completely at fault. This is the only important part of what you just typed: "Legally your obligations were only fulfilled once Gus signed the wavier freeing you from x,y,z." Sounds like our legal obligations were fulfilled as you just said. Nobody is covering anything up. Your entire argument is relying on twisted facts and assumptions. 9.2. IGN’s Obligations. IGN hereby agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Sponsor, and its directors, officers, employees and affiliated entities, against any and all Losses arising out of or based on any claim by a third party related to, involving or concerning (a) a breach by IGN of its representations, warranties or obligations under this Agreement, or (b) the gross negligence or willful misconduct of its employees or agents.
Hmm. So in simpler terms, this means that if IGN doesn't fulfil the contract or IGN employees screw up, and a third party brings something against PPSL because of that that causes "losses" to PPSL, then IGN will defend PPSL from those "losses"?
Which brings us back to Alex's question.. On April 17 2013 13:50 SunDevil wrote:
Exactly who is the 3rd party who is bringing a claim against Gus/AZK?
+ Show Spoiler [Personal thoughts] +Pffft.... Contract language >.<
Edit: Scrolling up, I guess Alex explained this in even simpler language.
|
Contracts make the world go round my friend! 
|
Cheeky, you can't seriously expect us to rely on your cherry picking on IGN contract on what you feel suits the needs. You have to keep it in context as a whole. I am no lawyer but I can at least read contracts and understand them to a good enough degree.
But luckily you posted the whole 9.2 so that at least immediately closes out what you even want to bring up, next topic. Moving on.
|
On April 17 2013 14:05 -CheekyDuck- wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2013 14:01 17Sphynx17 wrote:On April 17 2013 13:42 -CheekyDuck- wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On April 17 2013 13:29 SunDevil wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2013 13:10 -CheekyDuck- wrote:On April 17 2013 12:34 SunDevil wrote:
If Gus could not have performed what he promised with what was given in the written and signed contract then he should not have signed it. End of story. Stop saying we didn't deliver what we promised. We delivered exactly what we legally committed to. You cannot go back to a company and say "well at first you were talking about doing x, y and z, and even though we only have a contract for z, why didn't you deliver x and y?".
Also do not drag Joshy in this. He was my employee and I had direct responsibility for his actions. legally your obligations were only fulfilled once Gus signed the wavier freeing you from x,y,z. that lets be honest that wavier was pressured by Amanda's perceived urgency to receive funds asap. you didn't want to state that XYZ was offered and then withdrawn, and your statements about the event cover any of that up! who contacted ign and pointed them to SC2SEA post, instead of verifying the information, your department decides to just cut all contact and switch off the stream. lets talk about section 9.2 ! of the IGN contract signed. legally at this point you guys are completely at fault. This is the only important part of what you just typed: "Legally your obligations were only fulfilled once Gus signed the wavier freeing you from x,y,z." Sounds like our legal obligations were fulfilled as you just said. Nobody is covering anything up. Your entire argument is relying on twisted facts and assumptions. 9.2. IGN’s Obligations. IGN hereby agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Sponsor, and its directors, officers, employees and affiliated entities, against any and all Losses arising out of or based on any claim by a third party related to, involving or concerning (a) a breach by IGN of its representations, warranties or obligations under this Agreement, or (b) the gross negligence or willful misconduct of its employees or agents. tell me how you defended? to me and your posts, you guys sold out. yeah you guys can't now be forced to "legally" cough up the money, but it still doesn't mean you weren't in serious breach of its clauses. 9.3. Claim Procedure. 10. Term and Termination. yep and you followed that as well. contracts work both ways, its not just about the money, it a system set in place that is meant to protect this sort of incident happening. Cheeky, I'm quite surprised that's how you understood that. That statement, as per my understanding for 9.2 is that IGN will defend its sponsor, directors, officers etc. How is teamAZk or PPSL a sponsor? Basically, its like having coke being a sponsor of IGN/IPL in general. And an event like I don't know PPSL botched. IGN/IPL will defend coke from any wrongdoing or any claims by debts caused by an event sponsored by IGN/IPL or whatever. It clearly even states a breach by IGN will still indemnify its sponsors. "This eSports Sponsorship Agreement (“Agreement”) is made and entered into as of September __, 2011 (the “Effective Date”), by and between IGN Entertainment, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“IGN”), with its principal place of business at 625 2nd Street, 3rd Floor, San Francisco, CA 94107 and [PPSL], a ______ corporation (“Sponsor”), with its principal place of business at __________." in the contract Sponsor refers to Gus that actually signed this contract and IGN as well, IGN. ... edit:
IGN hereby agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Sponsor, Defend. you can't say in any of your many posts, blogs, or davids tweets/reddit posts that this was the case. i am not a lawyer, but its doesn't say defend hold harmless its defend and. not just in relation to getting sued.
Indeed you're not a lawyer, because you've missed the second part of the term:
against any and all Losses arising out of or based on any claim
by a third party related to, involving or concerning (a) a breach by IGN of its representations, warranties
or obligations under this Agreement, or (b) the gross negligence or willful misconduct of its employees or
agents.
There were no claims against Gus regarding breaches by IGN of its representations, warranties or obligations, nor was there any gross negligence or willful misconduct of its employees or agents. They were contracted to defend 'Sponsor' (who you say is Gus) against claims related to faults from IGN, and there were none.
Please stop stating what people are legally obligated or contracted to do when you clearly don't have the understanding/knowledge to make such statements.
|
Once again CheekyDuck leaves out info to make her point.... Its only what she's done this entire thread. Why is it still open?
|
On April 17 2013 13:55 pdd wrote:I said I won't post in this thread anymore, but after reading Dox's blog: http://esportsdinosaur.blogspot.com.au/2013/04/how-to-save-life.html, and going through all of Cheekyduck's posts here, I conclude that she's either naive and incoherent with her objectives and the main point she's making or she has a massive vendetta against Dox and some other people that its driven her to great lengths to make accusations and slander based on her own assumptions. I'm leaning on the latter. Please close this thread.
this is what im talking about with dox
absolutely disgusted!
and full of miss information.
i will post the "complete" logs of this that are on my phone and skype.
and what we talked about off stream/ disgusting flat out lies.
i can't even finish reading this.
|
On April 17 2013 14:29 jmbthirteen wrote:
Once again CheekyDuck leaves out info to make her point.... Its only what she's done this entire thread. Why is it still open?
what info?
|
10. Term and Termination.
10.1. Term. This Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall be effective until the completion
of the Event (the “Term”) unless earlier terminated as set forth herein.
10.2. Termination for Breach or Insolvency. Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time prior to
the expiration of the Term in the event that: (i) the other party breaches any material term or condition of
this Agreement and fails to cure such breach within thirty (30) business days after receipt of written notice
of such breach; (ii) either party becomes the subject of a voluntary petition in bankruptcy or any voluntary
proceeding relating to insolvency, receivership, liquidation, or composition for the benefit of creditors; or
(iii) either party becomes the subject of an involuntary petition in bankruptcy or any involuntary proceeding
relating to insolvency, receivership, liquidation, or composition for the benefit of creditors, if such petition
or proceeding is not dismissed within sixty (60) days of filing.
10.3. Obligations Upon Termination. Immediately upon termination or expiration of this Agreement, (a)
each party will cease using the other party’s Marks; and (b) each party will cease to use the other party’s
Confidential Information, and will destroy or return (at the option of the other party) any Confidential
Information to the other party, along with a written confirmation of destruction or return, signed by an
officer of such party. Sections 3, 4.1, 4.2, 4.4, 5.4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10.3 and 11 shall survive any expiration or
termination of this Agreement.
....
so 30 days then? look the stream was pulled because of the sc2sea post. David thing admits that in email. doesn't have anything to do with internet issues.
|
On April 17 2013 14:42 -CheekyDuck- wrote:
so 30 days then? look the stream was pulled because of the sc2sea post. David thing admits that in email. doesn't have anything to do with internet issues.
Could you please repost where David explicitly admits in an email that the stream was removed due to the post on sc2sea, as I can't seem to find it.
|
On April 17 2013 14:45 UHF wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2013 14:42 -CheekyDuck- wrote:
so 30 days then? look the stream was pulled because of the sc2sea post. David thing admits that in email. doesn't have anything to do with internet issues. Could you please repost where David explicitly admits in an email that the stream was removed due to the post on sc2sea, as I can't seem to find it.
And also, can you just post the whole damned contract? Why does it need to be in piecemeal? I mean, you admit you are not a lawyer and from we can see, you didn't interpret the contract properly when you made your accusations, so why not post it already since you seem to have it. Oh, don't post a draft, it has to be (really has to be) the formally signed agreement.
We as impartial readers can at least get the whole picture of deliverables, obligations and what not instead of you saying this and that and it turns out it isn't and you just misinterpreted it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
