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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 1 week ago (1 child)

No, what they have is a morally bereft contract condition.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago* (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments