On Tuesday 18 November 2008 12:26:25 am Ed Murphy wrote: > Pavitra wrote: > >> * There was a period lasting at least 4 days during which > >> the person was aware of or could easily have found out that an > >> attempt or intent to make that amendment was being made, and > >> could have ceased to agree to the document in question during > >> that time, with such ceasing to agree requiring no effort beyond > >> sending a message with no side-effects other than the ceasing to > >> agree itself. > > > > This would horribly break contracts that define assets whose > > ownership is restricted to parties. > > No, it would just transfer their assets to the Lost and Found > Department (assuming that that clause was retained).
"with no side-effects other than the ceasing to agree itself." You would need the explicit consent of each party that owned any such assets, because they would have to pay the contract-asset fee (in effect) in order to leave.
