변호사 이재욱의 미국법 이야기<br> (Attorney Lee's commentary about U.S. law)

변호사 이재욱의 미국법 이야기
(Attorney Lee's commentary about U.S. law) 이재욱변호사가 써가는 미국법 이야기입니다. 미국의 Federal Law와 State Law에 대한 이해를 돕고, Federal과 State간의 차이에 대해 이해를 함으로써, 미국법을 차용한 한국법의 불충분한 규정과 해석 그리고 몰이해에 대한 인식을 공유하고자 합니다.

페이지

  • Attorney Lee's Office
  • Attorney Lee's U.S. Law commentary
  • Legal Study with Attorney Lee
  • 미국법공부

글 목록

  • 1월 06 (1)
  • 12월 26 (1)
  • 12월 21 (1)
  • 12월 17 (1)
  • 12월 09 (1)
  • 11월 27 (1)
  • 11월 24 (1)
  • 11월 23 (1)
  • 11월 21 (2)
  • 11월 20 (2)
  • 11월 17 (1)
  • 11월 15 (3)
  • 11월 14 (3)
  • 11월 13 (2)
  • 11월 12 (1)
  • 11월 11 (2)
  • 11월 09 (1)
  • 8월 28 (3)
  • 8월 27 (1)
  • 8월 26 (2)
  • 8월 24 (2)
  • 8월 23 (12)
  • 8월 15 (1)
  • 8월 13 (1)
  • 8월 11 (1)
  • 7월 25 (1)
  • 7월 15 (2)
  • 7월 13 (3)
  • 7월 10 (1)
  • 7월 09 (8)
  • 7월 08 (31)
  • 7월 07 (37)
  • 7월 06 (3)
  • 7월 05 (1)
  • 7월 03 (3)
  • 7월 02 (1)
  • 7월 01 (5)
  • 6월 30 (5)
  • 6월 29 (11)
  • 6월 28 (3)
  • 6월 23 (1)
  • 6월 19 (1)
  • 6월 18 (3)
  • 6월 11 (2)
  • 6월 10 (1)
  • 6월 08 (28)
  • 6월 07 (20)
  • 6월 03 (11)
  • 6월 02 (1)
  • 6월 01 (18)
  • 5월 31 (1)
  • 5월 30 (9)
  • 5월 28 (10)
  • 5월 25 (4)
  • 5월 23 (1)
  • 5월 18 (1)
  • 5월 17 (14)
  • 5월 16 (1)
  • 5월 15 (6)
  • 5월 14 (1)
  • 5월 13 (3)
  • 5월 12 (1)
  • 5월 10 (4)
  • 5월 09 (7)
  • 5월 08 (1)
  • 5월 07 (6)
  • 5월 06 (2)
  • 5월 05 (1)
  • 5월 02 (8)
  • 5월 01 (8)
  • 4월 30 (48)
  • 4월 29 (16)
  • 4월 28 (20)
  • 4월 25 (4)
  • 4월 24 (4)
  • 4월 20 (1)
  • 4월 19 (5)
  • 4월 18 (5)
  • 4월 17 (7)
  • 4월 16 (1)
  • 4월 15 (6)
  • 4월 14 (5)
  • 4월 13 (9)
  • 4월 12 (3)
  • 4월 11 (7)
  • 4월 09 (3)
  • 4월 03 (2)
  • 4월 02 (1)
  • 3월 31 (1)
  • 3월 28 (27)
  • 3월 27 (4)
  • 3월 26 (13)
  • 3월 25 (42)
  • 3월 24 (59)
  • 3월 23 (5)

Attorney Lee's related hompages link

  • 변호사 이재욱의 Main 홈페이지(taxnlaw.co.kr
  • 변호사이재욱의 세금소송
  • 변호사이재욱의 기업회생,법인파산

프로필

내 사진
Attorney LEE, jae wook (taxnlaw.co.kr)
서울 서초구 반포대로 14길 30, 센추리 412호. TEL: 010-6350-1799 이메일:jawala.lee@gmail.com. Attorney at Law, Tax, Patent. Lee,Jae Wook is a member of the Korean Bar Association and Illinois Bar Association. Licensed to practice in KOREA and U.S.A., Illinois. Attorney Lee has worked since 1997.3. as a prominent Attorney in the legal service field including tax, law, patent, immigration, transaction across the border. You can find more at http://taxnlaw.co.kr
전체 프로필 보기

2013년 6월 29일 토요일

« PIPSELF’s 2012-2013 Executive Editorial BoardSAG-AFTRA Merger Consolidates Performers’ Unions » A Promise is Not Always a Promise: “Representations,” “Warranties” and “Covenants” Through the Lens of a Recording Agreement. Apr 12th, 2012 by lciaramella BY: DOUGLAS DONESON Every day people sign contracts. For example, a contract must be signed at a Rent-a-car Company in order to rent a car, at a doctor’s office in order to see the doctor, and at a leasing office in order to rent an apartment. Frequently the recipients of services of the above mentioned contracts do not understand all of the terms of the contract that they are signing. Generally, all they know is that they will receive their desired service if they sign the contract. The contract terms “representations, warranties, and covenants” are common and often overlooked in contracts, but they provide the fundamental structure of a contract and thus require understanding from both parties to a contract. One reason the terms “representations, warranties, and covenants” are overlooked is because at first glance these three terms appear redundant; by and large, all three terms imply a promise. The second possible reason little regard is given to these three important words is because the word “covenant” feels ancient and comes off as antiquated and irrelevant. Contrary to these misconceptions, the three terms “representations, warranties, and covenants” have individual significance. Further, today, the word “covenant” has just as much significance as it did in Jacob’s dream when God appeared and made four promises.[1] The key difference among these three words is temporal—past and present for representations; past, present but mainly future for warranties; and mainly future for covenants.[2] The remedies for a false representation, breach of warranty or violation of a covenant also have differed.[3] For these basic reasons it is important to know the significance and individual meaning of these three terms in order to properly implement them. Representations Traditionally, a representation precedes and induces a contract.[4] A representation is information in an express or implied statement that one party to the contract makes to the other before or at the time the contract is entered into regarding a past or existing fact.[5] An example might be that prior to signing with a record label, an artist in a recording agreement represents that he is currently not signed to any other label. Typically, a remedy for false representation is not a claim for damages under the contract. Instead, the proper approach for misrepresentation that induces a contract would be a claim for fraud in order to rescind the contract or for damages.[6] In contracts, representations can function as a “condition” or as a “warranty.” If the representation functions as a condition, it would entitle the party that relied on the condition to repudiate the contract if it was discovered that the condition was false. For example, while signing a recording agreement with a record label, a person represents that he is a famous independent artist. But after signing, the label discovered that this person is a law student and not a famous independent artist. In this situation, the record label would be entitled to repudiate the contract. In contrast, if the representation in a contract functioned as a “warranty,” which was discovered to be false, it might only rise to a claim of damages. For example, while signing a recording agreement with a record label, “Hip Hop Artist” warrants that he will provide the record label with a hip hop album. But “Hip Hop Artist” records a nu metal album instead. Here, the record label might not be entitled to repudiate the whole contract. Warranties Warranties are promises that appear on the face of a contract.[7] They may include representations, agreements or promises that a proposition of fact is true at the time of the contract and will be true in the future.[8] Although some warranties, such as a warranty of merchantability, are implied, the language creating an express warranty need not contain special phrases or formal words such as guarantee or warranty.[9] Warranties provide for obligations that are absolute and are imposed as a matter of law irrespective of whether the seller knew or should have known of the falsity of his representations.[10] This is significant because it serves as an assurance that a product is as promised.[11] A warranty is equivalent in effect to a promise that the warranting party will indemnify the other if the assurances are not satisfied. For example, if an artist signed to a label warrants to provide one album of original songs, but instead delivers an album of cover songs without first clearing the licenses for those songs, then the artist would be in breach of warranty and the label would be indemnified from any copyright claim involving the covered songs, since the artist warranted to deliver to the record label, an album consisting of original songs. A warranty is distinguishable from a representation in several different ways: (1) a warranty is an essential part of a contract, while a representation is usually only a collateral inducement, (2) an express warranty is usually written on the fact of a contract, while a representation may be written or oral, (3) a warranty is conclusively presumed to be material, while the burden is on the party claiming breach to show that a representation is material, and (4) a warranty must be strictly complied with, while substantial truth is the only requirement for a representation.[12] A key distinction, not listed above, is that justifiable reliance is an element for a misrepresentation claim.[13] In a warranty claim, the state of mind to whom the warranty is given is not pertinent.[14] Thus a party may enforce a warranty even if the beneficiary knows the warranty will be breached.[15] Due to the insignificance of a beneficiary’s state of mind in a warranty claim, a seller will sometimes add a generic as-is clause to a contract to disclaim any warranties that might otherwise accompany the respective contract.[16] Although representations and warranties are substantively distinguishable, both bridge the information gap between parties to a contract.[17] Representations and warranties are most useful when one party is relying on information about the other party that is much more difficult for the former party to determine than it is for the latter party.[18] Covenants Historically, a covenant was in a sealed document that was self authenticating, and witnesses were not required to establish the terms in the document.[19] Today, covenants are generally formal agreements or promises in a written contract, and are usually agreements relating to property.[20] Covenants are usually secondary to the main reason for the contract.[21] Sometimes they arise as an undertaking to do or not to do something in the future. For example, an artist is signed to a label and the recording agreement between the two parties provides for a 360 deal. This might be considered a covenant between the record label and the artist. Conclusion Please be aware that a promise is not always a promise. As seen here, “representations,” “warranties” and “covenants” each have their own unique implications. [1] The Bible, Genesis 28:12-15 (Covenant with Jacob) [2] Marc Primack, Representations, Warranties and Covenants: Back to the Basics in Contracts, The National Law Review, http://www.natlawreview.com/article/representations-warranties-and-covenants-back-to-basics-contracts (last visited Apr. 4, 2012) [3] Id. [4] Id. [5] Id. [6] Id. [7] Id. [8] Id. [9] Overstreet v. Norden Laboratories, Inc., 669 F.2d 1286 (6th Cir. 1982). [10] Mary Pickford Co. v. Bayly Bros., 12 Cal. 2d 501, 86 P.2d 102 (1939). [11] Primack, supra note 2. [12] Black’s Law Dictionary, 772 col. 1. (3rd ed. 2006) [13] Primack, supra note 2. [14] Id. [15] Id. [16] CAL. COM CODE. ANN. § 2316 [17] Common Contract Terms: Representations, Warranties and Covenants, VC Ready Law Group, LLC, http://www.vcreadylaw.com/blog/2009/10/29/common-contract-terms-representations-warranties-and-covenants/ (last visited Apr. 4, 2012) [18] Id. [19] Primack, supra note 2. [20] Id. [21] Id. Posted in Contracts, Music, Recording Trackback URI | Comments RSS Leave a Reply Name (required) Mail (hidden) (required) Website Recent Posts The Expansion of the First Sale Doctrine SCOTUS Decides on the Patentability of Genes Copyright Termination Rights: Giving Artists Their Second Bite at the Apple Intellectual Property Woes for Pharmaceutical Companies in India Redskins: Until Further Notice Beware of the Ides of March … Madness Photographer’s Potential Copyright Infringement Claim Leads to Summer Camp for Kids The Death of a Musician: A Sea Change in Sports Hazing? Music & Corporate Sponsorship Intellectual Property Rights: A ‘Loophole’ for College Athletes to Get Paid? Categories Alternative Dispute Resolution Arbitration Brand Constitutional Law First Amendment Privacy Contracts Copyright Copyright Act Fair Use First Sale Doctrine Infringement Original Authorship Termination Rights Visual Art Corporate Counterfeit Criminal Cyber-Attack Entertainment SAG Events Fashion Federal Court New York Government PIPA SOPA Health/Science Hollywood International China Internet Google Invention iTunes License Litigation Major League Basebal Major League Baseball Marketing Movies Music Recording Netflix New York State Patent Piracy SEC Second Circuit Social Media Facebook Twitter Sports Hazing Major League Baseball Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) National Football League (NFL) National Hockey League (NHL) NCAA Olympics Performance Enhancing Drugs Track & Field UFC Streaming Technology GPS Television Pay-Per-View Title IX Trademark Color Lanham Act Secondary Meaning Trademark Infringement UFC Uncategorized Unions Welcome WTO Pace I.P., Sports & Entertainment Law Forum © 2013 All Rights Reserved.Pace Law Theme based on MistyLook


« PIPSELF’s 2012-2013 Executive Editorial Board
SAG-AFTRA Merger Consolidates Performers’ Unions »

A Promise is Not Always a Promise: “Representations,” “Warranties” and “Covenants” Through the Lens of a Recording Agreement.

Apr 12th, 2012 by lciaramella
BY:  DOUGLAS  DONESON
Every day people sign contracts. For example, a contract must be signed at a Rent-a-car Company in order to rent a car, at a doctor’s office in order to see the doctor, and at a leasing office in order to rent an apartment. Frequently the recipients of services of the above mentioned contracts do not understand all of the terms of the contract that they are signing. Generally, all they know is that they will receive their desired service if they sign the contract.
The contract terms “representations, warranties, and covenants” are common and often overlooked in contracts, but they provide the fundamental structure of a contract and thus require understanding from both parties to a contract. One
reason the terms “representations, warranties, and covenants” are overlooked is because at first glance these three terms appear redundant; by and large, all three terms imply a promise.  The second possible reason little regard is given to these three important words is because the word “covenant” feels ancient and comes off as antiquated and irrelevant. Contrary to these misconceptions, the three terms “representations, warranties, and covenants” have individual significance. Further, today, the word “covenant” has just as much significance as it did in Jacob’s dream when God appeared and made four promises.[1]
The key difference among these three words is temporal—past and present for representations; past, present but mainly future for warranties; and mainly future for covenants.[2]  The remedies for a false representation, breach of warranty or violation of a covenant also have differed.[3]  For these basic reasons it is important to know the significance and individual meaning of these three terms in order to properly implement them.
Representations
Traditionally, a representation precedes and induces a contract.[4]  A representation is information in an express or implied statement that one party to the contract makes to the other before or at the time the contract is entered into regarding a past or existing fact.[5]  An example might be that prior to signing with a record label, an artist in a recording agreement represents that he is currently not signed to any other label.
Typically, a remedy for false representation is not a claim for damages under the contract. Instead, the proper approach for misrepresentation that induces a contract would be a claim for fraud in order to rescind the contract or for damages.[6]  In contracts, representations can function as a “condition” or as a “warranty.” If the representation functions as a condition, it would entitle the party that relied on the condition to repudiate the contract if it was discovered that the condition was false. For example, while signing a recording agreement with a record label, a person represents that he is a famous independent artist. But after signing, the label discovered that this person is a law student and not a famous independent artist. In this situation, the record label would be entitled to repudiate the contract. In contrast, if the representation in a contract functioned as a “warranty,” which was discovered to be false, it might only rise to a claim of damages. For example, while signing a recording agreement with a record label, “Hip Hop Artist” warrants that he will provide the record label with a hip hop album.  But “Hip Hop Artist” records a nu metal album instead. Here, the record label might not be entitled to repudiate the whole contract.
Warranties
Warranties are promises that appear on the face of a contract.[7]  They may include representations, agreements or promises that a proposition of fact is true at the time of the contract and will be true in the future.[8]  Although some warranties, such as a warranty of merchantability, are implied, the language creating an express warranty need not contain special phrases or formal words such as guarantee or warranty.[9]
Warranties provide for obligations that are absolute and are imposed as a matter of law irrespective of whether the seller knew or should have known of the falsity of his representations.[10]  This is significant because it serves as an assurance that a product is as promised.[11]  A warranty is equivalent in effect to a promise that the warranting party will indemnify the other if the assurances are not satisfied. For example, if an artist signed to a label warrants to provide one album of original songs, but instead delivers an album of cover songs without first clearing the licenses for those songs, then the artist would be in breach of warranty and the label would be indemnified from any copyright claim involving the covered songs, since the artist warranted to deliver to the record label, an album consisting of original songs.
A warranty is distinguishable from a representation in several different ways:
(1) a warranty is an essential part of a contract, while a representation is usually only a collateral inducement, (2) an express warranty is usually written on the fact of a contract, while a representation may be written or oral, (3) a warranty is  conclusively presumed to be material, while the burden is on the party claiming breach to show that a representation is material, and (4) a warranty must be strictly complied with, while substantial truth is the only requirement for a
representation.[12]
A key distinction, not listed above, is that justifiable reliance is an element for a misrepresentation claim.[13]  In a warranty claim, the state of mind to whom the warranty is given is not pertinent.[14]  Thus a party may enforce a warranty even if the beneficiary knows the warranty will be breached.[15]  Due to the insignificance of a beneficiary’s state of mind in a warranty claim, a seller will sometimes add a generic as-is clause to a contract to disclaim any warranties that might otherwise accompany the respective contract.[16]
Although representations and warranties are substantively distinguishable, both bridge the information gap between parties to a contract.[17]  Representations and warranties are most useful when one party is relying on information about the other party that is much more difficult for the former party to determine than it is for the latter party.[18]  
Covenants
Historically, a covenant was in a sealed document that was self authenticating, and witnesses were not required to establish the terms in the document.[19]  Today, covenants are generally formal agreements or promises in a written contract, and are usually agreements relating to property.[20]  Covenants are usually secondary to the main reason for the contract.[21]  Sometimes they arise as an undertaking to do or not to do something in the future. For example, an artist is signed to a label and the recording agreement between the two parties provides for a 360 deal. This might be considered a covenant between the record label and the artist.
Conclusion
Please be aware that a promise is not always a promise. As seen here, “representations,” “warranties” and “covenants” each have their own unique implications.



[1] The Bible, Genesis 28:12-15 (Covenant with Jacob)
[2] Marc Primack, Representations, Warranties and Covenants: Back to the Basics in Contracts, The National Law Review, http://www.natlawreview.com/article/representations-warranties-and-covenants-back-to-basics-contracts
(last visited Apr. 4, 2012)
[3] Id.
[4] Id.
[5] Id.
[6] Id.
[7] Id.
[8] Id.
[9] Overstreet v. Norden Laboratories, Inc., 669 F.2d 1286 (6th Cir. 1982).
[10] Mary Pickford Co. v. Bayly Bros., 12 Cal. 2d 501, 86 P.2d 102 (1939).
[11] Primack, supra note 2.
[12] Black’s Law Dictionary, 772 col. 1. (3rd ed. 2006)
[13] Primack, supra note 2.
[14] Id.
[15] Id.
[16] CAL. COM CODE. ANN. § 2316
[17] Common Contract Terms: Representations, Warranties and Covenants, VC Ready Law Group, LLC,http://www.vcreadylaw.com/blog/2009/10/29/common-contract-terms-representations-warranties-and-covenants/ (last visited Apr. 4, 2012)
[18] Id.
[19] Primack, supra note 2.
[20] Id.
[21] Id.
Posted in Contracts, Music, Recording
Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply

 
 
 
  • Recent Posts

    • The Expansion of the First Sale Doctrine
    • SCOTUS Decides on the Patentability of Genes
    • Copyright Termination Rights: Giving Artists Their Second Bite at the Apple
    • Intellectual Property Woes for Pharmaceutical Companies in India
    • Redskins: Until Further Notice
    • Beware of the Ides of March … Madness
    • Photographer’s Potential Copyright Infringement Claim Leads to Summer Camp for Kids
    • The Death of a Musician: A Sea Change in Sports Hazing?
    • Music & Corporate Sponsorship
    • Intellectual Property Rights: A ‘Loophole’ for College Athletes to Get Paid?
  • Categories

    • Alternative Dispute Resolution
    • Arbitration
    • Brand
    • Constitutional Law
      • First Amendment
      • Privacy
    • Contracts
    • Copyright
      • Copyright Act
      • Fair Use
      • First Sale Doctrine
      • Infringement
      • Original Authorship
      • Termination Rights
      • Visual Art
    • Corporate
    • Counterfeit
    • Criminal
    • Cyber-Attack
    • Entertainment
      • SAG
    • Events
    • Fashion
    • Federal Court
      • New York
    • Government
      • PIPA
      • SOPA
    • Health/Science
    • Hollywood
    • International
      • China
    • Internet
      • Google
    • Invention
    • iTunes
    • License
    • Litigation
    • Major League Basebal
    • Major League Baseball
    • Marketing
    • Movies
    • Music
      • Recording
    • Netflix
    • New York State
    • Patent
    • Piracy
    • SEC
    • Second Circuit
    • Social Media
      • Facebook
      • Twitter
    • Sports
      • Hazing
      • Major League Baseball
      • Mixed Martial Arts (MMA)
      • National Football League (NFL)
      • National Hockey League (NHL)
      • NCAA
      • Olympics
      • Performance Enhancing Drugs
      • Track & Field
      • UFC
    • Streaming
    • Technology
      • GPS
    • Television
      • Pay-Per-View
    • Title IX
    • Trademark
      • Color
      • Lanham Act
      • Secondary Meaning
      • Trademark Infringement
    • UFC
    • Uncategorized
    • Unions
    • Welcome
    • WTO
Pace I.P., Sports & Entertainment Law Forum © 2013 All Rights Reserved.
Pace Law Theme based on MistyLook

작성자: Attorney LEE, jae wook (taxnlaw.co.kr) 시간: 오전 6:19
이메일로 전송BlogThis!X에 공유Facebook에서 공유Pinterest에 공유
최근 게시물 이전 게시물 홈

이 블로그 검색

Translate

프로필

내 사진
Attorney LEE, jae wook (taxnlaw.co.kr)
서울 서초구 반포대로 14길 30, 센추리 412호. TEL: 010-6350-1799 이메일:jawala.lee@gmail.com. Attorney at Law, Tax, Patent. Lee,Jae Wook is a member of the Korean Bar Association and Illinois Bar Association. Licensed to practice in KOREA and U.S.A., Illinois. Attorney Lee has worked since 1997.3. as a prominent Attorney in the legal service field including tax, law, patent, immigration, transaction across the border. You can find more at http://taxnlaw.co.kr
전체 프로필 보기

이 블로그 검색

태그

  • USA Law

페이지

  • 홈
  • Attorney Lee's Office
  • Legal Study with Attorney Lee
  • Attorney Lee's U.S. Law commentary
세련 테마. Powered by Blogger.