-

[Flashman]

I'm going to sign the new contract.
300 plus bonus will in all likelihood be better than 300 no bonus.

No, it's not ideal but if Zach's intent is good we can all continue to make money. Many here have chosen to punish Zach for the fact he's not obligated to pay a bonus. How about we reserve punishment for when/if he fails to pay a proper bonus or fails to supply us with adequate info after the new contract is in place?
  

Lol as per new contract you have given up right to sue as you agree to dividends being issued on sole discretion of lab_rat.

Actually, I've come to thinking that the way this contract has been presented, we lose no rights whatsoever in being forced to agree to it...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duress#Economic_or_pecuniary_duress

"A contract is voidable if the innocent party can prove that it had no other practical choice (as opposed to legal choice) but to agree to the contract."

[Mindsync Miner]

Lol as per new contract you have given up right to sue as you agree to dividends being issued on sole discretion of lab_rat.

I would agree but I think the contract as it exists has loopholes. Again I'm not a lawyer but I've had quite a bit of experience with contracts due to business in film, television, healthcare and the oil industry. I'm going to include a few excerpts that caught my eye.

THESE TERMS REQUIRE THE USE OF ARBITRATION ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS TO RESOLVE DISPUTES, RATHER THAN JURY TRIALS OR CLASS ACTIONS.

Nope, sorry, you can't abolish your contract holder's rights by simply stating thus. If there is sufficient evidence of wrongful conduct, particularly criminal conduct then this line will be summarily dismissed.

There shall be No reliance on information outside of what is contained in this agreement.

OK, so this line is a CYA that we cannot rely upon information outside the terms of the contract to reference our rights, guarantees etc. What's missing, and please correct me if I'm wrong but I haven't found it, is a statement of integration. Something like:

This Agreement supersedes all prior agreements and understandings (whether written or oral) between the Company and the Underwriters, or any of them, with respect to the subject matter hereof.

The lack of the above essentially assures that signing the new contract adds provisions to our previous agreements, but nowhere does it negate the provisions of past agreements. Furthermore, when provisions are found to be in conflict with one another there is no procedure or resolution to be found. All of our previous agreements should be fair game in a court trial because the new contract negates nothing.

[DemocraticRepublicOfDave]

Hi All,

Haven't seen this mentioned.  LabRat sent out an email last night (UK time) to bondholders who have registered email addresses.

Reproduced here for those that did not receive it:

Subject: New Contract Information

As previously stated on the bitcointalk forums, this information is being gathered together and sent out in an email to all contract-holders that I have email addresses for (over 95%).  This information will also be posted on the forums and on the website.
Contained within this email are links to the Original Contract, New Contract, AMA Transcript, and Contract-Holder List.
 
If you have any further questions after reading the following please feel free to ask.  If you have a question to ask please read everything provided before asking as it may have been answered in the AMA.
 
Original Contract: https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0BwZCh0jtSZkwaGlkcjdiUEhKTVk&usp=sharing
 
New Contract:  https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0BwZCh0jtSZkwMUMxUURqdGNGT0k&usp=sharing
 
AMA Transcript:  https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0BwZCh0jtSZkwbzhwM1U4UUV3ZFU&usp=sharing
 
Contract-Holder List:  https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0BwZCh0jtSZkwbzFyUDdWUkpZeXM&usp=sharing
 
-Lab_Rat

[Mindsync Miner]

Here's another delicious morsel:

YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU HAVE READ AND UNDERSTOOD, AND AGREE TO BE BOUND BY, THE FOLLOWING TERMS AND CONDITIONS, INCLUDING ANY ADDITIONAL GUIDELINES AND FUTURE MODIFICATIONS (COLLECTIVELY, THE “TERMS”) OF THIS AGREEMENT.

If I'm reading this right the bold part talking about "future modifications" means that by signing we agree to all modifications LRM makes for perpetuity.

What?

So if he wants to he can modify the terms so that, I don't know, all our rights are meaningless? Maybe he'll make it so that we pay him dividends instead. Perhaps he'll modify terms so that he can put a lien on our private property to purchase equipment. Better yet he can claim custody of your spouse and/or kids. Not married? No problem! Just become the indentured servant of Lab Rat.

OK, so it's a ridiculous over reach to claim signing a contract holds you subject to future guidelines and modifications. Again that would be the purpose of a statement of integration and every time there are new guidelines and modifications they must be entered upon by signing a new contract either supplementing existing agreements or negating all previous agreements in favor of the new.

[Bargraphics]

I'm going to sign the new contract.
300 plus bonus will in all likelihood be better than 300 no bonus.

I'm looking at the bond list and your BTC address 1MQLfiKA5A6goEiSwMdVyVvFw4YgCj489V shows 159 bonds (x3 due to the split) so 53 Bonds originally. It makes sense for you that signing this new contract is probably easier than fighting for a proper non arbitrary contract would.

How many of the larger bond holders would like to see a more concrete contract put in place?

My BTC address is 1FscNBYzd5CqDzUVQ9YapLQNtLbswkM4NL

http://eligius.st/~wizkid057/newstats/userstats.php/1FscNBYzd5CqDzUVQ9YapLQNtLbswkM4NL

I have 5007 shares (1669 before split)

Looking at the bond list,
There are a total of 365 Individual Shareholders in the list (If you take out the ones that have 0 shares and assume that no one is using multiple addresses)

Top 10 Shareholders - 2.74% of Total Shareholders
own ~40% of all of the bonds

Top 15 Shareholders  - 4.11% of Total Shareholders
own ~48% of all of the bonds

Top 20 Shareholders  - 5.48% of Total Shareholders
own ~54% of all of the bonds

[karusloom]

Zach do get a refund when we accept the new contract.

Refund Policy: This policy applies to all of our purchases with Lab Rat Data Processing, L.L.C. sold through our website, EBay or any other means. We have a 7 day cooling off period where Refunds are available. After your purchase is completed and 7 days have passed ALL PURCHASES ARE FINAL Please make sure you understand this. By purchasing from us you agree to this 7 day Refund Policy.

So when i accept the new contract will i be treated as a new customer with a new purchase and will i be able to get a refund for my purchase ??

[bigasic]

Did those that bought shares at the very beginning digitally sign an agreement?

[contactmike1]

No, it was just open market on bitfunder.

[bigasic]

Had i known the rules were going to change mid stream, no way in hell would I  have agreed to what I agreed to. We cant change the rules, can we? lol..

I agree with BAR.. I don't feel comfortable with the way its written.. I think the bonus bothers me. What is the bonus? It needs to be put in GHS or MHS or whatever.. just saying bonus is too broad....

[Mindsync Miner]

How many of the larger bond holders would like to see a more concrete contract put in place?

I appreciate there are many with more skin in the game than myself. That being said I believe the new contract doesn't hold water if challenged. Assign your own risk valuation to signing the new contract.

[tempestb]

What's the alternative?  If you don't sign you basically get nothing.  There doesn't seem to be anyone actively suing him over this, so it's either sign and take your chances that you get something or get nothing and just complain in a forum that he's not even reading.

I don't see much choice except to sign and hope for the best.

[Mindsync Miner]

Actually, I've come to thinking that the way this contract has been presented, we lose no rights whatsoever in being forced to agree to it...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duress#Economic_or_pecuniary_duress

"A contract is voidable if the innocent party can prove that it had no other practical choice (as opposed to legal choice) but to agree to the contract."

+1

I'm going to add that the part of the contract that attempts to waive class action rights using arbitration as a substitute would fall under jurisdiction of state law. He would have to customize the contract to be effective for customers in each state. Do we have non-U.S. contract holders too? Again, more changes to the contract necessary to accommodate regulations by locale.

On top of that in my state, California such class action waivers have precedent of not always being upheld. http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=29dbb4d7-dfb6-41b7-90b9-4971dbd9ae8a

[bigasic]

I'm going to sign the new contract.
300 plus bonus will in all likelihood be better than 300 no bonus.

How many of the larger bond holders would like to see a more concrete contract put in place?

As a large shareholder, I would like to see a more concrete contract in place.  (Im in the top 10, I believe)

so, count me in....

Also, I agree with the duress statement. Its basically saying that we will be punished for not signing the new agreement.. that coercion...

Is LRM attorneys info placed anywhere in here?

[rangerbob21]

I'm going to sign the new contract.
300 plus bonus will in all likelihood be better than 300 no bonus.

How many of the larger bond holders would like to see a more concrete contract put in place?

As a large shareholder, I would like to see a more concrete contract in place.  (Im in the top 10, I believe)

so, count me in....

Also, I agree with the duress statement. Its basically saying that we will be punished for not signing the new agreement.. that coercion...

Is LRM attorneys info placed anywhere in here?

I am beginning to think the whole lawyer thing is a ruse... No self respecting lawyer would take months to produce LRM's new (what is looking more and more like illegal) "contract"? Really, called this lawyer from the side of the bus ad, did ya?

[LostDutchman]

I'm going to sign the new contract.
300 plus bonus will in all likelihood be better than 300 no bonus.

How many of the larger bond holders would like to see a more concrete contract put in place?

As a large shareholder, I would like to see a more concrete contract in place.  (Im in the top 10, I believe)

so, count me in....

Also, I agree with the duress statement. Its basically saying that we will be punished for not signing the new agreement.. that coercion...

Is LRM attorneys info placed anywhere in here?

I am beginning to think the whole lawyer thing is a ruse... No self respecting lawyer would take months to produce LRM's new (what is looking more and more like illegal) "contract"? Really, called this lawyer from the side of the bus ad, did ya?

Not to mention the constant and frequent misuse of the comma in the supposed "legal" documents.

This is not a joke or a slam.  The grammar is awful and the grammar is very important in legal documents as a mis-placed comma can change the entire meaning and intent of a provision.

My $.02.

[bigasic]

Ok, so I guess before I sign anything, I want to talk to the "attorney" that drew up the document...

[LostDutchman]

Ok, so I guess before I sign anything, I want to talk to the "attorney" that drew up the document...

No, you want to talk to YOUR attorney.

My $.02.

[bigasic]

Ok, so I guess before I sign anything, I want to talk to the "attorney" that drew up the document...

No, you want to talk to YOUR attorney.

My $.02.

Yep, thats exactly what Im going to do... Glad I have one on retainer... Thats why I want to know the name of the attorney, so my attorney can ask LR attorney questions, if needed.

[countduckula]

From Lab Rat Official contract

Summary:
Each 1 bond of LabRatMining represents a portion of the total hashrate owned and operated
by LabRatMining.

This initial amount is guaranteed to be a minimum of 100MH/s per bond, but with future
installments of the company the hashrate per bond will also increase. Depending on the
speed at which the initial offering of bonds is completed, the 100MH/s estimate could raise
rather quickly.

Isn't this part of the contract pretty clear? where does he get 100mh fixed hashrate?

[bigasic]

Just received an email stating an update to the new contract. but I dont see a link to the new contract. does anyone have the latest contract?