Contracts are only important when there is a disagreement. When everyone is getting along (which is most of the time), the contract can be verbal, cocktail, form, or lengthy, and it doesn't matter. You can see this from the fact that the most contentious subjects (such as construction) have the most rigorous contracts.
IANAL, but I have never heard of a lawyer writing a contract on a napkin, or advising a client to do so; and they say verbal contracts are worth the paper they're written on.
>IANAL, but I have never heard of a lawyer writing a contract on a napkin, or advising a client to do so
Where did I or anyone say that is what lawyers advise. In fact I specifically said it is because of their army of lawyers tech companies have long and complex TOS and PP.
The point is TOS and PP are not complex because Courts require them, and the cocktail napkin contracts are examples (the pinnacle law school example) of how simple contracts can be while still being enforceable.
>Contracts are only important when there is a disagreement.
No, contracts are most important before the disagreement because they are what help avoid the disagreement. It would be very difficult to explain in this forum, but if you know what Summary Judgment is, breach of contract cases essentially never end in summary judgement, which is actually very counter intuitive because one would think with all breach of contract case should end in summary judgement...because the contract should speak for itself right? In other word one would think either the contract was performed/breached or it wasn't right? The thing is whether a contract was performed or breached is a question of fact for the fact finder; thus, contract cases never end at summary judgement and would always have to go to a finder of fact (judge or jury). You would probably have to spend a semester or 2 to fully grasp this concept and even then, it probably takes some actual practice of law with contract cases to fully grasp why contracts do not resolve contractual disagreements. The reality is once there is a dispute and you are seeking enforcement you would much rather have the cocktail napkin than a complex agreement, it will save you years of litigation and the cost of the same.
IANAL, but I have never heard of a lawyer writing a contract on a napkin, or advising a client to do so; and they say verbal contracts are worth the paper they're written on.