He did a few things when he did it which made it clear it wasn't a mistake. He had to sort of go out of his way to do it.

No, I've had this happen when drawing up contracts with American lawyers way too many times for it to be mistakes. We've had lawyers try to sneak in one sided clauses after we agreed differently with business owners pretty much constantly.

It always significantly deteriorated relations with that company. But I guess Americans think that's fine because "it's just business".

IANAL, but if you have correspondence indicating that you wanted something removed and both sides agreed to it, then I'd imagine you'd have a case in court if they slipped something in. Contracts are never 'iron-clad' -- for example, you cannot legally sign away your soul. Lots of stuff can be invalidated in court.

Sure, but when they "fix" things like ticket/issue response times, SLAs, responsibilities of both companies, it can later be very hard to prove what you've agreed on a video call with a CEO/CTO. Especially when that other company decides that you'll be the one taking the blame for their internal politics.

Always get everything in writing. If you've been passing redlines back and forth, you should have that at minimum.

That sounds expensive.

That's a really prejudiced and unwarranted view of Americans. If anything it says more about your biases and prejudices than it does about one nation.

I am American?

I am saying that as an American, one that works in America, and from my subjective experience working in b2b and consulting jobs, the business culture around me is full of contractual bullshit.

Just think about the larger situation of EULAs and no-competes and arbitration clauses. Everything is hoping you don't read the fine-print, or have no energy to fight it, even to say you haven't read or were mislead and therefore it shouldn't apply.

Being an American doesn't make it any less prejudiced. It's a gross generalization. Even assuming it were true, how is this an exclusive characteristic of America?

I don't know whether it's exclusive. I never claimed that.

Your singling out of the country implies as much.

If it's not exclusive to America, you should have said "It's standard bullshit"

> But I guess Americans think that's fine because "it's just business".

That's a really prejudiced and unwarranted view of Americans. If anything it says more about your biases and prejudices than it does about one nation.

> That's a really prejudiced and unwarranted view of Americans. If anything it says more about your biases and prejudices than it does about one nation.

I am an American citizen so you can take it from an American citizen instead. Companies have zero scruples whatsoever about screwing over others in business.

But other companies still do business with them, right? So they're getting away with it.

"It doesn't matter how we behave as long as they're still forced to do business with us." attitude is exactly what I was talking about :)

Being an American doesn't make it any less prejudiced. It's a gross generalization. Even assuming it were true, how is this an exclusive characteristic of America?

> It isn't. I've noticed that Chinese companies are even worse.

Then it isn't "standard American bullshit". It's just "standard bullshit".

I wouldn't word it like this if it wouldn't be a very noticable pattern of behaviour comming pretty much only from US customers. Negotiations with customers from other cultures have been significantly more honest - it doesn't mean they weren't seeking an advantage, but this agreesive backstabing from legal departments right after signing up the customer was something that was very very US American.

After seeing it first-hand, I'm noticing this attitude even in fields like global politics, where burning goodwill to gain very minor advantages seems to be the policy these days.

> I wouldn't word it like this if it wouldn't be a very noticable pattern of behaviour comming pretty much only from US customers.

But that's the thing... do you have access to a representative, uniform, random sample of US customers? Do you have a similar sample of customers from other regions to compare against? Are those samples based on your actual data rather than personal anecdotes? Have you eliminated hidden variables that could better explain this behavior than simply the place they are from?

If you answered "no" to any of the above, you're suffering from availability bias.

> After seeing it first-hand, I'm noticing this attitude even in fields like global politics, where burning goodwill to gain very minor advantages seems to be the policy these days.

And that one is called confirmation bias.

And if you're sure, did you report this to the relevant disciplinary body?

What, the bar association?

Sleezy as this is you wouldn't be able to show damages since you didn't sign the contract. The other lawyer can claim error and the burden of proof would be on you.

If you did accept, then you have a lengthy court battle ahead where a jury could very well rule "abide by the contract you signed you reneging moocher."

The real world isn't a school playground. Calling a teacher over is time consuming and expensive and far from a guarantee of justice. It is up to you to keep yourself safe from assholes like this by always doing your due diligence. Someone who pulls this kind of shit constantly will eventually lose their license, but many years down the road and after many victims.

ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 8.4: Misconduct: "It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to: [...] (c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation..."

[https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibili...]

If it really was intentional, this very clearly meets the standard, and there's absolutely no requirement that there be damages for the lawyer to be disciplined. I'm not talking about a fraud or malpractice claim, so there's no reason this would involve a lengthy court battle, etc.

Further, Rule 8.3: "(a) A lawyer who knows that another lawyer has committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects, shall inform the appropriate professional authority."

[https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibili...]

Seems to fit as well if the behavior was repeated.

But on the same site:

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibili...

> The ABA is not a lawyer disciplinary agency and has no authority to investigate or act upon complaints filed against lawyers. Each state has its own agency that performs that function in regard to lawyers practicing in that state. Locate your state agency from the Directory of State Disciplinary Agencies.

So you're not dealing with the ABA, but the underfunded and understaffed state board.

Of course you're dealing with your local licensing authority, but they'll all have a rule substantially the same as the model rule cited.

California's state bar even has a formal opinion calling out this or similar behavior:

"Had Seller’s Attorney intentionally created a defective “redline” to surreptitiously conceal the change to the covenant not to compete, his conduct would constitute deceit, active concealment and possibly fraud, in violation of Seller’s Attorney’s ethical obligations."

[https://www.calbar.ca.gov/Portals/0/documents/ethics/Opinion...]