This chapter examines interfirm communications that many, sometimes implicitly, take to be central in defining the law's concept of agreement. The core problem with making the existence of communications determinative is that communication is ubiquitous, among other reasons because most actions, certainly including the sale of a goods item at a price, themselves communicate pertinent information. If the use of communications constitutes agreement, then pure interdependence (indeed, less) would trigger liability. Therefore, if agreement is to depend on communications and yet be more restrictive, it is necessary to specify some subcategory of communications, perhaps based on the mode of communication or its content, the use of which is necessary and sufficient to constitute agreement.
Princeton Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.