Categories
corporate buzz

MF Global Contracts

MF Global Holdings Ltd. recently announced its Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing. I’ve added MF Global contracts to the site. Here is the latest Jon Corzine employment agreement.

The most curious agreement was a Car Parking Agreement between J.P. Morgan Markets Limited and MF Global. At first, I thought a car must have been an acronym for some complex financial product. After all, it’s a 62 page(!) agreement. But, it just covers the parking of 15 private motor cars at Canary Wharf Estate. Still, 62 pages!!!

Categories
employment agreement

Hewlett-Packard Meg Whitman Employment Agreement

HP recently filed its Offer Letter between Hewlett-Packard Company and Margaret (Meg) C. Whitman. Unlike previous CEOs, such as Carly Fiorina (Base Salary of $1,000,000), Mark Hurd (Base Salary of $1,400,000), and Leo Apotheker (Base Salary of $1,200,000), Meg has an initial base salary of only $1 per year. However, she will be eligible for a target bonus of $2,400,000, so this is not an entirely pro bono affair.

HP has an executive stock ownership guideline that requires to CEO to hold HP shares with a value of five times salary. However, with a initial base salary of $1 per year, this requirement would be meaningless. For Meg, her “guideline will be based on a notional base salary of $1,200,000 instead of [her] actual salary of $1.”

Categories
employment agreement

Apple Finally Files 8-K on the Resignation of Steve Jobs

Two days later:

On August 24, 2011:

  • Steve Jobs resigned as Chief Executive Officer of Apple Inc. (“Apple”). Mr. Jobs will continue to serve as an employee;
  • The Board of Directors (the “Board”) appointed Mr. Jobs as Chairman of the Board;
  • The Board promoted Chief Operating Officer Timothy D. Cook to Chief Executive Officer; and
  • The Board appointed Mr. Cook to the Board to fill an existing vacancy.

In connection with Mr. Cook’s appointment as Chief Executive Officer, the Board awarded Mr. Cook 1,000,000 restricted stock units. Fifty percent of the restricted stock units are scheduled to vest on each of August 24, 2016 and August 24, 2021, subject to Mr. Cook’s continued employment with Apple through each such date.

Here’s the Restricted Stock Award Agreement between Apple Inc. and Steve Jobs from March of 2003, which CNNMoney curiously failed to consider. The restricted stock grant to Steve Jobs was for 5,000,000 shares. At the $14.95 closing price on March 19, 2003, the grant was worth $74,750,000. The stock split 2:1 in February 2005. The 5,000,000 share grant is worth $3,835,800,000 today–that’s 3.8 billion. And, Steve earned every dollar of it.

Categories
mergers and acquisitions

Google Motorola Mobility Merger Agreement

The Merger Agreement between Google Inc. and Motorola Mobility Holdings, Inc. has raised the stakes in the iOS and Android battle for smartphone dominance. Will the acquisition prove as disastrous as the HP and Palm union? We will soon see if the Google only wanted the patents or whether it will be steaming full speed ahead in the hardware business.

Categories
ipo

Skullcandy Contracts

Skullcandy Inc. contracts from their Form S-1 Registration Statement. Featured contracts include an International Distribution Agreement between Skullcandy Inc. and 57 North AB.

Teavana Holdings Inc. contracts are available as well.

Categories
ipo

Zillow IPO

Zillow, a real estate information company, is going public. Their website is best known for their “Zestimate,” which provides a home value and rental estimate. I’ve added Zillow Inc. contracts to the website.

On a completely different note, this would be the oddest exhibit I’ve found included in a security filing. “Lydia Slotnick Unplugged” script. Obviously, not from Zillow.

Categories
ipo licensing agreement

Pandora Media IPO

Pandora filed some interesting contracts, including a Web Site Music Agreement with BMI.

Categories
litigation

Transportation Agreement

A Transportation Agreement between General Freight Services, Inc. and Amazon Fulfillment Services, Inc. appears as Exhibit A in a lawsuit between Amazon.com, Inc., Amazon Fulfillment Service, Inc. and Coyote Logistics, LLC.

Categories
ipo

Renren IPO

Last month, Renren Inc. (人人) filed a registration statement in preparation for its initial public offering of American depository shares (ADSs). I’ve indexed the Renren Inc. contracts from their security filings. Renren operates a social networking platform in China that some liken to Facebook, which is banned in China.

So, how will Renren get around the problems that plague Facebook? Take a look at the disclosures in Renren’s Form F-1. How frightening that “[s]ubstantially all of the content published on [Renren] is manually screened by employees” and prohibited content will be reported to the relevant governmental authority. I’ve bolded the really interesting portions below:

Regulations on Internet Content Services

National security considerations are an important factor in the regulation of internet content in China. The National People’s Congress, the PRC’s national legislature, has enacted laws with respect to maintaining the security of internet operations and internet content. According to these laws, as well as the Internet Measures, violators may be subject to penalties, including criminal sanctions, for internet content that:

  • opposes the fundamental principles stated in the PRC constitution;
  • compromises national security, divulges state secrets, subverts state power or damages national unity;
  • harms the dignity or interests of the state;
  • incites ethnic hatred or racial discrimination or damages inter-ethnic unity;
  • undermines the PRC’s religious policy or propagates heretical teachings or feudal superstitions;
  • disseminates rumors, disturbs social order or disrupts social stability;
  • disseminates obscenity or pornography, encourages gambling, violence, murder or fear or incites the commission of a crime;
  • insults or slanders a third party or infringes upon the lawful rights and interests of a third party; or
  • is otherwise prohibited by law or administrative regulations.

ICP service operators are required to monitor their websites. They may not post or disseminate any content that falls within these prohibited categories and must remove any such content from their websites. The PRC government may shut down the websites of ICP license holders that violate any of the above-mentioned content restrictions, order them to suspend their operations, or revoke their ICP licenses.

To comply with these PRC laws and regulations, we have adopted internal procedures to monitor content displayed on our website, including a team of employees dedicated to screening and monitoring content uploaded on our website and removing inappropriate or infringing content. However, due to the large amount of user uploaded content, we may not be able to identify all videos, photos or other content that may violate relevant laws and regulations.

To the extent that PRC regulatory authorities find any content displayed on or through our websites objectionable, they may require us to limit or eliminate the dissemination or availability of such content on our websites or impose penalties, including the revocation of our operating licenses or the suspension or shutdown of our online operations. In addition, the costs of compliance with these regulations may increase as the volume of content and users on our website increases. See “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Business and Industry—Content posted or displayed on our websites may be found objectionable by PRC regulatory authorities and may subject us to penalties and other administrative actions.”

Regulations on Information Security and Censorship

Internet content in China is also regulated and restricted from a State security standpoint. The National People’s Congress, China’s national legislative body, enacted a law on December 28, 2000, as amended on August 28, 2009, that makes it unlawful to: (i) gain improper entry into a computer or system of strategic importance; (ii) disseminate politically disruptive information; (iii) leak State secrets; (iv) spread false commercial information; or (v) infringe intellectual property rights.

The Ministry of Public Security has promulgated measures on December 16, 1997 that prohibit the use of the internet in ways which, among other things, result in a leakage of State secrets or the distribution of socially destabilizing content. Socially destabilizing content includes any content that incites defiance or violations of PRC laws or regulations or subversion of the PRC government or its political system, spreads socially disruptive rumors or involves cult activities, superstition, obscenities, pornography, gambling or violence. State secrets are defined broadly to include information concerning PRC national defense, state affairs and other matters as determined by the PRC authorities.

On December 13, 2005, the Ministry of Public Security promulgated Provisions on Technological Measures for Internet Security Protection, or the Internet Protection Measures. The Internet Protection Measures require all ICP operators to keep records of certain information about its users (including user registration information, log-in and log-out time, IP address, content and time of posts by users) for at least 60 days and submit the above information as required by laws and regulations. The ICP operators must regularly update information security and censorship systems for their websites with local public security authorities, and must also report any public dissemination of prohibited content. If an ICP operator violates these measures, the PRC government may revoke its ICP license and shut down its websites.

In addition, the State Secrecy Bureau has issued provisions authorizing the blocking of access to any website it deems to be leaking State secrets or failing to comply with the relevant legislation regarding the protection of State secrets.

As Qianxiang Tiancheng, Qianxiang Wangjing and Beijing Nuomi are all ICP operators, they are subject to the laws and regulations relating to information security. To comply with these laws and regulations, they have completed the mandatory security filing procedures with the local public security authorities, regularly update their information security and content-filtering systems with newly issued content restrictions, and maintain records of users’ information as required by the relevant laws and regulations. They have also taken measures to delete or remove links to content that to their knowledge contains information violating PRC laws and regulations. Substantially all of the content published on our websites is manually screened by employees who are dedicated to screening and monitoring content published on our website and removing prohibited content. All of the other content, primarily consisting of comments posted by users, is first screened by our filtering systems and content containing prohibited words or images is manually screened by our employees. We believe that with these measures in place, no prohibited content under PRC information security laws and regulations should have been publicly disseminated through our website in the past. However, due to the significant amount of content published on our website by our users on a daily basis, if any prohibited content is publicly disseminated in the future and we become aware of it, we will report it to the relevant governmental authority. We believe these measures are generally in compliance with the relevant laws and regulations.

If, despite the precautions, we fail to identify and prevent illegal or inappropriate content from being displayed on or through our websites, we may be subject to liability. In addition, these laws and regulations are subject to interpretation by the relevant authorities, and it may not be possible to determine in all cases the types of content that could result in liability. To the extent that PRC regulatory authorities find any content displayed on or through our websites objectionable, they may require us to limit or eliminate the dissemination or availability of such content or impose penalties, including the revocation of our operating licenses or the suspension or shutdown of our online operations. In addition, the costs of compliance with these regulations may increase as the volume of content and users on our website increases. See “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Business and Industry—Content posted or displayed on our websites may be found objectionable by PRC regulatory authorities and may subject us to penalties and other administrative actions.”

Categories
mergers and acquisitions

Berkshire Hathaway – Lubrizol Merger Agreement

The Lubrizol Corporation recently filed the Agreement and Plan of Merger between Berkshire Hathaway Inc. and itself. The agreement does contain a forum selection clause. So, do you think that the forum selection clause designates Nebraska where Berkshire Hathaway Inc. is located or Ohio where The Lubrizol Corporation is located?

Here’s the answer:

Each of the parties hereto (i) consents to submit itself to the personal jurisdiction of the state and federal courts of the State of Ohio in the event that any dispute arises out of this Agreement or any of the Transactions, (ii) agrees that it will not attempt to deny or defeat such personal jurisdiction by motion or other request for leave from any such court and (iii) agrees that it will not bring any action relating to this Agreement or any of the Transactions in any other court. Each of the parties hereto irrevocably and unconditionally waives (and agrees not to plead or claim) any objection to the laying of venue of any dispute arising out of this Agreement or any of the Transactions in the state and federal courts of the State of Ohio, or that any such dispute brought in any such court has been brought in an inconvenient forum.