I have to believe, as you said, that the contract provides they can recast Kang if the agreement is terminated for a violation of the morals clause. But while I’m a contract lawyer in the boring kind not the Hollywood-jazz-hands-movie-star kind.
Is that definitely what The Weekly Planet reported? I listen every week, and I can't guarantee that my attention and recall are always 100%, but I only remember them _speculating_ that a clause preventing the recasting of Kang was _one possibility._
A fellow weekly wackadoo! Glad to meet you Dorian. I tried to find a link on CZcams of the clip but I could not. However I found a reel from instagram of them talking about it. Hopefully this works. instagram.com/reel/Cz6JWj9MAci/?
I have to believe, as you said, that the contract provides they can recast Kang if the agreement is terminated for a violation of the morals clause. But while I’m a contract lawyer in the boring kind not the Hollywood-jazz-hands-movie-star kind.
Nice! It’s good to hear from a big time contract lawyer to confirm our suspicions!
Is that definitely what The Weekly Planet reported? I listen every week, and I can't guarantee that my attention and recall are always 100%, but I only remember them _speculating_ that a clause preventing the recasting of Kang was _one possibility._
A fellow weekly wackadoo! Glad to meet you Dorian. I tried to find a link on CZcams of the clip but I could not. However I found a reel from instagram of them talking about it. Hopefully this works. instagram.com/reel/Cz6JWj9MAci/?
@@garnerbrothers Yep, you got it right. I missed that bit. Thanks for the reply and for clearing up my misunderstanding (and for the welcome)!
If the instagram link doesn’t work you can just go to episode 505 and start at the 23:50 mark. That will get you right to the point M8!