From: Jeffrey Epstein <[email protected]> To: Steven Sinofsky Subject: Re: contract Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2013 20:43:34 +0000 You can respond to their comments with abandon sobibdo not see a real issue On Wednesday, June 5, 2013, Steven Sinofsky wrote: Section 2... a lot of section 6 hinges on this section which is that payment should be made unless the agreement is "materially" breached AND there is failure to cure. Defining what materially breached means in the context of section 6 is tricky and curing a vague concept of disparagement is tricky. There's an easy argument of "cannot unring the bell" that gets made. What I worry about is basically not getting paid and then having to sue. 6b. This reads like a permanent restraining order on talking about Microsoft. Hard to see how I could write a book or talk about Microsoft ever. This is not good. The end date for everything was supposed to be 12 months. This vaguely extends it to jan 2016 but then has a clause that seems to on forever. 6c. switches to first person weirdly "me" 14. this gives 21 days for me to sign. we should understand the SEC regulation. is this business days? if the comp committee meets on the 12 then it is July before I have to sign assuming perfect execution on their part. Section 6 is very messy for me and PR. It sets up a "gotcha" dynamic especially if I work at another company that matters or just say anything in public. The press could write something I say as negative and then that becomes evidence of material breach. Then they just don't pay. I have no recourse. I know you think this will sit on a shelf but section 6 is currently the rest of my life. Sent from Windows Mail on Surface RT I @stevesi The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of Jeffrey Epstein Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of t