On Sun, 25 Apr 1999 10:20:51 -0400, "A.M. Rutkowski"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>At 08:41 AM 4/25/99 , William X. Walsh wrote:
>
>>Am I the only domain holder here that find this clause absolutely
>>unacceptable?
>
>Is it third party indemnification clauses in general that
>you find "unacceptable?" On what basis? You don't think
>people should be able to protect themselves from vicarious
>liabilities?
>
It is the concept that >>I<< may be held liable for making sure that
NSI has not violated any laws by permitting me to register a name.
Regardless of my own legal obligations to ensure that I am not
violating any laws by registering a domain, now I am also responsible
for making sure that NSI is or has not violated any laws by permitting
me to register the name.
Of course....IANAL, but that is exactly how I read it. Now perhaps an
attorney can explain the limitations in such a clause that would not
permit a situation such as this to arise.......
--
William X. Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
General Manager, DSo Internet Services
NSI & Internic news http://www.dso.net/internic/
