Maybe I'm a little slow on the draw, but I've just now realized that we've come full circle, in a strange sort of way.
8 to 10 years ago the discussions were dominated by Karl D(1), where *everything* was defined as to whether is was "actionable" or not. Now the discussions are dominated by many people, acting like Karl D, where their view is solely based on whether their contract supports either what they do or don't do. -mark (1) Actual name not shown to avoid being sued.
