Truely remarkable, don't you think?
Thanks for the "heads up"; especially for herewith contacting the (too) few
"senior" "authorities" of companies who ply these halls, who can enlist their
own corporation's "champions" (read lawyears"(sic)/time-billing-automatons)
to protect and defend their rights from such a "grab".
I spoke a warning of this joust of lawyers vs. "us" some time ago. There is
some activity afoot to effect an advance of more recent decisions by the
courts that seem to have proceeded from those same courts having been
"stacked" by the political successes of conglomerate groups via PACS, etc.,
that have been having their way altering our way (read: our rights have
gotten "inefficient for a/the/some +"society"'s progress").
PRESTO! CHANGO! POOF! The "burden (read: "expense") of proof" has been
shifted onto you and yours, via VERY recent (as opposed to "tested by time"
and melded with "Common" Law) "unhearalded" (sic) "litigation" (last pair of
quotes very much intended here! Just try and research this issue; of "things"
that "employ" the "finer" points of "rules" of "what is to be recorded and
made available to the body public").
Thus, they no linger (sic) care about details like "signatures", now that you
cannot likely afford the $, time and trouble to prevail. Even if you do,
you'll be a very rare exception, and certainly won't be "seen" as someone who
should be apologized to or even acknowledged (actually, they'll want to
record as little information about your not having actually made any
"contract" whatsoever, as they can).
BTW:
As to Mitsubishi's recent confession; think damage control: NOT how much will
it cost; how much did it save, shifting (no sifting!) costs; since the remedy
imposed will never {politically) put that many jobs even at risk. After the
Ford/Firestone revelation, was Mitsubishi's timing great? Now that any
treble damage sums are far too great to possibly be paid, the price will be a
lot less; treble damages will be mitigated away (least harm to "society").
Expect more apologies to try to catch this wave. It's the first thing to
come along to apply-to/thwart the treble damage vengeful jury problem nicely.
BTTP (Back To The Point):
In my warning I proceeded from the software giants (read MS's unpaid-for
copies of Windows, etc.) "shrinkwrap" licensing agreements and the invented
illusion of conclusion, hence the "submit" gambit. That battle was, I seem
to recall, not even fought to the finish. The "outcome" was "effected" as
the burden of proof switcheroo, which was all that was necessary to establish
a few precedents in the lowest courts (thus you may observe the inclusion
also of statements claimed to substantiate some "submit"ing to "arbitraitors"
(sic)), so that such "judges" could "do what's right - over all (us)", quick
and easy, thus now you need some real money to undo what just flew by.
You just "submit"ed to having your day in court turn out to be theirs, on
your tab. Since you pay their expenses (everyones!; really!), what do you
think the time-billers will be thinking next?
Just a rant?
Watch yours,
Jim Cunningham
P.S.
For over a century, Law Schools taught "Contracts: 101" and spent that
efforts vigor on the finer points of "What's a contract? What's not".
"shrinkwrap licensing" constitutes changing the deal after the parties
"conclude" the deal. It's ever so post-"consideration" (the point at which
negotiation is acknowledged as concluded by, and as the contract's "birth
certificate"). Consult Richard Stallman's work on same for additional issues
and insight re: the public/greater good, as well.
P.P.S.
The beauty part of shifting the "burden of proof" is:
they don't have to go for the
"yeah, we'll certainly lose the case on "the law", but we'll win it on
appeal, or even better, that expense will force them to accept (submit) a
settlement (counter offer duty)";
you do;
you won't;
cause you can't cover the action;
period.
What trial.
What "case".
The courts are gonna love this effect on their docket. They can get back to
the time honored tradition of a "golf day", like the doctors and even the
dentists.
They've "seized (truly) the high ground and negotiate from strength", quitely.
No hubbub, bub.
The power of trans-national/BIGGEST "entities" is shifted into hyper-grab,
with zero fanfare. The same tactics will be used to virtual-disenfranchise
minority stock holders as well, so being an employee/stockholder won't help.
You will never get to stay a "real" stakeholder. Power is just to damn
attractive. The power to burden the opponent is winning without fighting,
and the funny stuff that's being effected by metrics will promote the
coupling of greed with that tactic as well.
Yeah, ... ... ..., so? What's yer point?
The shrinkwrap grab's nose in inside the tent! Sleep on?
------ XML/edi Group Discussion List ------
Homepage = http://www.XMLedi-Group.org
Unsubscribe = send email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Leave the subject and body of the message blank
Questions/requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To receive only one message per day (digest format)
send the following message to [EMAIL PROTECTED],
(leave the subject line blank)
digest xmledi-group your-email-address
To join the XML/edi Group complete the form located at:
http://www.xmledi-group.org/xmledigroup/mail1.htm
