[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> You read it; you negotiated; you settled on
> agreeable terms. Seems reasonable.
>
> May seem silly to you. Apparently it wasn't
> silly to them and therefore, you negotiated.
> That is standard business; you took exception
> and they wanted your service enough to accept
> your exception. I see nothing FUDDY about that.
> I see a mature business.
>
> If you had told them to take a flying leap,
> I would doubt your business acumen. Had you
> signed up to an unacceptable requirement, I
> would doubt your business acumen. Had you not
> agreed to indemnify your own work, I would
> doubt your honor. All I require is that
> those making offers to my company do the same.
> That includes Microsoft, Red Hat, or any other
> vendor providing us tools.
>
> You are fudding with extreme examples. Indemnity
> is not a shiny new word. What is boggling is
> how many here didn't even understand the meaning
> of it, and how many others aren't willing to
> go forward with discussions for means of mitigating
> the risks made very evident by IBM vs SCO, the
> EULA, the GPL, and so on.
>
> That makes me doubt their commitment to this
> business and to the shared welfare of those
> that must work together. If you have a problem
> with that, we must agree to disagree respecfully
> or not.
My annoyance is very simple: I haven't googled, but I don't think I remember
hearing you ever mention "indemnity" in this forum before about a month ago.
At that time you posted a crowing and strangely-reasoned post basically
intimating that those pimple-faced OSS commies would finally face oblivion at
the hands of the brand new dragon labelled "indemnity". Since that time, you
have thrown the word into every discussion on this forum, instantly turning,
say, on-topic discussions about XML and semantics into off-topic screeds
against "adolescent" OSS pinkos. It's enough to drive one to drink, then
delurk.
I admit that I too ran off-topic by posting my own incidental real-world
example of how indemnity is but a quotidian issue in the usual negotiation of
commerce. I was hoping that by helping take some of the buzz off the word
that there was some chance that we would lose interest and get back to XML
development. Silly on my part.
> There are no semantics in markup except what
> we put there in the running code. It is the
> relationship of the markup and what it can
> provide as proof and the running code which
> is indemnified on its own merit that we
> should explore. Perhaps we will discover
> that there are ways and means to manage the
> risks in common and by more honorable means
> than EULA and GPL.
Wow. Far out. Since I can't make any sense at all of this, I think that's my
cue to step out of the discussion.
--
Uche Ogbuji Fourthought, Inc.
http://uche.ogbuji.net http://4Suite.org http://fourthought.com
XML Data Bindings in Python, Part 2 - http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/07/02/py-xm
l.html
Introducing Examplotron - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-x
mptron/
Charming Jython - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jython.h
tml
Python, Web services, and XSLT - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/libr
ary/ws-pyth13/
A custom-fit career in app development - http://www.adtmag.com/article.asp?id=7
744
|
