RE: latest Version; Chap16 Revision 2

[Peter Kacandes <Peter.Kacandes@EBay.Sun.COM>]

Unfortunately, when working for a large organization like ours, the lawyers have the 
right to put the kabosh on certain things and you won't be able to make progress 
unless you can make them happy.

I don't see why I should waste unneccessary effort on it if I can avoid the problem 
in the first place simply by using different terminology.

When we play golf or tennis, there aren't many legal issues involved in calling 
ourselves partners.

On the other hand, when two legal entities engage in a business transaction, there 
are some potentially serious implications if they imply that there is a partnership 
relation beyond the contractual relationship.

Do you seriously intend to imply that you have no knowledge of implied contracts and 
their implications?

Ignore the legal implications at your own peril. If you want to be a responsible 
corporate officer, I would highly recommend that you read the text "The Managers 
Legal Function." I can dig out the exact reference information, if you like. Lots of 
good examples of how people get themselves and their companies in trouble by 
ignoring legal precedent and case history.

I've had my say. I'm certainly not an authority, so no more from me on this topic. 
Do what you will.

regards

pk

>Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 18:33:21 -0400
>From: David RR Webber <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>
>Subject: RE: latest Version; Chap16 Revision 2
>To: "Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM" <mwsachs@us.ibm.com>
>Cc: Peter Kacandes <Peter.Kacandes@EBay.Sun.COM>, david.burdett@commerceone.com, 
chris.ferris@east.sun.com, ebxml-architecture@lists.ebxml.org, 
bpeat@processsolutions.com, TonyW@EDIFECS.COM, knaujok@pacbell.net, dick@8760.com
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>Content-Disposition: inline
>
>Message text written by "Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM"
>>
>At some point, you just have to accept that other people know better. I
>accept
>what the lawyers say on this topic.
><<<<<<<<<<<
>
>Frankly lawyers live in a totally artificial world of their own arcane
>making.
>
>They should basically serve not drive.  My experience has been
>if you let the lawyers in they ruin your life.  If you stand up to them,
>they back down.
>
>The approach should always be 'here is reality - now make your
>legal mumbo jumbo conform to this'.   Legal anything is about
>conformance, and accepted practice.
>
>This e-anything is so totally new there is very little precedence
>and thus this is especially true.
>
>I'm not buying that the EDI world has never heard of trading partners.
>
>Of course a trading partner is totally different from a business partner.
>What about tennis partners and golf partners?  Are we not allowed
>to use those terms either because we might be signing up to
>something we did not intend?
>
>I agree with Marty - let's engage with the right group of lawyers to
>get our needs address - not let them bully us around.
>
>DW.

Peter Kacandes

Application Planning, Architecture & Strategy	phone number: 	X36529
WWOPS IT/Supply Chain Management		email:	peter.kacandes@ebay