| |||||||||||||
Project Harmony decloaksProject Harmony decloaksPosted Apr 12, 2011 14:08 UTC (Tue) by clugstj (subscriber, #4020)Parent article: Project Harmony decloaks
I wouldn't call this "decloaking", when the author of the agreements is a shady character who won't even say who paid him to write them. This isn't really a good way to build trust.
(Log in to post comments)
Project Harmony decloaks Posted Apr 13, 2011 0:09 UTC (Wed) by gdt (subscriber, #6284) [Link] Most lawyers are guns for hire, that doesn't necessarily say anything about their character. I can't imagine any lawyer volunteering the name on a cheque used to pay for their work, they would see that very much as part of lawyer-client privileged material and would want to be forced by a court order. However, there is no reason why Project Harmony itself could not reveal its sources of funding and its brief to its lawyer.
Project Harmony decloaks Posted Apr 13, 2011 12:26 UTC (Wed) by clugstj (subscriber, #4020) [Link]
"Most lawyers are guns for hire, that doesn't necessarily say anything about their character."
I would say that that says everything about their character.
Project Harmony decloaks Posted Apr 15, 2011 15:44 UTC (Fri) by butlerm (subscriber, #13312) [Link] I would say that that says everything about their character.That's a pretty credible claim, if you, yourself, abstain indefinitely from ever working for another party as an agent, employee, or independent contractor. Nice world to live in where you have no fiduciary responsibility to anyone else. Master of your own ship, captain of your own soul - no one can tell you what to do. So there.
Project Harmony decloaks Posted Apr 27, 2011 9:24 UTC (Wed) by wvholst (guest, #67089) [Link]
As someone who provided input to the various authors of the agreements, I find this rather offensive. As far as I understand it none of the contributors to the agreements are 'shady' characters.
|
|||||||||||||