PLUG-discuss digest, Vol 1 #2447 - 13 msgs

Tue, 2 Jul 2002 16:34:58 -0400 (EDT)

Thanks, Frank, but dmesg doesn't seem to show everything that
happens at boot.  specifically, mine stops after the entry
showing eth0 is active.  My initialization scripts run after
that.  But I did notice that RH 7.3 lists an option during the
boot process to hit "I" to enter an "interactive mode".  I did
this, and then it allows me to step through.  Using this, I could
see the message, and detemined the script I copied in didn't have
the executable bit set for it.  I fixed this.  Now the script
runs and doesn't log anything.  But vnc still isn't running when
the box comes up.  Any suggestions as to next step?  Thanks! 

>From: Frank Mandato <linuxfrank@keyquest.com>
>As root run dmesg from the command line, that will give you all
>the info
>when you boot your system. You might want to use dmesg -less so
>that you
>can read it one screen at a time.
>FrankM

>On Tue, 2002-07-02 at 08:42, Scott Henderson wrote:
> Downloaded the latest vnc, running it on RH 7.3.  I can run the
> "vncserver" script from the command line and it works, but when
> trying to run it at boot, it fails.  I can't find anything in
> logs about a problem, but as I watch the scroll-by during boot, I
> catch some long complicated error string, something to do with
> permissions.  I can't find any permissions problem.  Anyone seen
> this, or have a suggestion how I can freeze the screen to read
> this message?  Thanks!
> 
> -----------------------------
> Tired of Microsoft Windows?
> Visit http://www.lycoris.com!
> 
> ________________________________________________
> See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
> 
> PLUG-discuss mailing list  -  PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> 
> 

--__--__--

Message: 4
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 09:01:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: Matt Alexander <m@netpro.to>
To: PLUG-AZ <plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us>
Subject: Linux and other online training courses
Reply-To: plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us

A coworker of mine found a site that has some pretty good online training
courses.  He's been going through the Linux courses and they're pretty
good.  There's also courses on quite a few other computer topics.  Go
here:

http://mvulearning.mivu.org/e/eAccount/eAccountCreate.html

Create an account (you just need a valid email address) and you're on your
way.
~M

--__--__--

Message: 5
From: slr <zen2now@qwest.net>
To: plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us, geneous@bigfoot.com
Subject: Re: That 2-headed (monster), err install, last Saturday
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 09:12:37 -0700
Reply-To: plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us

On Monday 01 July 2002 06:49 pm, geneous@bigfoot.com wrote:
> My first attempt at RPMing 1.0.8 called for .lib dependies.  Two
> itertions later RPM was satisfied with the collection of 5 or 6 .rpms I
> downloaded from the ximian site.

ok, it sounds like you handled the deps issue correctly.

> I tried the debug run as suggested.  Unfortunately, the times it got
> as far as bringing up the main window, it instantly gave me this
> message in the shell:
> evolution-shell-WARNING **: CORBA exception
> IDL:GNOME/Evolution/Shell/InvalidURI:1.0 when requesting URI --
> debug=tmp/evolve4.log

is this a type-o in the email or did you forget the / in front of tmp 
--debug=tmp/evolve4.log ? this could be why there was no debug info file 
created. the path should be --debug=/tmp/evolve4.log. i havent personally 
this option, but you have to create an empty file first, as i do not know if 
the --debug option will create the file specified.

i know i asked you not to run evolution as root, for debug reasons. because we 
wanted to see why evolution was failing for your user. but i would like to 
see if evolution will run as root, and if it does start as root then there 
may be a permission issue going on here. 

BTW your /home isnt a NFS share is it?

slr

--__--__--

Message: 6
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 10:04:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: Matt Alexander <m@netpro.to>
To: PLUG-AZ <plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us>
Subject: Forum on Microsoft Enterprise Agreement for Maricopa County
Reply-To: plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us

Below is a message I received from the Deputy CIO of Maricopa County.  I
plan on attending and I hope many of you will let him know you're
attending as well.
~M

From: Paul Allsing - EGOVX <PAllsing@mail.maricopa.gov>

You recently inquired about the County's use of Microsoft products and the
manner in which we license their software.  We appreciate your interest in
the County's technology plans.  To provide a forum in which to discuss our
technology direction and address any questions you may have, we will have
Information Technology staff members available to meet with citizens at
8:30 am on Monday July 8th.  The meeting location will be the County
Administration Building at 301 W. Jefferson in Suite 420.  Please RSVP
your attendance so we can ensure that adequate facilities are available
for the meeting.

Thank you for your inquiry,
Paul Allsing
Deputy CIO
Maricopa County
301 W Jefferson, Suite 420
Phoenix, AZ 85003

--__--__--

Message: 7
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 10:23:49 -0700
To: plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
From: "Kimi A. Adams" <kimi@unitywave.com>
Subject: Fwd: Forum to discuss and answer questions on Enterprise
 Agreement
Reply-To: plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us

--=====================_8499557==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

Okay, here is an answer to my questions about a public forum and the 
approval of the Enterprise Agreement.

PLAN TO BE THERE!!!!  If you can attend, please RSVP to 
PAllsing@mail.maricopa.gov with your name.

Thanks.

Kimi A. Adams, V.P.
Unity Wave, L.L.C.
602-375-5363

>Delivered-To: kimi@unitywave.com
>From: Paul Allsing - EGOVX <PAllsing@mail.maricopa.gov>
>To: "'kimi@unitywave.com'" <kimi@unitywave.com>
>Subject: Forum to discuss and answer questions on Enterprise Agreement
>Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 09:51:21 -0700
>X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55)
>
>You recently inquired about the County's use of Microsoft products and the 
>manner in which we license their software.  We appreciate your interest in 
>the County's technology plans.  To provide a forum in which to discuss our 
>technology direction and address any questions you may have, we will have 
>Information Technology staff members available to meet with citizens at 
>8:30 am on Monday July 8th.  The meeting location will be the County 
>Administration Building at 301 W. Jefferson in Suite 420.  Please RSVP 
>your attendance so we can ensure that adequate facilities are available 
>for the meeting.
>
>Thank you for your inquiry,
>Paul Allsing
>Deputy CIO
>Maricopa County
>301 W Jefferson, Suite 420
>Phoenix, AZ 85003

--=====================_8499557==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<html>
Okay, here is an answer to my questions about a public forum and the
approval of the Enterprise Agreement. 
PLAN TO BE THERE!!!!&nbsp; If you can attend, please RSVP to
PAllsing@mail.maricopa.gov with your name. 
Thanks. 
Kimi A. Adams, V.P. 
Unity Wave, L.L.C. 
602-375-5363 
 
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>Delivered-To:
kimi@unitywave.com 
From: Paul Allsing - EGOVX &lt;PAllsing@mail.maricopa.gov&gt; 
To: &quot;'kimi@unitywave.com'&quot; &lt;kimi@unitywave.com&gt; 
Subject: Forum to discuss and answer questions on Enterprise
Agreement 
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 09:51:21 -0700 
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) 
You recently inquired about the
County's use of Microsoft products and the manner in which we license
their software.&nbsp; We appreciate your interest in the County's
technology plans.&nbsp; To provide a forum in which to discuss our
technology direction and address any questions you may have, we will have
Information Technology staff members available to meet with citizens at
8:30 am on Monday July 8th.&nbsp; The meeting location will be the County
Administration Building at 301 W. Jefferson in Suite 420.&nbsp; Please
RSVP your attendance so we can ensure that adequate facilities are
available for the meeting. 
 
Thank you for your
inquiry, 
Paul Allsing 
Deputy CIO 
Maricopa County 
301 W Jefferson, Suite
420 
Phoenix, AZ 85003
</blockquote></html>

--=====================_8499557==_.ALT--

--__--__--

Message: 8
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 10:50:41 -0700
To: plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
From: "Kimi A. Adams" <kimi@unitywave.com>
Subject: Fwd: Forum to discuss and answer questions on Enterprise
 Agreement
Reply-To: plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us

--=====================_10111764==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

Okay, here is an answer to my questions about a public forum and the 
approval of the Enterprise Agreement.

PLAN TO BE THERE!!!!  If you can attend, please RSVP to 
PAllsing@mail.maricopa.gov with your name.

Thanks.

Kimi A. Adams, V.P.
Unity Wave, L.L.C.
602-375-5363

>Delivered-To: kimi@unitywave.com
>From: Paul Allsing - EGOVX <PAllsing@mail.maricopa.gov>
>To: "'kimi@unitywave.com'" <kimi@unitywave.com>
>Subject: Forum to discuss and answer questions on Enterprise Agreement
>Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 09:51:21 -0700
>X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55)
>
>You recently inquired about the County's use of Microsoft products and the 
>manner in which we license their software.  We appreciate your interest in 
>the County's technology plans.  To provide a forum in which to discuss our 
>technology direction and address any questions you may have, we will have 
>Information Technology staff members available to meet with citizens at 
>8:30 am on Monday July 8th.  The meeting location will be the County 
>Administration Building at 301 W. Jefferson in Suite 420.  Please RSVP 
>your attendance so we can ensure that adequate facilities are available 
>for the meeting.
>
>Thank you for your inquiry,
>Paul Allsing
>Deputy CIO
>Maricopa County
>301 W Jefferson, Suite 420
>Phoenix, AZ 85003

--=====================_10111764==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<html>
Okay, here is an answer to my questions about a public forum and the
approval of the Enterprise Agreement. 
PLAN TO BE THERE!!!!&nbsp; If you can attend, please RSVP to
PAllsing@mail.maricopa.gov with your name. 
Thanks. 
Kimi A. Adams, V.P. 
Unity Wave, L.L.C. 
602-375-5363 
 
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>Delivered-To:
kimi@unitywave.com 
From: Paul Allsing - EGOVX &lt;PAllsing@mail.maricopa.gov&gt; 
To: &quot;'kimi@unitywave.com'&quot; &lt;kimi@unitywave.com&gt; 
Subject: Forum to discuss and answer questions on Enterprise
Agreement 
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 09:51:21 -0700 
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) 
You recently inquired about the
County's use of Microsoft products and the manner in which we license
their software.&nbsp; We appreciate your interest in the County's
technology plans.&nbsp; To provide a forum in which to discuss our
technology direction and address any questions you may have, we will have
Information Technology staff members available to meet with citizens at
8:30 am on Monday July 8th.&nbsp; The meeting location will be the County
Administration Building at 301 W. Jefferson in Suite 420.&nbsp; Please
RSVP your attendance so we can ensure that adequate facilities are
available for the meeting. 
 
Thank you for your
inquiry, 
Paul Allsing 
Deputy CIO 
Maricopa County 
301 W Jefferson, Suite
420 
Phoenix, AZ 85003
</blockquote></html>

--=====================_10111764==_.ALT--

--__--__--

Message: 9
From: "tickticker" <tickticker@cox.net>
To: <plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us>
Subject: Re: Forum to discuss and answer questions on Enterprise  Agreement
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 10:54:29 -0700
Reply-To: plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0027_01C221B6.D6D960D0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I just rsvp'd.  I'm going to drudge up some articles on some linux =
implementations on the local government level and in school districts, =
but not all of them.  Any body attending might want to as well since my =
research won't be long or thorough.  If they are taking this seriously =
then case studies could help. I'm sure this will be discussed ten =
million times this weak.  If positive things can happen here then we =
become the case study for others. :-)

anthony
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Kimi A. Adams=20
  To: plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us=20
  Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 10:23 AM
  Subject: Fwd: Forum to discuss and answer questions on Enterprise =
Agreement

  Okay, here is an answer to my questions about a public forum and the =
approval of the Enterprise Agreement.

  PLAN TO BE THERE!!!!  If you can attend, please RSVP to =
PAllsing@mail.maricopa.gov with your name.

  Thanks.

  Kimi A. Adams, V.P.
  Unity Wave, L.L.C.
  602-375-5363

    Delivered-To: kimi@unitywave.com
    From: Paul Allsing - EGOVX <PAllsing@mail.maricopa.gov>
    To: "'kimi@unitywave.com'" <kimi@unitywave.com>
    Subject: Forum to discuss and answer questions on Enterprise =
Agreement
    Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 09:51:21 -0700=20
    X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55)

    You recently inquired about the County's use of Microsoft products =
and the manner in which we license their software.  We appreciate your =
interest in the County's technology plans.  To provide a forum in which =
to discuss our technology direction and address any questions you may =
have, we will have Information Technology staff members available to =
meet with citizens at 8:30 am on Monday July 8th.  The meeting location =
will be the County Administration Building at 301 W. Jefferson in Suite =
420.  Please RSVP your attendance so we can ensure that adequate =
facilities are available for the meeting.

    Thank you for your inquiry,=20
    Paul Allsing=20
    Deputy CIO=20
    Maricopa County=20
    301 W Jefferson, Suite 420=20
    Phoenix, AZ 85003=20

------=_NextPart_000_0027_01C221B6.D6D960D0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.3211.1700" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I just rsvp'd.&nbsp; I'm going to =
drudge up some=20
articles on some linux implementations on the local government level and =
in=20
school districts, but not all of them.&nbsp; Any body attending might =
want to as=20
well since my research won't be long or thorough.&nbsp; If they are =
taking this=20
seriously then case studies could help. I'm sure this will be discussed =
ten=20
million times this weak.&nbsp; If positive things can happen here then =
we become=20
the case study for others. :-)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>anthony</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:kimi@unitywave.com" title=3Dkimi@unitywave.com>Kimi =
A. Adams</A>=20
  </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
  href=3D"mailto:plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us"=20
  =
title=3Dplug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us>plug-discuss@lists.plug.pho=
enix.az.us</A>=20
  </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, July 02, 2002 =
10:23=20
  AM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Fwd: Forum to discuss =
and answer=20
  questions on Enterprise Agreement</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>Okay, here is an answer to my questions about a public =
forum=20
  and the approval of the Enterprise Agreement.<BR><BR>PLAN TO BE=20
  THERE!!!!&nbsp; If you can attend, please RSVP to <A=20
  =
href=3D"mailto:PAllsing@mail.maricopa.gov">PAllsing@mail.maricopa.gov</A>=
 with=20
  your name.<BR><BR>Thanks.<BR><BR>Kimi A. Adams, V.P.<BR>Unity Wave,=20
  L.L.C.<BR>602-375-5363<BR><BR><BR>
  <BLOCKQUOTE class=3Dcite cite type=3D"cite">Delivered-To: <A=20
    href=3D"mailto:kimi@unitywave.com">kimi@unitywave.com</A><BR>From: =
Paul=20
    Allsing - EGOVX &lt;<A=20
    =
href=3D"mailto:PAllsing@mail.maricopa.gov">PAllsing@mail.maricopa.gov</A>=
&gt;<BR>To:=20
    "'kimi@unitywave.com'" &lt;kimi@unitywave.com&gt;<BR>Subject: Forum =
to=20
    discuss and answer questions on Enterprise Agreement<BR>Date: Tue, 2 =
Jul=20
    2002 09:51:21 -0700 <BR>X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service=20
    (5.5.2655.55)<BR><BR><FONT face=3D"Courier New, Courier" =
size=3D2>You recently=20
    inquired about the County's use of Microsoft products and the manner =
in=20
    which we license their software.&nbsp; We appreciate your interest =
in the=20
    County's technology plans.&nbsp; To provide a forum in which to =
discuss our=20
    technology direction and address any questions you may have, we will =
have=20
    Information Technology staff members available to meet with citizens =
at 8:30=20
    am on Monday July 8th.&nbsp; The meeting location will be the County =

    Administration Building at 301 W. Jefferson in Suite 420.&nbsp; =
Please RSVP=20
    your attendance so we can ensure that adequate facilities are =
available for=20
    the meeting.<BR></FONT><BR><FONT face=3D"Courier New, Courier" =
size=3D2>Thank=20
    you for your inquiry,</FONT> <BR><FONT face=3D"Courier New, Courier" =

    size=3D2>Paul Allsing</FONT> <BR><FONT face=3D"Courier New, Courier" =

    size=3D2>Deputy CIO</FONT> <BR><FONT face=3D"Courier New, Courier"=20
    size=3D2>Maricopa County</FONT> <BR><FONT face=3D"Courier New, =
Courier"=20
    size=3D2>301 W Jefferson, Suite 420</FONT> <BR><FONT=20
    face=3D"Courier New, Courier" size=3D2>Phoenix, AZ 85003</FONT>=20
</BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0027_01C221B6.D6D960D0--

--__--__--

Message: 10
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 13:40:27 -0400
From: Seth Johnson <seth.johnson@realmeasures.dyndns.org>
Organization: Real Measures
To: plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us, m@netpro.to
Subject: On: By Maricopa County rules, Microsoft not Qualified for Government 
 Contracts
Reply-To: plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us

(Forwarded from Committee for Independent Technology
Community Discussion list,
C-FIT_Community@realmeasures.dyndns.org)

-------- Original Message --------
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 20:22:23 -0400
From: Seth Johnson <seth.johnson@RealMeasures.dyndns.org>

(A thread from the Law & Policy of Computer Communications
list, CYBERIA-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM.  Discussion touches on
State and Federal jurisdiction regarding the Commerce and
Contract Clauses, click- and shrinkwrap licenses, UCITA, and
migration to GNU/Linux.  -- Seth)

> From:    George Toft via
> Date:    Sat, 15 Jun 2002 14:27:50 -0400
> 
> [As I read MC1-902.B.3, Microsoft (a Person), having been
> convicted of a violation of Federal Antitrust Statues,
> cannot be a County Contractor.]

(original message snipped. -- Seth)

-------- Original Message --------
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 08:55:07 -0700
From: Bruce Hayden <bhayden@IEEE.ORG>

Apparently my fair county of Maricopa would violate its city
policy if it signed a pending Enterprise agreement with MS.

No matter how nice this sounds, I would suspect that the
reality is that the county is not going to switch to Macs. I
am of two minds here.  MS is a convicted monopolists. But my
tax dollars are at issue here, and I would suspect that
there is already a large installed base of MS software in
county offices.

-------- Original Message --------
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 13:34:34 -0400
From: "Peter D. Junger" <junger@SAMSARA.LAW.CWRU.EDU>

Bruce Hayden writes:

: Apparently my fair county of Maricopa would violate
: its city policy if it signed a pending Enterprise
: agreement with MS.
:
: No matter how nice this sounds, I would suspect that
: the reality is that the county is not going to
: switch to Macs.  I am of two minds here.  MS is a
: convicted monopolists.  But my tax dollars are at
: issue here, and I would suspect that there is
: already a large installed base of MS software in
: county offices.

Surely the solution is not to switch to Apple, but rather to
Linux.  The old installed base, which has been paid for, can
be used as long as people want it.  If for some reason it
should become necessary to run Windows applications on Linux
boxes I understand that WINE is getting pretty good and
there is always Lindows.  In the few cases where Windows is
a necessity, Windows boxes can be purchased from an
independent vendor like Dell, so the county would not be
contracting with Microsoft, or copies of the software could
be purchased directly from CompUSA or some such retailer.

The biggest problem might well be finding a source of new
computers that do not come pre-loaded with MSWindows.  But
the county can always avoid the Microsoft Tax by buying
computers from Walmart and Dell will supply servers that are
pre-loaded with RedHat Linux.

The county would make the perfect plaintiff in an action to
establish that when it acquired title to a computer,
including copies of Microsoft's software from Dell or some
other third party, it is not bound by Microsoft's purported
``clickwrap'' license agreement.  An issue that, by the way,
is purely a matter of state law.

-------- Original Message --------
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 13:11:21 -0400
From: John Noble <jnoble@DGSYS.COM>

At 1:34 PM -0400 6/18/02, Peter D. Junger wrote:
>The county would make the perfect plaintiff in an
>action to establish that when it acquired title to
>a computer, including copies of Microsoft's
>software from Dell or some other third party, it
>is not bound by Microsoft's purported ``clickwrap''
>license agreement.  An issue that, by the way, is
>purely a matter of state law.

Almost nothing is purely a matter of state law anymore. This
case would raise dormant Commerce Clause and Contract Clause
issues. And generally speaking, the Contract Clause scrutiny
gets much more intense when it is a state or local
government that is relying on state law to alter or avoid
its ostensible legal obligations.

-------- Original Message --------
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 09:36:49 -0700
From: Drew Lehman - DigitaEye Designs
<dlehman@DIGITAEYE.COM>

>No matter how nice this sounds, I would suspect that
>the reality is that the county is not going to switch
>to Macs.  I am of two minds here.  MS is a convicted
>monopolists.  But my tax dollars are at issue here,
>and I would suspect that there is already a large
>installed base of MS software in county offices.

  Well, the easy way around this is to sign it for one more
year, and in that time, begin migrating systems to non-MS
platforms.  They can even use Lindows!

-------- Original Message --------
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 14:59:52 -0400
From: "Peter D. Junger" <junger@SAMSARA.LAW.CWRU.EDU>

John Noble writes:

: At 1:34 PM -0400 6/18/02, Peter D. Junger wrote:
: >The county would make the perfect plaintiff in an
: >action to establish that when it acquired title
: >to a computer, including copies of Microsoft's
: >software from Dell or some other third party, it
: >is not bound by Microsoft's purported
: >``clickwrap'' license agreement.  An issue that,
: >by the way, is purely a matter of state law.
:
: Almost nothing is purely a matter of state law
: anymore. This case would raise dormant Commerce
: Clause and Contract Clause issues. And generally
: speaking, the Contract Clause scrutiny gets much
: more intense when it is a state or local
: government that is relying on state law to alter
: or avoid its ostensible legal obligations.

Are you claiming that there is any law other than state law
that governs the formation of contracts?  It there is no
contract, then there can't be a Contracts Clause problem. 
And how could the dormant Commerce Clause be awakened by a
claim that in buying a computer from Dell or a CD from
CompUSA one did not somehow enter into a Contract with one
with whom one has no privity---like Microsoft?

All the stupid and some not so stupid cases involving the
validity of shrinkwrap and clickwrap agreements are federal
cases, yet the issue is purely one of state law.  It seems
to me still that a state municipal corporation would be a
very good plaintiff for a declaratory judgment in a state
court; the only better one would be the State, itself; but
procedurally it would seem rather odd for a state to seek
such declaratory relief, nicht wahr?

-------- Original Message --------
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 17:08:55 -0400
From: John Noble <jnoble@DGSYS.COM>

At 2:59 PM -0400 6/18/02, Peter D. Junger wrote:
>Are you claiming that there is any law other than
>state law that governs the formation of contracts?
>It there is no contract, then there can't be a
>Contracts Clause problem.  And how could the
>dormant Commerce Clause be awakened by a claim
>that in buying a computer from Dell or a CD from
>CompUSA one did not somehow enter into a Contract
>with one with whom one has no privity---like
>Microsoft?
>
>All the stupid and some not so stupid cases
>involving the validity of shrinkwrap and clickwrap
>agreements are federal cases, yet the issue is
>purely one of state law.  It seems to me still
>that a state municipal corporation would be a very
>good plaintiff for a declaratory judgment in a
>state court; the only better one would be the
>State, itself; but procedurally it would seem
>rather odd for a state to seek such declaratory
>relief, nicht wahr?

Wish I knew what 'nicht wahr' means. We agree on where
contract law should be decided, but state law that "impairs"
the enforcement of contracts in interstate commerce has to
suggest Commerce Clause and Contract Clause arguments. I
represent local governments in cases involving regulation of
cable and telecom, and I regularly see arguments that
franchise provisions -- traditionally a matter of state
contract law -- violate the dormant Commerce Clause; and
that local laws which alter or amend the obligations of
franchisees violate the Contract Clause. A California "law"
that imperils the nationwide mass-market distribution system
that has evolved for software -- licenses terms imposed
unilaterally -- would have significant collateral effects
outside of the state. I'm not saying that it necessarily
falls to a dormant Commerce Clause analysis, but it presents
a tempting fucking target. The Contract Clause argument
isn't as strong, but it's there. In any event, there is
little question that Congress could preempt state law in
this area, and I am afraid that the prospect of different
rules in different states for shrinkwraps and clickwraps
would persuade them to do exactly that.

-------- Original Message --------
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 14:09:50 -0700
From: Bruce Hayden <bhayden@IEEE.ORG>

With your Commerce Clause and Contract Clause points below,
is there any way of using such arguments to invalidate UCITA
laws passed by those few states?  After all, the
implementation of UCITA can arguably be seen as ex post
facto changing the terms of software agreements - in
particular taking shrink-wrap out of UCC II and making
various terms that were arguably not enforceable now
enforceable.

John Noble wrote:

> Wish I knew what 'nicht wahr' means. We agree on
> where contract law should be decided, but state
> law that "impairs" the enforcement of contracts in
> interstate commerce has to suggest Commerce Clause
> and Contract Clause arguments. I represent local
> governments in cases involving regulation of cable
> and telecom, and I regularly see arguments that
> franchise provisions -- traditionally a matter of
> state contract law -- violate the dormant Commerce
> Clause; and that local laws which alter or amend
> the obligations of franchisees violate the Contract
> Clause. A California "law" that imperils the
> nationwide mass-market distribution system that has
> evolved for software -- licenses terms imposed
> unilaterally -- would have significant collateral
> effects outside of the state. I'm not saying that
> it necessarily falls to a dormant Commerce Clause
> analysis, but it presents a tempting fucking
> target. The Contract Clause argument isn't as
> strong, but it's there. In any event, there is
> little question that Congress could preempt state
> law in this area, and I am afraid that the prospect
> of different rules in different states for
> shrinkwraps and clickwraps would persuade them to
> do exactly that.

-------- Original Message --------
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 18:01:06 -0400
From: John Noble <jnoble@DGSYS.COM>

Uniform codes probably undergird state law jurisdiction
because they address the "patchwork of regulations" problem
that is often pointed to in support of applying the dormant
Commerce Clause doctrine to preempt local regulation. The
Contract Clause argument might be invoked to protect
pre-existing contract rights that were allegedly abrogated
by enactment of UCITA, but wouldn't be a problem with
respect to contracts/sales after enactment.

At 2:09 PM -0700 6/18/02, Bruce Hayden wrote:
>With your Commerce Clause and Contract Clause points
>below, is there any way of using such arguments to
>invalidate UCITA laws passed by those few states?
>After all, the implementation of UCITA can arguably
>be seen as ex post facto changing the terms of
>software agreements - in particular taking shrink-
>wrap out of UCC II and making various terms that
>were arguably not enforceable now enforceable.

**********************************************************************
For Listserv Instructions, see
http://www.lawlists.net/cyberia
Off-Topic threads:
http://www.lawlists.net/mailman/listinfo/cyberia-ot
Need more help? Send mail to:
Cyberia-L-Request@listserv.aol.com
**********************************************************************

C-FIT Community Discussion List
List Parent: seth.johnson@RealMeasures.dyndns.org
C-FIT Home:  http://RealMeasures.dyndns.org/C-FIT

To Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
------------------------------------------------------------
Send "[Un]Subscribe C-FIT_Community" To
Listserv@RealMeasures.dyndns.org

--__--__--

_______________________________________________
PLUG-discuss mailing list  -  PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

End of PLUG-discuss Digest

-----------------------------
Tired of Microsoft Windows?
Visit http://www.lycoris.com!