🚀 go-pugleaf

In Article <1993Jan8.160909.16042@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu> "rick@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu (Richard Warner)" says:
> wcn@cs.brown.edu (Wen-Chun Ni) writes:
> >In article <1993Jan8.002640.5554@gandalf.UMCS.Maine.EDU> jurlwin@gandalf.UMCS.Maine.EDU (Jeff Urlwin) writes:
> >  <stuffs from Robert and Brian deleted>
 
  [Stuff Deleted]
 
> In this case he was more than a developer, he was an independent 
> businessperson.  One of the first things taught in business schools is
> that everything should be put in writing.  This was HIS failure, not
> IBM's.  Without a written agreement, he has no leg to stand on.
 
  I think with the loss of $100K and an OS/2 developer, there's plenty 
  of blame to go around.   On Bob's part, that's a huge risk.   Before
  I gave up my day job (hey, it ain't much, but it pays the bills :-)
  I think I would have hired a lawyer to form a contract.   But, unless
  IBM is restricted by M$ on providing the driver, they should come
  across with the code.   And if they are restricted by an M$ copyright,
  they should say so.
 
  From what little I remember from my Business law class, if there are
  other "uninterested" parties who can corroborate the existence of the
  verbal contract, Bob may have a good chance in court.   If not, and IBM
  denies the existence of a contract, Bob's lost.   If an employee of IBM,
  acting on IBM's behalf, commits to providing something, I *believe*
  that they could be required to provide it (he acted as an agent of IBM).
 
  At any rate, IBM should provide the code to Bob in order to avoid the
  ill will which will result from this, and to help make a nice new
  function available to users.

  Gene Mangum
  Univ of Michigan Hospitals