Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!lll-winken!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnews!cbnewsm!jfischer
From: jfischer@cbnewsm.att.com (james.fischer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.3b1
Subject: Re: Ethics: Software Sale Horror Story
Message-ID: <1991Feb6.220310.16297@cbnewsm.att.com>
Date: 6 Feb 91 22:03:10 GMT
References: <2@liltyke.CHI.IL.US>
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 27


	If an agreement was reached as to price, then the logistics of
	shipping the software would have been subject to the same level
	of examination by both parties.

	Are you sure that the recipient of the software was on the
	same wavelength?  The entire situation might be a misunderstanding...

	Did you save your e-mail on the subject (both ways!)?  It would
	seem to be a good idea to review the e-mail and check the clarity
	of the tacit ageement between the parties.

	The lack of follow-up on the return of software could be oversight.
	If I was laid off, quite a few things would be left undone, while
	I was trying to get work.

	The "bounce" could have been legit - you have no idea what the
	actual bounce-back looks like until you send mail to the same
	machine with a KNOWN bogus user-id (like "mickey.mouse").

	To slander another person on the net without giving consideration
	to the types of concerns mentioned above is not a good idea.

	Someday, slander on the net will be the subject of a civil suit.
	Don't be the first.
	Try again to get your software back.