Subject:
|
Re: neither sponsored nor endorsed by the LEGO Company? (was : Re: an update -- and an apology)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.dear-lego
|
Date:
|
Wed, 3 May 2000 21:34:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
339 times
|
| |
|
|
Kevin Loch <kloch@opnsys.com> wrote in message news:Fu03yK.IxJ@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes:
> > That's absolutely correct, Eric.
> >
> > In addition, the amount of the donation ($5,000 USD) is so tiny that it • could
> > not even remotely be thought of as sponsorship or financial support • unless
> > LEGO sends these sorts of things often and regularly, which I certainly
> > wouldn't count on without some sort of binding agreement.
> >
> > --Todd
>
>
> Todd is right IMO. "Sponsorship" in the disclaimer means
> a formal contractual relationship, and usually accompanies significant
> financial support.
"usually " "significant"
To very vague words. To somebody who is new to LUGNet or not aware of this
thread, the welcome could be argued as being misleading.
> Since that is not the case here,
$5k is 500 times to normal suggested membership fee.
Scott A
> the traditional
> disclaimer is appropriate (and in fact still required). That said,
> I think the acknowledgement letter was written as if you wish you
> haddn't received the gift. If their cover letter made it clear
> that it was a gift with no strings attached, then a simple "thank you"
> letter would have been more appropriate IMHO. Lawyers are only helpful • when
> you really need them.
I;llkeep my opinion on lawyers to myself :-)
Scott A
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
19 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
