On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 01:35:43PM +0100, Thomas Michael Wanka wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 29 Jan 2002 at 21:43, David Maxwell wrote:
> > A--1--B--2--C.
> > 
> > If you are B, having signed agreement 1 to get service from A, under
> > certain conditions, it seems extraordinarily clear to me that you
> > can't allow C (buying service from you, B) to do things which put you
> > in violation of 1. Either you make sure that agreement 2 is at least
> > as strict as 1, or you've promised to provide something that you
> > cannot provide, and you lose.
> 
> this is only true, as long as the law does not prohibit the terms of 
> agreement 1 to be part of agreement 2. 
> 
> If A is a manufacturer and B is a dealer, agreement 1 can limit the 
> warranty to 6 months or even less. If C is a consumer, the law does 
> not only prohibit any limitation of the minimum 24 months warranty, 
> but also disables any term containing such limitation while the rest 
> of agreement 2 is still valid. 
> 
> Of course it is correct, that if B is a dealer B must know the laws 
> and his risks. 

And since we're talking about internet connectivity, and not cars -
where everyone is at the same logical level..

-- 
David Maxwell, david@vex.net|david@maxwell.net -->
(About an Amiga rendering landscapes) It's not thinking, it's being artistic!
					      - Jamie Woods