[AccessD] Time for More Legal Discussion - Oh Boy

DWUTKA at marlow.com DWUTKA at marlow.com
Tue Jan 25 11:27:01 CST 2005


88 Silverado with the paint peeling on the hood.  I'm a redneck programmer.

If your screen saver has a scope tracking a deer....you might be a red neck
programmer.

If you write Class Objects with properties such as 'Didjaeatyet'....you
might be a red neck programmer.

If you use bound forms ..... 

Just kidding.  I know it's Tuesday, but I've had an extended long
week....just playing around during one of the raw breathers I've been able
to take!

Drew

-----Original Message-----
From: Nicholson, Karen [mailto:cyx5 at cdc.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 5:26 AM
To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
Subject: RE: [AccessD] Time for More Legal Discussion - Oh Boy


An escort?  I thought all of us rich programmers had Hummers and
Beemers.

-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of John W. Colby
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 3:20 PM
To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'
Subject: RE: [AccessD] Time for More Legal Discussion - Oh Boy


It is only your problem if you claimed it was possible.  I tried to
drive my
Escort to the moon.  It is definitely NOT Ford's fault I failed to get
there.

At some point you have to say "look, that doesn't work - and I never
claimed
it did."

John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com 

Contribute your unused CPU cycles to a good cause:
http://folding.stanford.edu/

-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Charlotte
Foust
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 3:05 PM
To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
Subject: RE: [AccessD] Time for More Legal Discussion - Oh Boy


Concurrent connections isn't *necessarily* the problem.  We have a
client
who insists on trying to run our app over a WAN where it can take an
hour to
load a report!  That isn't a concurrency problem in our app, it's a
bandwidth problem in their WAN.  It's still "our" problem.

Charlotte Foust


-----Original Message-----
From: John W. Colby [mailto:jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com] 
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 10:45 AM
To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'
Subject: RE: [AccessD] Time for More Legal Discussion - Oh Boy


Concurrent connections is not the problem.  I have a database running
just
fine with about 45 connections (bound forms no less).

John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com 

Contribute your unused CPU cycles to a good cause:
http://folding.stanford.edu/

-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Nicholson,
Karen
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 1:26 PM
To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
Subject: RE: [AccessD] Time for More Legal Discussion - Oh Boy


Yeah, but the guy paid over $10,000 for the system.  He wants that back.
What can you do when Microsoft claims that Access can handle 255
concurrent
database connections at one time?  We all know that is just bird-poopey.

-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Brett
Barabash
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 1:13 PM
To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
Subject: RE: [AccessD] Time for More Legal Discussion - Oh Boy


Karen,
First of all, if the total loss is $3000, this is clearly a small claims
court issue.  A civil court won't hear a case under $5K, and it wouldn't
be
worth it for the client to pay a lawyer to recover such a small amount.
Of
course, explaining dumbing down the evidence for a small claims court is
no
small task.

Secondly, there is the legal concept of mitigation of loss.  The client
will
be burdened with the task of proving that they didn't know about the bug
six
months ago.  If it can be proven that they did know about it and said
nothing, the actual amount of damage will be greatly reduced.

And finally, if this can be proven to be a Microsoft technology issue
(security flaw, data corruption bug, etc.), and it is documented
(knowledgebase, 3rd party journals, etc.), it should be easy for the
developer to prove that they were not at fault.  I have gone down this
exact
road with a MS solution provider for way more than $3000.  After we
reviewed
the facts, it was clear to us that the problem was with the product, not
the
consultant.  So sue Bill instead (oh, and good luck with all that!).
 

-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Nicholson,
Karen
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 11:13 AM
To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com
Subject: [AccessD] Time for More Legal Discussion - Oh Boy

What happens when a program is written for a customer using Microsoft
Technology, and the Microsoft Technology is bad - its data, its logic.
It
has cost this one client, he claims, $3000 in lost revenue and he wants
the
payment for the system refunded plus damages.  The user never notified
said
programmer that there was a problem even though they have been using it
for
a good six months.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------
The information in this email may contain confidential information that 
is legally privileged. The inform

recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient(s), you 
are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the
taking 
of any action in regard to the content of this email is strictly
prohibited.
If 
transmission is incorrect, unclear, or incomplete, please notify the
sender 
immediately. The authorized recipient(s) of this information is/are
prohibited 
from disclosing this information to any other party and is/are required
to 
destroy the information after its stated need has been fulfilled.

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifies and with authority, states them to be
the
views of Tappe Construction Co.

This footer also confirms that this email message has been scanned for
the
presence of computer viruses.Scanning of this message and addition of
this
footer is performed by SurfControl E-mail Filter software in conjunction
with virus detection software.

-- 
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
-- 
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com



-- 
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
-- 
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com



-- 
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
-- 
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com



More information about the AccessD mailing list