[kwlug disc.] trixbox as spyware - and worse?

[unsolicited]

Chris Frey wrote, On 12/20/2007 10:12 AM:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 04:29:52PM -0500, unsolicited wrote:
>> Chris Frey wrote, On 12/18/2007 3:38 AM:
>>> On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 03:06:23AM -0500, unsolicited wrote:
>>>> My personal pet peeves of such ... insurance policies and credit card
>>>> member agreements.
>>> Side note: you're allowed to stroke out any part of an agreement that you
>>> don't like before you sign it, including stuff at the bank.
>> Says who?
> 
> Basic contract law.  Both parties have to agree for a contract to be valid.

OK, of course. BUT - by stroking it out you've just indicated you
don't agree, and you're one of the parties. Therefore ...

Offer and acceptance says, they made an offer, you made a
counter-offer, and they accepted. Or a duly authorized 'officer' accepted.

	It probably does count, but morally it shouldn't ... frequently such
have a clause buried within the mumbo jumbo that says only an
authorized agent may make changes, and the person you're talking with
ain't an authorized agent. Which starts to feel like chicken and egg.

>> Seems to me if authorized parties of all involved initial / sign off
>> on the change, you should be good. Perhaps better if uninvolved
>> witness signature too. [Do disabuse me if wrong.]
>>
>> OTOH - could the bank be swallowing this because they know such is
>> irrelevant? (Assuming it is, here.) Which turns this into an ethical
>> issue - somebody watching you stroke something out, saying nothing,
>> and not informing you that they won't honour it.
> 
> I agree that the more initialling and counter signatures you get, the better.
> I settle for a photocopy of the finished, modified, signed document.
> In this case, a photocopy is almost better than the original, since it is
> a picture of a contract in a state in time, and has no additional pen
> modifications (but that's just me).  I'm not a lawyer, so feel free to
> check this advice with a real one.

Absolutely agree. Thus, it's always useful to make any pen marks in a
colour of high-contrast to the text colour. Some blues all but
disappear when next to black (as being blue).

Only one way to do better - have copy notarized.

> Some links on contracts:
.
.
.
> I wish someone had told me these things earlier.  I think everyone should
.
.
.

Yep, 1st year university course on contract law has stood me well.
Aside from a general familiarity, my shite sensor is a little more
sensitive that it would have otherwise been.

> push back a little when they are faced with tons of legalese that seems
.
.
.

Yes, but it frequently seems like I'm just a drop in the bucket
getting overwhelmed.

.
.
.
> It is kind of disturbing when the people across the table from you haven't
> even read the contract they are expecting you to sign (such as in a bank).

Try reading H.R. policies. Even more distressing ... something's
wrong, and many others have just blindly signed, ...

Don't get me started.

Unfortunately, the costs of standing up are usually unbearable.
Unfortunately, sometimes that's not evident until long after you
started down that road.

> The main reason I want to modify contracts is so I don't get sued for
> not upholding some unreasonable clause, or if I do get sued, so I have
> a leg to stand on in my defence.

Bingo.

Even noting - 'I am concerned about this clause.' has value.

> For contracts involving privacy, describing what the other party can do
> with your data, etc, I think the better way is to control what they know
> in the first place, and only give them what they need.  For example, there's
> no way I'm giving a video rental place my SIN number (as an extreme example),
> and by not giving it to them in the first place, they can't abuse it later.

Only partially works.

Some times you have to give up information you would prefer not to.
What you are exposing yourself to, is that you trust the other party
to mean what they say, and that when they give information to another
party as they disclose they do, that your other party is making sure
their other party adheres to what your other party has promised. And
she told two friends ...

Problem is, they don't, they can't.

You give you VIN to broker. Broker gives to insurer. Insurer connects
with government to affirm insurance. You have an accident, insurer
gives vin to adjuster. Adjuster gives VIN to repair shop. Repair shop
gives VIN to supplier. Supplier gives VIN to manufacturer. You're
trusting your broker to enforce, let alone verify, their privacy
policies upon the manufacturer - 6 links away. Good luck with that.


Ever had to give your driver's license number ... to someone with whom
you've just used a credit card to pay for something ...