Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sylvester80 who wrote (179871)	1/14/2006 9:00:36 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 281500

Dude... For one, I'm not going to say that SAIC personnnel didn't deliberately impede Chavez's attempt to nullify their contract. And I have no data to verify/refulte what you say about SAIC and INTESA. But if some non-authorized government official came into your office and attempted to usurp control over proprietary software that you were contracted to deploy on a project, YOU HAD BETTER not give it to them without a legal finding and appropriate compensation. If they were not authorized by the leadership of the joint venture to comply with the illegal seizure of control over the petroleum plants, then they had NO AUTHORITY to release control to unauthorized parties. They certainly have no obligation to train their replacements without a reworking of the contract and appropriate compensation. So thank you for the news article, but all you've stated is that Chavez was willing to violate numerous contractual obligations ON A WHIM and via use of coercive intimidation. Btw, I personally have no problem with their moving to open source software. I'm no fan of Windows. But copyright law is copyright law. And Chavez's people had no right to try and nationalize someone else's proprietary product. Hawk