[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Perl Co-inventor Convicted
In article <3vj0pp$h9c@pith.uoregon.edu> bmoore@cie-2.uoregon.edu (Zump)
writes:
> Sean Donelan (sean@sdg.dra.com) wrote:
(Deletions...)
> Of course, the proper analogy for Randal's actions is that he was a burglar
> alarm installer caught checking the door locks at a clients site. If
> it were anything other than computers the case would be laughed out
> of court. But computers are something the average citizen (and mediabot)
> don't understand, so the legal system gets trashed.
But, was he *hired* to evaluate their security, or perform another task?
The proper analogy might be "a plumber caught checking the door locks
at a client's site." Even if the legality of what he did is dismissed,
there remains the issue of a contractor performing work other than
that which he is being paid for. With the amounts that many contractors
earn, $60,000 may be a refund of what Intel paid him under the assumption
he was doing something else. Just something to consider...
Typical disclaimers...
--
David Breneman
Unix System Administrator Mail: david.breneman@mccaw.com
IS - Operations (soon to be ~@attws.com)
McCaw Cellular Communications, Inc. Phone: +1-206-803-7362
Follow-Ups:
References: