"Michael Geary" wrote in message
Tom wrote:
"Will" ->implies<- futurity only and in no circumstances whatsoever means "shall", let alone "must".
As for lawyers, you can be sure that Adobe’s lawyers looked over these socalled "promises" very carefully before they saw the light of day.
That’s amazingly silly, and really quite insulting. You are suggesting
that
one of Adobe’s lawyers said, "I’ve got it! If we just say ‘will’ instead
of
‘shall’, then we won’t have to keep our promises!"
No. YOU are suggesting that. I said no such thing.
What *I* said was the language used gave Adobe an out (wonder of wonders) and that the language was vetted by Adobe’s lawyers before it saw the light of day. If Adobe does NOT use lawyers to draft their license terms, I’ll be happy to buy a full page ad in the newspaper of your choice and print an apology.
If they do use lawyers, and of course they do, you can bet your ass they choose their words VERY carefully.
Adobe would fire a lawyer who thought that way.
Then we will be reading about all the bloodletting at Adobe’s legal department any day now because ALL lawyers "think that way". They are PAID to "think that way".
Look–you may not like activation. I don’t like it either. As I mentioned earlier, it makes Photoshop incompatible with the Ghost disk-cloning
backup
system that has saved my skin so many times.
Haven’t figured our forensic backup yet?
But Adobe’s management, and Adobe’s lawyers, are not the lying thieves
that
you imply.
This is so far over the top as to be ridiculous.
I *know* these people. I work with them.
Then tell them activation sucks, costs them money and only hurts honest clients.
They are honorable
people who keep their word.
No one said they were not. You are the one running around with your hair on fire about "thieves", "weasels", lying", etc. Actually starting to make me
wonder though…
Give it a rest and come back to what I REALLY said.
They are not the kind of people who would weasel
out of a promise by saying "Ha ha! I didn’t say ‘shall’! All I said was ‘will’, so it wasn’t a real promise!"
I’ll have to take your word for that as there is nothing in writing to indicate any such thing.
Maybe you can give an example. Does Adobe do business just taking vendors word? I know a promise and a handshake was a business model used by some companies and private individuals in days gone by, but is this the way Adobe operates now?
You pass the word on that, I’ll wait for your response.
Do you want to know why the activation FAQ says ‘will’ instead of ‘shall’?
Yep. Because that was the language chosen. And vetted by… who?
It’s because Adobe is an American company. Americans, speaking United
States
English, do not make the subtle distinction between ‘will’ and ‘shall’
that
you’re so worried about.
Bullshit. I’m not talking about Joe six-pack wandering aimlessly down the street. And you damn well know it. You must be grossly ignorant of contract law and the terms used to even say such nonsense, yet you ascribe motives to ME questioning the terms.
The FAQ says ‘we will’
because that’s how you make a promise in America.
That is not how lawyers make "promises" in America… or any other country.
But don’t take my word for it. Read the detailed Usage Note on "will" vs. "shall" at dictionary.com:
Why? One more time… we are not talking about playground usage, we are talking about legal usage. You seem to have missed that somehow. Or are ignoring it.
Makes no difference anyway.
The language is there in plain view. To suggest it somehow escaped notice by your legal department is disingenuous at best.
Oh, and if it does not matter, have your web site bubbas change it to "shall". No big deal, right? Words mean the same thing, right?
Run that little editorial change past your lawyers and see what they say.
Right.
Tom