That might be a little too innocuous. I don't think I've ever read any forum user policies... Since this one is going to be very different than anything I've seen, maybe license should be more conspicous...
Doesn't matter if you don't read the policies! :-)
If I spent the time to read and fully understand all the words behind all the things I hit the "I Agree" button on, I think first, nothing would ever get done and second, my head would explode...
I hereby declare that everything I ever do in the future, first occurred in the past, therefore I expect full waivers for grandfather status (or maybe senile guy status) (c)
LOL
geez this place is so danged serious about licenses and junk i feel like i am in the dmv zone
Rayman,
You can't prevent someone from posting stuff that they have no right to post. You can sue them afterwards if you want since they are representing (by posting) that they have a right to post the code (or otherwise copy it). Parallax's only obligation would be to remove the code from the forums when presented proof (acceptable to Parallax) of someone else "owning" the code.
Since posting code here without the right to do so is illegal, it doesn't automatically inherit an MIT license. An illegal act doesn't create a valid contract.
Ok, let me give a better example... Suppose some innocent kid is writing his own code that uses 10 different objects, all of them 3rd party drivers that are not MIT licensed. He then posts the zip archive of his code and asks for help...
Somebody else sees it and uses to develop a commercial product assuming it is MIT.
Whose job is it to then look through all the files and make sure they don't contain somebody elses, non-MIT code?
If they find this, do they have to contact everybody who downloaded it to tell them it really wasn't MIT?
Whose job is it? Why everyone's. Anyone who uses someone else's code in a project for commercial use has to do due diligence on code acquired from elsewhere. It's reasonable to trust some vendors like Parallax to take reasonable caution to assure that code, represented as original, is, in fact, original. Reasonable caution isn't certainty though. Parallax can't be 100% sure about any code not done in-house. Even then, there might be a patent "lurking" in the woods with some troll trying to collect a pound (or more) of flesh from an unsuspecting victim.
FWIW, I've never considered anything I say in a public forum to be off limits to others. If you say or demonstrate something in public, it becomes public domain. While I still own (am responsible for) what I say, the implication is that I've "let the cat out of the bag" per se. It goes back to the "if you want something kept secret, don't open your mouth" philosophy.
Personally, I like the saying that two can keep a secret if one is d3@d........
Ok, let me give a better example... Suppose some innocent kid is writing his own code that uses 10 different objects, all of them 3rd party drivers that are not MIT licensed. He then posts the zip archive of his code and asks for help...
Somebody else sees it and uses to develop a commercial product assuming it is MIT.
Whose job is it to then look through all the files and make sure they don't contain somebody elses, non-MIT code?
If they find this, do they have to contact everybody who downloaded it to tell them it really wasn't MIT?
I don't mean to be glib but if I steal lumber from a lumber yard and build a house with it and sell the house. After five years it's proven that the house contains stolen lumber. I get caught and am prosecuted but have no money to pay for the stolen lumber. What happens to the house?
Another scenerio. I buy a stolen watch from a person on a street corner and am later found with the watch and it's determined that the watch was stolen. Do I get to keep the watch? Can I be arrested for possession of stolen property?
Remember I'm not a lawyer and don't pretend to be one on the internet or anywhere else. But the way I see it software is like any other property. The theft, purchase and possession of software is subject to the same rules as any other form of property. As always consult a lawyer if in doubt! Being wrong code be expensive.
Ok, but I'm not talking about intentional abuse... I really don't think all the many users of this forum with fully understand their obligations with other peoples code or drivers... Who's job is it to search the forum and fix these problems...
Ok, but I'm not talking about intentional abuse... I really don't think all the many users of this forum with fully understand their obligations with other peoples code or drivers... Who's job is it to troll the forum and fix these problems...
Sadly the person actually using the code! I can't imagine anyone willing to "bless" the ownership of code. The liability would be to high. If the person "fixing" the problem of improperly licensed code is far to high. In the end it comes down to due diligence and acting in good faith. If you use that code in good faith for a commercial product and it's found out that it wasn't properly licensed be prepared to pay damages. Either in a single payout or royalties.
It stinks but unfortunately that's the way of the world!
Sadly the person actually using the code! I can't imagine anyone willing to "bless" the ownership of code. The liability would be to high. If the person "fixing" the problem of improperly licensed code is far to high. In the end it comes down to due diligence and acting in good faith. If you use that code in good faith for a commercial product and it's found out that it wasn't properly licensed be prepared to pay damages. Either in a single payout or royalties.
For the record any code I write and post here is free for anyone to use and modify in anyway they want. You don't even have to admit to writing and can blame me for it!
I don't mean to be glib but if I steal lumber from a lumber yard and build a house with it and sell the house. After five years it's proven that the house contains stolen lumber. I get caught and am prosecuted but have no money to pay for the stolen lumber. What happens to the house?
The house would remain intact but you would have a judgment entered against you. That is, if the statute of limitations hadn't run out.
Another scenerio. I buy a stolen watch from a person on a street corner and am later found with the watch and it's determined that the watch was stolen. Do I get to keep the watch? Can I be arrested for possession of stolen property?
Very unlikely that you would be arrested but you don't get to keep stolen property.
Only in theory does the legal system make any sense. You've heard the joke about being a "prospect" one day and a "customer" the next, where you suddenly find yourself in hell and wonder what happened? That's what the legal system is like. It's not as advertised. It's just a huge racket that profits off of conflicts. I've personally seen it take two forms, on several occasions:
1) Someone feels violated and, being naive, they hire a lawyer to make it right. Then, someone else has to hire a lawyer, which means two lawyers are now making money. Neither are in any hurry to end the conflict, so they drag it on for as long as possible - several years is quite common. The lawyers, their paralegals, the caterers, down to the potty scrubbers at the law firms, along with the court employees all win together, as conflict affords them their employment. Both the plaintiff and the defendant lose.
2) Someone wealthy feels vengeful and with full knowledge of how evil the system is, uses it to bleed down their enemy - at no small cost to themselves. But, if they have $100M and their enemy has only $1M, they win by attrition. Never mind any facts. This is has nothing to do with the truth - ZERO! The lawyers and the system win again. The plaintiff achieves his objective. The defendant loses.
This is what we'd likely face in a possible conflict. We can, at least, not be the plaintiff in the first scenario, who sets a disaster into motion. The other stuff, we have no control over.
Really, the best we can all do is to SHUN that world as much as possible, while making some effort to keep it at bay. To make its madness our own is to contract a crippling disease of the mind and spirit. Who among us has even felt creative since this whole episode began? I haven't. They're winning and they haven't even done anything to anybody. The smell, alone, is debilitating.
What we CAN take control and ownership over is our own attitude, and what WE stand for and how WE will act, come what may.
really, the best we can all do is to shun that world as much as possible, while making some effort to keep it at bay. To make its madness our own is to contract a crippling disease of the mind and spirit. Who among us has even felt creative since this whole episode began? I haven't. They're winning and they haven't even done anything to anybody. The smell, alone, is debilitating.
What we can take control and ownership over is our own attitude, and what we stand for and how we will act, come what may.
Really, the best we can all do is to SHUN that world as much as possible, while making some effort to keep it at bay. To make its madness our own is to contract a crippling disease of the mind and spirit. Who among us has even felt creative since this whole episode began? I haven't. They're winning and they haven't even done anything to anybody. The smell, alone, is debilitating.
What we CAN take control and ownership over is our own attitude, and what WE stand for and how WE will act, come what may.
My wife would be the first to agree with you regarding the system and money. There is a reason I sometimes refer to her as my in-house counsel, as her initials include JD. She would also point out that while the lawyers an their followers are making money, they can only act on behalf of someone else. (Though the lawyer representing himself is often said to have a fool for a client) The two scenarios you give both demonstrate that the lawyers are not acting on their own, but on the request of the wronged person or the greedy company. This is why the lawyer is needed, no two people will always agree on things (like contracts and copyright) or virtually anything else. Like it or not, better the current system with a fractional chance than some stooge saying what you claim is awarded to another without recourse because the stooge says so. Love 'em, like 'em, or hate 'em, human nature makes lawyers a necessity.
Only in theory does the legal system make any sense. You've heard the joke about being a "prospect" one day and a "customer" the next, where you suddenly find yourself in hell and wonder what happened? That's what the legal system is like. It's not as advertised. It's just a huge racket that profits off of conflicts. I've personally seen it take two forms, on several occasions:
1) Someone feels violated and, being naive, they hire a lawyer to make it right. Then, someone else has to hire a lawyer, which means two lawyers are now making money. Neither are in any hurry to end the conflict, so they drag it on for as long as possible - several years is quite common. The lawyers, their paralegals, the caterers, down to the potty scrubbers at the law firms, along with the court employees all win together, as conflict affords them their employment. Both the plaintiff and the defendant lose.
2) Someone wealthy feels vengeful and with full knowledge of how evil the system is, uses it to bleed down their enemy - at no small cost to themselves. But, if they have $100M and their enemy has only $1M, they win by attrition. Never mind any facts. This is has nothing to do with the truth - ZERO! The lawyers and the system win again. The plaintiff achieves his objective. The defendant loses.
This is what we'd likely face in a possible conflict. We can, at least, not be the plaintiff in the first scenario, who sets a disaster into motion. The other stuff, we have no control over.
Really, the best we can all do is to SHUN that world as much as possible, while making some effort to keep it at bay. To make its madness our own is to contract a crippling disease of the mind and spirit. Who among us has even felt creative since this whole episode began? I haven't. They're winning and they haven't even done anything to anybody. The smell, alone, is debilitating.
What we CAN take control and ownership over is our own attitude, and what WE stand for and how WE will act, come what may.
In my experience, I have almost always ended up on the losing end of a court battle, however 99.9% of the time, it was through my own stupidity, simply because I did not abide by laws. So I have made a general effort to become acquainted with the laws and penalties that can have a serious impact on my life. In a civilized world, laws are necessary to keep the peace and protect the innocent. Whereas lawyers are necessary to settle the disputes, because most people do not take the time to concern themselves with learning all the different aspects of the law that affect their daily lives or how to defend themselves, should a dispute occur. Like it or not, we are all governed by laws, which me must abide by, or we suffer the penalties and consequences. Even this forum has laws, as set out in the forum user policy.
Breach of contract and infringement can both have very serious consequences. As individuals, or as a group, the very best that we can do is to acquaint ourselves with laws, to help protect ourselves from punishment I don't know about the rest of you, but I never did like getting a spanking or receiving a reprimand with financial consequences. I hate to burst the bubble, but simply ignoring the laws won't make them go away.
As I mentioned in another thread, anyone involved with programming and dealing with source code, should at least become acquainted with the basics of copyright law.
EDIT: And as it applies to licensing, anyone involved with programming and dealing with source code, should at least become acquainted with the basics of contract law.
1. Without reading the whole thread I assume that the auto MIT license applies to prop source code whole (files) or in part i.e. snippets?
2. Does the same apply to binaries (prop)?
3. What are the implications for say .exe files for utilities that I and other post here from time to time?
4. Again for the source code that may be posted for said utilities?
5. And for documents, files or just pasted into the thread reply etc?
6. Also schematics whole or in part as either files or images?
Thanks for posting up something about why you are the way you are. I really appreciate that, because it helps me understand our differences, and doing that is not always easy either. Thanks for it.
We all get shaped by experiences, and there are positive and negative ones too, and in life we can choose to fixate on negative, or positive! I'm a positive guy myself. Sometimes having that bell ring at the school of hard knocks isn't pretty as we both know.
I learned something about law due to a court case I got sucked into involving the police. I did nothing, but was in the wrong place at the wrong time. The details aren't important, but the experience is. I had to go through a criminal trial and for that I needed to retain an attorney. I don't like attorneys, but I do like this one. I had called three of them to vet them. One was a total weasel, working both sides, and if you had money, he would take care of you no matter what. Let's just say you feel like taking a shower after leaving the office.The what just determined the money. Corrupt.
Another was negative, chip on his shoulder type. Nothing but negative and trouble. No thanks, because I don't want to be a tool to be used up on their agenda, whatever it was.
The one I picked was a woman who had 25 years experience in really ugly criminal law. More than I needed, but we kind of clicked, and she took my case. She believed me actually, and I was the first in over 10 years who walked through her door she felt good about, the rest being a question of what was going to happen, not that something shouldn't deffo happen to them for what they had done --and that's the stuff people knew about.
Criminal law is about intent. We prosecute the state of mind. Let's say you are walking home with somebody and they die because you took the long route talking to them and it was too much. They are dead, but there was no intent for them to be dead. Say you did the same thing observing they were having trouble and took the long route to see whether or not they would tip over. There was intent there. One is an unfortunate circumstance difficult to live with. The other is worth a lot of jail time.
Intent matters.
The intent here isn't to break the law. We can look at law a couple of ways, and it's always this double edged thing we managed in life. One way is the big scary, you could go to jail for way too many years or pay too much money to feel good about, if... and that's negative. The positive is our personal freedom and the law helping to keep people of bad intent and character at bay, which improves our personal freedom and our life rewards for good character! That's positive.
And our experiences shape us. I had many a long talk with that woman. She's a gem in a sea of cheap, fake, plastic stones worthy of high respect, yet almost unknown in her field, because unlike most, she actually walks into the court room with the good intent to serve herself and her peers well because she knows that needs to get done. I think we needed one another too, me fearful sucked into something I had no intent to do, her growing very jaded getting asses off the hard time every day. So we talked a lot, and it was good.
This all actually happened a year or two before I got into P1 and it bothered me very deeply because I have good intent. I really do. I wake up just wanting to be a good guy, get it done and enjoy being here and enjoy meeting others who are of like mind so I don't get lonely. No joke.
I worried over all that could happen, and the attorney told me something very profound. (we write once a year to check in and chat about life for a moment or two, BTW) She said I was at what she called a defining point in life, and that I faced a choice. If I surrender that intent to fear, this event was going to change things and I wouldn't be the same person who walked into her office --that person she did a full trial for at a fraction of the fee, but one of the many others who don't show that basic intent, who cannot really be believed just another case to manage down to the minimum and move on. Or I could trust in that, get through this and go back to life as I know it, free, basic, honest, worthy.
There were 6 long months before that trial was rendered. Had to appear, worry, follow every single rule lest they impinge my character, and you have no idea just how ugly that time was. Well, that attorney Lynn put it very simply: That's how life would be if I embraced the fear and let this event shape me. She also said it's a choice we all have every single day and if we put fear out there, question it and render it moot for all but real mortal, valid fear, we all can get to the place where she and I were, that of good people who know it and have few real worries in the world.
So I did the right thing. Down deep I knew I had to do this and that, so I did, waiting for all of it to pass so I could move on, forget and just do what I did before. Won the case fairly easily too, which helped, but even had the system failed me, I would have done this and that, waiting it out until I could return to the basic, free state I find part of who I am. Truth is, I could have taken the long route home and none of it would have happened, and you know after it's all said and done, I'm glad I didn't, because I got shown something powerful and important. PITA though, make no mistake. The good stuff always is, in my experience, because that is how the school of hard knocks often works.
Circling back around to what we do here and that policy then, it's not about breaking the law or even challenging it. What we are doing is solidifying the basic good intent and ethic that makes us who we are here, and who we are is good and we know it and can take great strength and pride in that, both of which trump fear if you sit back and ask the right basic questions needed to render that fear moot.
So Bruce, I submit you have a lot of fear because you've heard that bell ring at the school of hard knocks. I get it. Consider questioning that fear and look hard at your own intent. Where you find it something to doubt, spend your energy on that rather than all the worry and fear and you will see great rewards for it, the law a help rather than a hindrance. Please take none of this to mean or imply you are a bad person. I do not mean that, it is not my intent. I'm just sharing some life experiences as food for thought, that's all.
Life is filled with things that have ugly consequences. Choosing to walk in front of a bus is brutal as is breaking a contract, or infringing on something may be. As we walk the world, we can see either a wide field of things we can do and enjoy, or a sea of blinking "don't, or else!!" signs. Up to us individually.
I get it now. When you see a blanket policy you see all those little "what if's" and they are blinking red, "don't do it or else!" signs. A shift in perspective sees them entirely differently as the help and security they are because intent is solidified and codified into something we can trust in, count on and act secure in the understanding of. Instead of going it alone, fearing all those signs wondering if you will even get there, where ever there is, you can walk with us, the road clear, all of us getting there, where ever there is with few worries and the help of friends. That's the intent here, and it matters more than the red blinking signs do.
Again, up to us individually. And an edit here: I've decided I like you Bruce. That post helps me understand why we have the friction we do. No worries. Again, please don't take my post in return for anything other than just one guy sharing some stuff that might do some good, because that is all it is.
Comments
Where do you hang out?
One edit from me.
"All your posted to forum code are belong to us."[
Doesn't matter if you don't read the policies! :-)
Someone just posted a question about one of my programs and attached my code to his question.
Does that make it MIT license?
No. It can't. We need to modify the rule so that it only applies to code originally posted after December 18, 2012.
LOL
geez this place is so danged serious about licenses and junk i feel like i am in the dmv zone
You can't prevent someone from posting stuff that they have no right to post. You can sue them afterwards if you want since they are representing (by posting) that they have a right to post the code (or otherwise copy it). Parallax's only obligation would be to remove the code from the forums when presented proof (acceptable to Parallax) of someone else "owning" the code.
Since posting code here without the right to do so is illegal, it doesn't automatically inherit an MIT license. An illegal act doesn't create a valid contract.
Somebody else sees it and uses to develop a commercial product assuming it is MIT.
Whose job is it to then look through all the files and make sure they don't contain somebody elses, non-MIT code?
If they find this, do they have to contact everybody who downloaded it to tell them it really wasn't MIT?
Personally, I like the saying that two can keep a secret if one is d3@d........
Keep in mind you can't give away whats not yours. If a person posts code they don't own the rights to, that code isn't subject to the MIT license.
I don't mean to be glib but if I steal lumber from a lumber yard and build a house with it and sell the house. After five years it's proven that the house contains stolen lumber. I get caught and am prosecuted but have no money to pay for the stolen lumber. What happens to the house?
Another scenerio. I buy a stolen watch from a person on a street corner and am later found with the watch and it's determined that the watch was stolen. Do I get to keep the watch? Can I be arrested for possession of stolen property?
Remember I'm not a lawyer and don't pretend to be one on the internet or anywhere else. But the way I see it software is like any other property. The theft, purchase and possession of software is subject to the same rules as any other form of property. As always consult a lawyer if in doubt! Being wrong code be expensive.
Sadly the person actually using the code! I can't imagine anyone willing to "bless" the ownership of code. The liability would be to high. If the person "fixing" the problem of improperly licensed code is far to high. In the end it comes down to due diligence and acting in good faith. If you use that code in good faith for a commercial product and it's found out that it wasn't properly licensed be prepared to pay damages. Either in a single payout or royalties.
It stinks but unfortunately that's the way of the world!
Are we back where we started yet?
Probably!
This is a hard problem with no easy solution.
For the record any code I write and post here is free for anyone to use and modify in anyway they want. You don't even have to admit to writing and can blame me for it!
The house would remain intact but you would have a judgment entered against you. That is, if the statute of limitations hadn't run out.
Very unlikely that you would be arrested but you don't get to keep stolen property.
1) Someone feels violated and, being naive, they hire a lawyer to make it right. Then, someone else has to hire a lawyer, which means two lawyers are now making money. Neither are in any hurry to end the conflict, so they drag it on for as long as possible - several years is quite common. The lawyers, their paralegals, the caterers, down to the potty scrubbers at the law firms, along with the court employees all win together, as conflict affords them their employment. Both the plaintiff and the defendant lose.
2) Someone wealthy feels vengeful and with full knowledge of how evil the system is, uses it to bleed down their enemy - at no small cost to themselves. But, if they have $100M and their enemy has only $1M, they win by attrition. Never mind any facts. This is has nothing to do with the truth - ZERO! The lawyers and the system win again. The plaintiff achieves his objective. The defendant loses.
This is what we'd likely face in a possible conflict. We can, at least, not be the plaintiff in the first scenario, who sets a disaster into motion. The other stuff, we have no control over.
Really, the best we can all do is to SHUN that world as much as possible, while making some effort to keep it at bay. To make its madness our own is to contract a crippling disease of the mind and spirit. Who among us has even felt creative since this whole episode began? I haven't. They're winning and they haven't even done anything to anybody. The smell, alone, is debilitating.
What we CAN take control and ownership over is our own attitude, and what WE stand for and how WE will act, come what may.
bravo!!
Yes! Thank you Chip!
Jeff
Reading that and seeing you guys resonate with it makes me really happy, because I am in the right place.
My wife would be the first to agree with you regarding the system and money. There is a reason I sometimes refer to her as my in-house counsel, as her initials include JD. She would also point out that while the lawyers an their followers are making money, they can only act on behalf of someone else. (Though the lawyer representing himself is often said to have a fool for a client) The two scenarios you give both demonstrate that the lawyers are not acting on their own, but on the request of the wronged person or the greedy company. This is why the lawyer is needed, no two people will always agree on things (like contracts and copyright) or virtually anything else. Like it or not, better the current system with a fractional chance than some stooge saying what you claim is awarded to another without recourse because the stooge says so. Love 'em, like 'em, or hate 'em, human nature makes lawyers a necessity.
Just a side track,
Frank
Breach of contract and infringement can both have very serious consequences. As individuals, or as a group, the very best that we can do is to acquaint ourselves with laws, to help protect ourselves from punishment
As I mentioned in another thread, anyone involved with programming and dealing with source code, should at least become acquainted with the basics of copyright law.
EDIT: And as it applies to licensing, anyone involved with programming and dealing with source code, should at least become acquainted with the basics of contract law.
1. Without reading the whole thread I assume that the auto MIT license applies to prop source code whole (files) or in part i.e. snippets?
2. Does the same apply to binaries (prop)?
3. What are the implications for say .exe files for utilities that I and other post here from time to time?
4. Again for the source code that may be posted for said utilities?
5. And for documents, files or just pasted into the thread reply etc?
6. Also schematics whole or in part as either files or images?
Cheers.
Thanks for posting up something about why you are the way you are. I really appreciate that, because it helps me understand our differences, and doing that is not always easy either. Thanks for it.
We all get shaped by experiences, and there are positive and negative ones too, and in life we can choose to fixate on negative, or positive! I'm a positive guy myself. Sometimes having that bell ring at the school of hard knocks isn't pretty as we both know.
I learned something about law due to a court case I got sucked into involving the police. I did nothing, but was in the wrong place at the wrong time. The details aren't important, but the experience is. I had to go through a criminal trial and for that I needed to retain an attorney. I don't like attorneys, but I do like this one. I had called three of them to vet them. One was a total weasel, working both sides, and if you had money, he would take care of you no matter what. Let's just say you feel like taking a shower after leaving the office.The what just determined the money. Corrupt.
Another was negative, chip on his shoulder type. Nothing but negative and trouble. No thanks, because I don't want to be a tool to be used up on their agenda, whatever it was.
The one I picked was a woman who had 25 years experience in really ugly criminal law. More than I needed, but we kind of clicked, and she took my case. She believed me actually, and I was the first in over 10 years who walked through her door she felt good about, the rest being a question of what was going to happen, not that something shouldn't deffo happen to them for what they had done --and that's the stuff people knew about.
Criminal law is about intent. We prosecute the state of mind. Let's say you are walking home with somebody and they die because you took the long route talking to them and it was too much. They are dead, but there was no intent for them to be dead. Say you did the same thing observing they were having trouble and took the long route to see whether or not they would tip over. There was intent there. One is an unfortunate circumstance difficult to live with. The other is worth a lot of jail time.
Intent matters.
The intent here isn't to break the law. We can look at law a couple of ways, and it's always this double edged thing we managed in life. One way is the big scary, you could go to jail for way too many years or pay too much money to feel good about, if... and that's negative. The positive is our personal freedom and the law helping to keep people of bad intent and character at bay, which improves our personal freedom and our life rewards for good character! That's positive.
And our experiences shape us. I had many a long talk with that woman. She's a gem in a sea of cheap, fake, plastic stones worthy of high respect, yet almost unknown in her field, because unlike most, she actually walks into the court room with the good intent to serve herself and her peers well because she knows that needs to get done. I think we needed one another too, me fearful sucked into something I had no intent to do, her growing very jaded getting asses off the hard time every day. So we talked a lot, and it was good.
This all actually happened a year or two before I got into P1 and it bothered me very deeply because I have good intent. I really do. I wake up just wanting to be a good guy, get it done and enjoy being here and enjoy meeting others who are of like mind so I don't get lonely. No joke.
I worried over all that could happen, and the attorney told me something very profound. (we write once a year to check in and chat about life for a moment or two, BTW) She said I was at what she called a defining point in life, and that I faced a choice. If I surrender that intent to fear, this event was going to change things and I wouldn't be the same person who walked into her office --that person she did a full trial for at a fraction of the fee, but one of the many others who don't show that basic intent, who cannot really be believed just another case to manage down to the minimum and move on. Or I could trust in that, get through this and go back to life as I know it, free, basic, honest, worthy.
There were 6 long months before that trial was rendered. Had to appear, worry, follow every single rule lest they impinge my character, and you have no idea just how ugly that time was. Well, that attorney Lynn put it very simply: That's how life would be if I embraced the fear and let this event shape me. She also said it's a choice we all have every single day and if we put fear out there, question it and render it moot for all but real mortal, valid fear, we all can get to the place where she and I were, that of good people who know it and have few real worries in the world.
So I did the right thing. Down deep I knew I had to do this and that, so I did, waiting for all of it to pass so I could move on, forget and just do what I did before. Won the case fairly easily too, which helped, but even had the system failed me, I would have done this and that, waiting it out until I could return to the basic, free state I find part of who I am. Truth is, I could have taken the long route home and none of it would have happened, and you know after it's all said and done, I'm glad I didn't, because I got shown something powerful and important. PITA though, make no mistake. The good stuff always is, in my experience, because that is how the school of hard knocks often works.
Circling back around to what we do here and that policy then, it's not about breaking the law or even challenging it. What we are doing is solidifying the basic good intent and ethic that makes us who we are here, and who we are is good and we know it and can take great strength and pride in that, both of which trump fear if you sit back and ask the right basic questions needed to render that fear moot.
So Bruce, I submit you have a lot of fear because you've heard that bell ring at the school of hard knocks. I get it. Consider questioning that fear and look hard at your own intent. Where you find it something to doubt, spend your energy on that rather than all the worry and fear and you will see great rewards for it, the law a help rather than a hindrance. Please take none of this to mean or imply you are a bad person. I do not mean that, it is not my intent. I'm just sharing some life experiences as food for thought, that's all.
Life is filled with things that have ugly consequences. Choosing to walk in front of a bus is brutal as is breaking a contract, or infringing on something may be. As we walk the world, we can see either a wide field of things we can do and enjoy, or a sea of blinking "don't, or else!!" signs. Up to us individually.
I get it now. When you see a blanket policy you see all those little "what if's" and they are blinking red, "don't do it or else!" signs. A shift in perspective sees them entirely differently as the help and security they are because intent is solidified and codified into something we can trust in, count on and act secure in the understanding of. Instead of going it alone, fearing all those signs wondering if you will even get there, where ever there is, you can walk with us, the road clear, all of us getting there, where ever there is with few worries and the help of friends. That's the intent here, and it matters more than the red blinking signs do.
Again, up to us individually. And an edit here: I've decided I like you Bruce. That post helps me understand why we have the friction we do. No worries. Again, please don't take my post in return for anything other than just one guy sharing some stuff that might do some good, because that is all it is.