Subj : Re: How much should I charge for fixed-price software contract? To : comp.programming From : Richard Heathfield Date : Fri Aug 26 2005 01:16 am Gerry Quinn wrote: > In article , > invalid@address.co.uk.invalid says... >> Rather, the size of the penalty should reflect >> the seriousness of the charge! > > Indeed, and that's why library fines are low, whereas penalties for > distributing cracking tools are moderately high. Your argument is circular. You say it's a serious charge because it has a serious punishment, and you say it has a serious punishment because it is a serious charge. > (Incidentally, the Elcomsoft software was written in English and > advertised in such a way that it was clearly intended for sale in the > US. It's completely irrelevant whether a particular sale was > 'computerised'.) It doesn't matter whether the Elcomsoft software was intended for sale in the US or not. It still wasn't in breach of Russian law, and Russian law is the only law that applied to it. >> So you think the Internet means the end of national sovereignty? How >> interesting. > > I think it offers an arena which nations must needs regulate to some > degree in accordance with international norms, lest they find their > affairs forcibly regulated for them. I'm guessing that by "international norms" you mean US law, and by "lest they find their affairs forcibly regulated" you mean that the US can blow to bits anyone it doesn't like. If I'm wrong about that, please clarify. -- Richard Heathfield "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999 http://www.cpax.org.uk mail: rjh at above domain .