[NTLUG:Discuss] crackers

[Richard Cobbe]

cbbrowne at godel.brownes.org wrote on 8-27-1999:

> After all, if NTLUG gets sued, and doesn't have much money, it might prove
> necessary to sue the members.  And short of things that would evoke Godwin's
> Law, that's about the most terrible thing I could ever imagine happening.

It seems to me that the group has more or less decided not to offer such a
service, but I thought I'd pass this info along regardless.  Partly, I'd
like to set the facts straight, and partly I find it interesting and
amusing.

First, #include <std_disclaimers/IANAL.h>.  I did, however, just check with
my father, who *is* a lawyer, registered to practice in the state of Texas.
(Corporate bankruptcy, if anyone cares.)  Were the group to offer such a
service, he *highly* recommends that the group and any individuals who
would perform the service consult with their lawyers to get a better idea
of the issues involved.

While it would be a Bad Thing for NTLUG to get sued over this (or any
other) issue, I don't think the above statement is true.  Since we are now
a corporation under Texas law, the assets of the shareholders or members
cannot be seized to pay off corporation debts, including legal fees and
penalties.  The shareholders could lose their investment in the
corporation, but that's about it.  (Dad says that there is a very very
small, almost infinitesimal, chance that a plaintiff could get around this,
but in his almost 15 years of practicing law in Texas, he's never seen it
happen.)

Some clarifications and additional issues, though:

1) A disgruntled customer could file suit against the individuals who
   performed the service on behalf of the corporation, and their assets
   could be seized to pay off the suit.  Other members and shareholders not
   named as defendants, however, would not be affected.

2) It's also possible for officers of the corporation to be named as
   defendants, and the above would apply.

3) That being said, there may be insurance available to cover liability in
   these cases, similar to medical malpractice insurace.  This would likely
   not cover damages due to criminal activity, I suspect.

4) This strikes me as a particularly unlikely problem, but I thought it was
   funny, so I'll pass it along.  A suitably sleazy person or group could
   use a similar service to set up a classic protection racket!  "Ok, we've
   looked at your system, and here's how much it'll cost you to make sure
   nothing happens to it!"  I don't know that we'd want to leave ourselves
   open to accusations of this nature.  I don't think we're sleazy enough
   to actually pull a stunt like this, and the fact that we wouldn't charge
   for the service could defuse such an accusation, but it's still
   something to consider.

A security-centered presentation at one of our meetings should be a lot
safer from a legal perspective.

(Incidentally, while I'm here, I'd be very interested in attending such a
presentation.)

Richard