| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
F90OEX
F9X
Wildly Inappropriate.
   |
Posted - 2009.10.15 18:42:00 -
[31]
I Have been 3rd party for 3-4 T2 BPOs, I'd never build or copy them for my own personal gain/wealth. IMO it would be bad form for the 3rd party to use them since that was not the agreement he/she was asked to hold the BPO in the 1st place.
|
TornSoul
BIG
Libertas Fidelitas
|
Posted - 2009.10.15 19:02:00 -
[32]
Lets add a couple more twists (for ease of reference I'll use BMBE as example)
BMBA A:
A BMBE customer offers us a T2 print as collateral - And for whatever reason, upon asked, does not wish to have the print put into either copy/research/production.
Would or would it not be ok for BMBE to do copy/research/production on the print in this case?
BMBE B: (this one might seem a bit silly, but ties into some other arguments regardless)
Assume BMBE has two *identical* BPO's as collateral (different clients however).
One client pays of his loan, and gets his BPO back.
But it's in fact not his own BPO he gets back, but that of the other client.
Is this a problem?
BIG Lottery |
Krathos Morpheus
Gallente
Legion Infernal
|
Posted - 2009.10.15 19:07:00 -
[33]
 Originally by: TornSoul
Nice one - and a good question.
But let me quickly add that the ISK is not being used.
But the academica of the question is valid regardless.
Just the same as the BPO owner we'll never know. I would like to hear some opinions before saying mine.
|
Ferkimer Burns
Perkone
|
Posted - 2009.10.15 20:22:00 -
[34]
What's needed is a simple statement by the 3rd party to the effect:
"My prices are discounted to reflect the benefit received by perusing your blueprints while in my possession. Other terms may be negotiated."
Frankly, it's poor form to leave a valuable asset lying deadweight in a hangar for weeks on end, but as long as notice is given up front then there's no reason why the 3rd party should not benefit. As well, the 3rd party could run up the ME/PE on it for the benefit of the owner (at a negotiated price).
|
cosmoray
Bella Vista Holdings Corp
|
Posted - 2009.10.15 20:59:00 -
[35]
When I do third party holding or collateral, I do not do anything for myself with the owners assets.
I always come to an agreement about how the assets are to be handled and used.
In most cases I perform research for the owner.
If an owner wants something that is more complex, I may change my fees or split some copies. Once again in this scenario this is always agreed in writing with the asset owner prior to exchange.
|
Alain Kinsella
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.10.16 13:05:00 -
[36]
Originally by: TornSoul
Lets add a couple more twists (for ease of reference I'll use BMBE as example)
BMBA A:
A BMBE customer offers us a T2 print as collateral - And for whatever reason, upon asked, does not wish to have the print put into either copy/research/production.
Would or would it not be ok for BMBE to do copy/research/production on the print in this case?
It would probably not be OK, as the action would be a breach of contract.
Quote:
BMBE B: (this one might seem a bit silly, but ties into some other arguments regardless)
Assume BMBE has two *identical* BPO's as collateral (different clients however).
One client pays of his loan, and gets his BPO back.
But it's in fact not his own BPO he gets back, but that of the other client.
Is this a problem?
That depends on how 'identical' is defined. :)
If they have the same ME & PE numbers (to *any* level) than it does not matter. If they are different then I would be closely tracking which one was from whom.
Turning the question around - If you gave someone a high-resource BPO (i.e. Hulk) at 50 ME, would you like it if you got back one at 0 ME?
--A_K
PS - Great discussion btw.
|
TornSoul
BIG
Libertas Fidelitas
|
Posted - 2009.10.16 17:27:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Alain Kinsella
It would probably not be OK, as the action would be a breach of contract.
Could you elaborate what part(s) of the contract get's breached by this (I might be blind, but I don't see it)
If anything I would say that the contract isn't in question at all.
Hence the OP's title of "Etiquette" rather than "breach of contract"
Originally by: Alain Kinsella
That depends on how 'identical' is defined. :)
If they have the same ME & PE numbers (to *any* level) than it does not matter.
That's what I meant (ie. drop them into a hangar, and you would not be able to tell which is which)
BIG Lottery |
Alain Kinsella
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.10.16 22:09:00 -
[38]
@TornSoul:
The client was specific in requesting the BP to be left alone. I consider that part of the contract and would have to honor it, no matter how I feel about the issue.
Note that my opinion on this is probably skewed by my RL work ethic as a Systems Administrator (aka datacenter admin).
--A_K
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |