I'm under the impression that BHA was created at the specific request of PGI, and would therefore (if I'm correct) be ok under the concept of promissary estoppel.:lock: Courts generally agree that you don't have a case of contract violation when the other party does something you asked them to do. In other words, if PGI asked (Dihm, Chris, any other NDA signer here, herinafter known as 'the SoR') to set up a restricted chat server to take some load off their chat server, PGI cannot later claim that the SoR broke the NDA contract by following PGA's request. The SoR, at it's own expense, helped PGI reduce their expenses. So, for the chat server only the SOR is bullet proof , so long as reasonable care is taken to limit chats to NDA signers. Hence, the NDA police. :sarcasticclap: They're annoying, but necessary. They're fulfilling the implied promise of 'reasonable care'. A private SoR NDA forum, being unauthorized, would be a different matter altogether :suspicion:. It would be acceptable under NDA so long as there was 100% adherence, with no leaks whatsoever. Any leak (including a cut 'n paste to the outside), however, would be a problem for any NDA signer of the following: the leaker, the quoted poster, the SoR, the site owner and the site hosting service. :angrymob: Unfortunately, setting up an NDA only forum stakes the future of the SoR on nobody violating the NDA. That's not a bet I'd be willing to make. :lies:disclaimer: I'm not your lawyer. The forgoing is merely the result of contemplating the lint in my bellybutton. It is not to be construed as legal advice, or any other kind of advice, except for 'bad' advice. If you need a lawyer, go hire a lawyer.
SI got it correct, BHA channel in the TS was created with sanction from the dev team and followed their request that access be restricted to confirmed users.
But does that mean that we can continue to use it on these forums? The TS is wholly separate from what is done on these forums and I'd hate to see us in trouble because Now, if PGI gave us permission to do such a thing then all's fine and dandy. But if PGI has limited this to said TS channel only then we would still be held accountable under their stated guidelines/rules for what goes on via the forums. I just want to make sure we're not playing in the grey with this and that quoted statement caught my eye immediately.
