OneNDA: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
We love the idea that standard, [[boilerplate]], tedious terms that make up the loin’s share of commercial legal discourse should be regarded as a common utility; a free societal resource, and not some secret sauce that keeps battalions of [[legal eagle]]s in well-paid but soul destroying work. | We love the idea that standard, [[boilerplate]], tedious terms that make up the loin’s share of commercial legal discourse should be regarded as a common utility; a free societal resource, and not some secret sauce that keeps battalions of [[legal eagle]]s in well-paid but soul destroying work. | ||
Kudos, therefore, to the team at the [http://www.lawboutique.co.uk Law Boutique] for doing something about it. The [[JC]] will put his sclerotic old shoulder to the wheel, for whatever that is worth, and commends his friends, relations and readers; especially those who occupy places in the firmament higher | Kudos, therefore, to the team at the [http://www.lawboutique.co.uk Law Boutique] for doing something about it. The [[JC]] will put his sclerotic old shoulder to the wheel, for whatever that is worth, and commends his friends, relations and readers; especially those who occupy places in the firmament higher than his own — that’s more or less all of you — to do what you can to get your own organisations behind this excellent initiative. Start with the NDA, who knows where it may lead? | ||
Of course, the effluxion of time, the inevitable [[special pleading]], the [[committee]] drafting to which we agents of the tragic commons resort by irrepressible force of habit may mean this augers into the ground, but we can but try. | Of course, the effluxion of time, the inevitable [[special pleading]], the [[committee]] drafting to which we agents of the tragic commons resort by irrepressible force of habit may mean this augers into the ground, but we can but try. | ||
Revision as of 17:03, 17 February 2021
|
The design of organisations and products
|
Don’t just read about it here: go see: https://www.onenda.org
We love the idea that standard, boilerplate, tedious terms that make up the loin’s share of commercial legal discourse should be regarded as a common utility; a free societal resource, and not some secret sauce that keeps battalions of legal eagles in well-paid but soul destroying work.
Kudos, therefore, to the team at the Law Boutique for doing something about it. The JC will put his sclerotic old shoulder to the wheel, for whatever that is worth, and commends his friends, relations and readers; especially those who occupy places in the firmament higher than his own — that’s more or less all of you — to do what you can to get your own organisations behind this excellent initiative. Start with the NDA, who knows where it may lead?
Of course, the effluxion of time, the inevitable special pleading, the committee drafting to which we agents of the tragic commons resort by irrepressible force of habit may mean this augers into the ground, but we can but try.