Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/09/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 11:46 AM 9/26/02 -0400, B. D. Colen wrote: >No, but the existence of an obvious conflict of interest unavoidably raises >the question of whether a person has been unduly influenced. And the >person's work should be judged in light of the conflict, and the question. >Particularly when the person in question vehemently denied - on this list >and his own "private" list, the existence of such a conflict. BD What schlocky sort of a journalist are you? I was trained, back in my journalism days, to develop a time line. IN THE PAST, Erwin has told us that he did not receive money from Leica. The last such claim was about a year ago, if my memory is correct. TODAY, Erwin appears to have been the author of a pamphlet sponsored by Leica. A slew of queries would occur to the non-doctrinaire journalist: a) Was Erwin paid for this work? b) IF he was paid (and I am not certain that he was, having done unpaid work for Leica myself), when was this a firm deal? Before or after his last statement that he was independent of Leica? c) If he knew of an impending payment, did this render him not "independent" of Leica? Can there be a one-shot payment which does not affect independence? d) Does drafting a pamphlet make one a heart-and-soul slave of Leica? e) Does taking money to draft a descriptive pamphlet necessarily invalidate a lifetime of work? BD, I could run down the companies which own the companies for which you work. Are you slaves to these? Be real, brother! Marc msmall@infi.net FAX: +276/343-7315 Cha robh bąs fir gun ghrąs fir! - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html