RE: TPA reference element?

[Dale Moberg <dmoberg@cyclonecommerce.com>]

I am not certain what legal role, if any, a CPA plays
by itself. I wondered whether we should be able to,
for convenience, point off to contractual documents.
I suppose the contractual documents might refer back
to the CPA somehow, and in that case a CPA might become
relevant to the squabble. At any rate, I did not originally
think of giving a role to the CPA expressing something like
"no legal contract is to be used". If an element was
not present in the CPA, it does not mean that there
is no legal agreement--only that no reference to it
was included. But I am beginning to see why this
legal TPA stuff was stuck into a comment ;-) 

Just to change the question a bit: What if the
BPSS turns off its flag, but there is some other legally binding
contract? Doesn't setting the flag on
isLegallyBinding to false just mean that the BPSS is not
itself a legally binding document? Or is it intended
to imply that there
are no legally binding documents pertaining
to the business process? (which sounds
funny to me).


Dale

-----Original Message-----
From: Welsh, David [mailto:David.Welsh@nordstrom.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 12:02 PM
To: 'Martin W Sachs'; Dale Moberg
Cc: ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: TPA reference element?


What might happen in a real business scenario if BPSS has
IsLegallyBinding turned ON, CPA explicitly says there's no legal
contract to be used, and something major goes wrong where as a result
one of the 2 parties wants to take legal recourse. BPSS over-rides CPA ?
-Dave


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin W Sachs [mailto:mwsachs@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 11:43 AM
> To: Dale Moberg
> Cc: ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: TPA reference element?
> 
> 
> 
> We already have such an element although it is "hidden" :-)  
> In the early
> versions of what became tpaML, we (IBM Res.) had a LegalText 
> element.  The
> spec stated that this could be used to record the ID of an 
> accompanying
> paper contract.  When people inside IBM started advising us 
> not to tangle
> with the legal profession, we changed the element name to 
> Comment and that
> has persisted into CPP-CPA V 1.0.
> 
> Since we have more recently seen that the legal community is in fact
> interested and friendly to us, I agree that we could add an element
> specifically for identifying an accompanying contract.  
> Presumably, this
> element would be CPA-only. Since it would be directly under the root
> element, we can enforce the restriction to CPA only in the 
> DTD and Schema.
> We probably should use the term "TPA" only as an example of such a
> contract.
> 
> Regards,
> Marty
> 
> **************************************************************
> ***********************
> 
> Martin W. Sachs
> IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
> P. O. B. 704
> Yorktown Hts, NY 10598
> 914-784-7287;  IBM tie line 863-7287
> Notes address:  Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM
> Internet address:  mwsachs @ us.ibm.com
> **************************************************************
> ***********************
> 
> 
> 
> Dale Moberg <dmoberg@cyclonecommerce.com> on 06/26/2001 02:18:36 PM
> 
> To:   ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org
> cc:
> Subject:  TPA reference element?
> 
> 
> 
> Another issue for next month's kickoff--
> probably under the small additions category--
> is to add an optional element that can reference a TPA
> that is to be associated with a CPA.
> 
> Just as we now have pointers off to trading
> partner information, and business process specifications,
> a pointer to a TPA might also be useful.
> Some industry groups, RosettaNet for example,
> are exploring specifying TPAs
> for their communities in the near future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>