From: Rob Kall (smile_at_compuserve.com)
Date: 2001-06-08 14:08:32
Message text written by INTERNET:buildcheapeeg_at_yahoogroups.com
>
I want to repeat my point, though, that the machine would be useful
for a variety of purposes even without the BF software, so I think
there is really no ethical problem with dividing the machine from the
SW, and this is really not just a thin veil of trickery.<
You DID make your point, quite well. And actually, it would probably be
cheaper tohave two separate websites.
The only thing is, the biofeedback software might then be subject to the
same liability issues.
It might be possible to word the licensing agreement to protect from
liability, or even to have each user pay a fee towards liability insurance
for the product.
Here in Pennsylvania, you can buy auto insurance with or without the right
to full tort protection. If you don't pay the extra $50 for "full tort" you
can't sue if you are in an accident.
Rob Kall
Futurehealth, Inc.
211 N. Sycamore St., Newtown, PA 18940 215-504-1700, fax 215-860-5374
www.futurehealth.org
10th annual Winter Brain Meeting February 7-11, Miami Florida
"We're much more like flickering flames than hunks of meat."
Candace Pert
BioFbP Listserve. The Listserve For BIofeedback Practitioners.
Subscribe: biofbp-subscribe_at_yahoogroups.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 2002-07-27 12:28:30 BST