Enron Mail

From:mark.taylor@enron.com
To:louise.kitchen@enron.com
Subject:Re: Eastern - Summary of their Response to PA/ETA
Cc:
Bcc:
Date:Mon, 17 Jan 2000 06:50:00 -0800 (PST)

Don't be too hard on him just yet. Remember that we talked about many
similar issues here when they first came up. Maybe after we've been through
these with him once he will negotiate them in the first case and only bring
the tough sticking points to us.




Louise Kitchen
01/17/2000 02:25 PM
To: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Justin Boyd/LON/ECT@ECT, David Forster/LON/ECT@ECT
Subject: Eastern - Summary of their Response to PA/ETA

Please deal with this for me - but my initial thoughts are that we cannot
address the majority of these.

Thanks

---------------------- Forwarded by Louise Kitchen/LON/ECT on 01/17/2000
08:22 PM ---------------------------


David Forster
01/14/2000 06:43 PM
To: Louise Kitchen/LON/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Eastern - Summary of their Response to PA/ETA

I'm running out of time - can you handle?

Thanks,

Dave
---------------------- Forwarded by David Forster/LON/ECT on 14/01/2000 18:41
---------------------------


Justin Boyd
14/01/2000 11:36
To: David Forster/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: Edmund Cooper/LON/ECT@ECT

Subject: Eastern - Summary of their Response to PA/ETA

PA

They wish to amend the PA such that:

Enron warrants that their use of the passwords and the Website does not cause
them to breach any third party rights
they only notify us of unauthorised disclosure or use of passwords upon their
learning of the same.
they can withdraw or amend information provided to Enron from time to time

ETA

They do not want to be bound by future terms and conditions imposed by Enron
(see 1(iii))
They wish to restrict our use of information to Enron Group companies (see
last sentence of 2(b))
They feel unable to make the statement in the first sentence of 2(d), since
they trade through various group company agents on behalf of a BV principal
To establish a tangible audit trail and for verification, they wish to be
able to verify our paper confirms (see 3(e))
They wish to restructure the indemnity entirely (see 4), such that each party
is liable for losses suffered by the other due to its own wilful
default/negligence/omission.
They wish to have the right to terminate the ETA (see 6(a)), and wish that
electronic notices be deemed sent when the sender receives notice from the
system of delivery or failed delivery (see 6(e)).

Some of these are more important than others, but there are some key points.
Please let me know what you think - thanks

Justin