|
|
Enron Mail |
Dear Mark
Before they give their final confirmation that the game can go ahead in Poland, our Polish lawyers would like me to forward to them some information as to the critria Enron use to decide who can and can't trade online. I guess that they are wanting to know whether the criteria are basically objective i.e based on credit ratings etc or whether they are more subjective. In practice, what sort of companies do Enron refuse online trading access to? Thanks Rachel -----Original Message----- From: Leslie Hansen [mailto:Leslie.Hansen@enron.com] Sent: Monday, August 28, 2000 7:43 PM To: rachel.murton@linklaters.com; Mark Taylor Cc: Dave Samuels Subject: Re: Enron game Rachel: Mark Taylor will finalize all issues relating to the EnronOnline Games in my absence. Please follow up with Mark to advise re the status of Italy, Norway and Sweden (and any other countries that we may be able to move to the "Approved List.") Also, please confirm that for the purpose of screening individuals who should not play the game, the appropriate question is "Country of Residence." Thank you so much for all of your invaluable assistance on this project! Leslie ----- Forwarded by Leslie Hansen/HOU/ECT on 08/28/2000 01:37 PM ----- |--------+------------------------< | | Leslie Hansen | | | | | | 08/25/2000 | | | 11:44 AM | | | | |--------+------------------------< <--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -| | | | To: "Murton, Rachel" <rachel.murton@linklaters.com<@ENRON | | cc: Dave Samuels/HOU/ECT@ECT | | Subject: Re: Enron game(Document link: Leslie Hansen) | <--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -| Rachel: I don't think we're going to be interested in reimbursing for connection costs so I think we should just keep France in the lists of "not approved." With regard to the data protection issue, I have actually sent Justin an on this various issue to determine if our current legal & privacy language is sufficient or if we need additional language in the rules. I will forward you that e-mail. If you go into the Registration Screen of the demo game, you will see that individual participants will be required to enter their name, e-mail, address and telephone number. I look forward to your comments on this issue. Leslie |--------+------------------------------< | | "Murton, Rachel" | | | <rachel.murton@linkl| | | aters.com< | | | | | | 08/25/2000 10:47 AM | | | | |--------+------------------------------< <--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -| | | | To: "'leslie.hansen@enron.com'" <leslie.hansen@enron.com< | | cc: "'justin.boyd@enron.com'" <justin.boyd@enron.com<, "Didizian,| | Marly" <marly.didizian@linklaters.com< | | Subject: Enron game | <--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -| Dear Leslie France I have now read through the French advice. The DGCCRF (lottery regulators) have confirmed that a game offered on a website may well be regarded as involving a financial contribution due to the cost of Internet communication. This means that the game probably does fall foul of French lottery legislation. One way round this might be to offer to reimburse connection costs. If this is done, then there are still a couple of "indirect contribution" issues to sort out (these relate to being seen not to promote Enron, and so may fall away as in other jurisdictions, although French law on these matters is generally stricter). There is also a possibility that a bailiff needs to be appointed to adjudicate in the case of disupute, but I get the impression from the French advice that this could probably be got round by further discussing the matter with the DGCCRF. Is offering to reimburse connection costs feasible? - if it isn't then, there is presumably little point in "tidying up" the indirect contribution" and "bailiff" issues. The game will not be a lottery if no prize is awarded i.e. there must be an expectation of profit/gain. Hence in theory, not awarding the prize to a French resident should allow the game to be played in France. The French lawyers seemed to have concerns about how this could be done practically - I am not sure I understand their concerns, and have asked them for clarification. I assume that Enrons French customers are French companies, and that we would need to exclude employees of such companies, together with employees of other Enron Customers (for example UK companies) who happen to reside in France. I have asked our colleagues in France for clarification that such exclusions would suffice, and will forward you the essence of their replies. I set out below a list of countries where the game would be lawful, providing prizes are not awarded to residents of that country. Netherlands Belgium Sweden [France] - subject to clarification of our French lawyers concerns Italy As mentioned in my previous e-mail, some of these countries may move into the "approved" list anyway. I have not received express advice on this particular issue from Norway - but there advice implies that not awarding prizes would be ok, and if the tax issue scan be sorted out, Norway may move to the approved list anyway. I will however ask them to confirm the "not awarding prizes" point for completeness. I have not received advice on this point from Spain. You may recall that for the Euro 2000 game, colleagues in Belgium were concerned that if prizes are not to be awarded to Belgium residents, then this needs to be made very clear from an early stage, so that Enron are not misleading partcipants of that country into thinking that they will be awarded a prize if they are not going to be. If ineligbility for prizes is placed prominently in the rules, and partcipants have to read the rules before playing, then I guess that this covers this issue. Although none of the advice from the other jurisdictions has mentioned this point, I think it would apply anywhere where partcipants cannot be awarded prizes. Countries where Enron could avoid liability by using disclaimers pointing out that residents of that particular country cannot play and by having an online registration process are: Spain (based on previous Euro 2000 advice) Italy Netherlands Denmark Sweden Belgium - but note the comments made re Euro 2000 that there is a very slight chance that an online registartion process might raise evidential difficulties i.e. Enron might not be able to prove in a court that Belgium participants had been properly advised of their ineligibility. Belgium law requires written proof of such terms in contracts with consumers. Rules I have not had chance to review the rules in detail. One issue that may be important from a European point of view is data protection i.e. protection of personal data including names and addresses of partcipants and consent to trnsfer data - I will look into this and let you know. As mentioned above, the inelegibility of residents of certain jurisdictions for prizes will need to be included in the "eligibility" section. Miscellaneous One issue which was touched upon in a previous e-mail was whether the word "Olympic" could be used in a disclaimer. I will look into this further and get back to you on this matter next week. As requested, I will summarize the Olympic advice for you also. Regards Rachel ____________________________________________________________ This message is confidential. It may also be privileged or otherwise protected by work product immunity or other legal rules. If you have received it by mistake please let us know by reply and then delete it from your system; you should not copy the message or disclose its contents to anyone. ____________________________________________________________
|