Here's the first story to come out about this:

President, Congress Reach Y2K Compromise (Robert MacMillan, Newsbytes)

-- pshannon (pshannon@inch.com), June 29, 1999

Answers

The compromise bill still tries to lessen the amount of Year 2000- related lawsuits that may be filed by forcing plaintiffs to allow defendants between 30 and 90 days, depending on circumstances, to acknowledge and fix the problems caused by Year 2000-related breakdowns. This is done to encourage alternative dispute resolution.

It's also done to allow slackers more time. It will also encourage scoffers to "fix on failure".

I don't make many predictions. :-) But I'm going to go out on a limb here: a decade from now, this provision of the bill will be viewed universally as one of the worst things that could have been done at this time.

-- Lane Core Jr. (elcore@sgi.net), June 29, 1999.

Lane,

If you can't succeed fairly, change the rules!

-- Mr. Adequate (mr@adequate.com), June 30, 1999.

Thanks for the heads-up ps, as usual...

Any of our hounds got a link to the actual document? I doubt it will matter much. Get ready for a tidal-wave of Mumbo-Jumbo. AT&T, IBM, MS, etc. can generate a whole bunch of M-J... <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), June 30, 1999.

So if my power, water, and phone are off for up to 90 days, no problem, right?

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), June 30, 1999.

Yes, Patrick, thanks for the link.

When anybody finds a link to the text of the bill, please post it. :-)

And, while I'm out on that limb, one more prediction: a decade from now, it will be arguable that this bill (if enacted) actually tended to increase the amount of Y2K litigation rather than to decrease it.

-- Lane Core Jr. (elcore@sgi.net), June 30, 1999.