Representations and Recommendations Unless otherwise stated in writing, neither Xxxxxxxx Realty Inc, nor its brokers or licensees have made, on their own behalf, any representations or warranties, express or implied, with respect to any element of the Property including but not limited to, the legal sufficiency, legal effect, or tax consequences of this transaction. Any information furnished by either party should be independently verified before that party relies on such information. Xxxxxxxx Realty Inc. recommends that Buyer consult its attorneys and accountants before signing this Agreement regarding the terms and conditions herein and that Seller satisfy itself as to the financial ability of Buyer to perform.
Conclusions and Recommendations The demonstration and evaluation process provided an opportunity to test community specific tools with a range of end users from the memory institution domain and to gain greater insight into both the current and future evolution of the SHAMAN prototypes for preservation, access and re-use. Xxxx et al. (2000) in their user evaluation study of the Alexandria Digital Library which incorporated the evaluation of a Web prototype by earth scientists, information specialists and educators raised four key questions in relation to their findings that SHAMAN may be well advised to consider, they are paraphrased here with our conclusions from the investigations. What have we learned about our target organizations and potential users? Memory institutions are most definitely not a homogenised group; their needs and requirements differ greatly across the domain. Representatives of the archives community are agreed on the benefits of SHAMAN‟s authenticity validation function. The representatives of government information services remained unconvinced as to the need or benefit of grid technologies or distributed ingest while librarians saw the value of grid access as an asset of the framework. What have we learned about the evaluation approach for digital preservation? Within the limits of the exercise, in terms of time-frame and resources, the approach adopted has generated useful information for the further development of demonstrators and for the development of the SHAMAN framework overall. What have we learned about the SHAMAN ISP1 demonstrator? Respondents to the evaluation questionnaires and the focus groups indicate that, overall, the presentation of the demonstrator worked effectively and that, in general, participants in the demonstration and evaluation events were able to understand the intentions of the demonstration and to apply the ideas presented to their own context. What have we learned about the applicability of the SHAMAN framework to memory institutions? Respondents to the questionnaires and participants in the focus groups readily identified the value of the SHAMAN framework to their own operations. The majority had not yet established a long-term digital preservation policy, but recognized the need. Generally, the concepts of distributed ingest and grid operations found favour. Virtually all practitioners in the focus groups, however, drew attention to need of a lower level demonstration that would be closer to their everyday preservation troubles, especially for digital preservation to be applied to non-textual materials, such as film, photographs and sound archives. In addition to the criteria suggested by Xxxx et al., we can add a further project-related question: What have we learned that has implications for the training and dissemination phase of the Project? It was not part of the remit of the demonstration and evaluation specifically to discover information of relevance to the training and dissemination function. However, a number of factors will affect the efficacy of any training programme in particular. o First, no common understanding of digital preservation can be assumed of the potential target audiences for training. Consequently, it is likely that self-paced learning materials will be most effective in presenting the SHAMAN framework. o Secondly, the aims of SHAMAN as a project must be conveyed clearly: specifically, that it is a kind of „proof-of-concept‟ project and is not intended to deliver a package of programs capable of being implemented by institutions. o Thirdly, it needs to be emphasised that the SHAMAN framework is not limited to text documents; it can be applied to materials of all kinds. However, the demonstrations relate to bodies of material that were actually available for use. o Fourthly, the existing presentation materials are capable of being adapted for use in training activities. o Finally, the target audiences will appreciate the possibility of online access to the demonstrator, which will need to have very great ease of access in order that people with diverse backgrounds are able to use it with equal facility. We believe that, overall, WP14 has met its aims and objectives in this demonstration and evaluation of ISP1. Valuable lessons have been learnt by all parties involved, which will be transferred to the evaluation of ISP2 in the coming months.
Conclusion and Recommendations D. Evaluations for Offenders without a sex offense conviction shall answer the following additional referral questions in the evaluations:
Manufacturer's Recommendations All work or materials shall be installed in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations and requirements. The Contractor shall obtain the manufacturer’s recommendations and requirements, for its use at the Site in executing the Work, copies of bulletins, circulars, catalogues, or other publications bearing the manufacturer’s titles, numbers, editions, dates, etc. If the manufacturer’s recommendations and requirements are not available, the Contractor shall request installation instructions from the Design Professional.
Determinations and Actions by the Board of Directors All actions, calculations and determinations (including all omissions with respect to the foregoing) which are done or made by the Board of Directors in good faith pursuant to this Agreement, shall not subject the Board of Directors to any liability to the holders of the Rights.
Cooperation on forestry matters and environmental protection 1. The aims of cooperation on forestry matters and environmental protection will be, but not limited to, as follows: (a) establishing bilateral cooperation relations in the forestry sector; (b) developing a training program and studies for sustainable management of forests; (c) improving the rehabilitation and sustainable management of forest with the aim of increasing carbon sinks and reduce the impact of climate change in the Asia-Pacific region; (d) cooperating on the execution of national projects, aimed at: improving the management of forest plantations for its transformation for industrial purposes and environmental protection; (e) elaborating studies on sustainable use of timber; (f) developing new technologies for the transformation and processing of timber and non-timber species; and (g) improving cooperation in agro-forestry technologies. 2. To achieve the objectives of the Article 149 (Objectives), the Parties may focus, as a means of cooperation and negotiations on concluding a bilateral agreement on forestry cooperation between the two Parties. Such collaboration will be as follows: (a) exchanges on science and technology as well as policies and laws relating the sustainable use of forest resources; (b) cooperation in training programs, internships, exchange of experts and projects advisory; (c) advice and technical assistance to public institutions and organizations of the Parties on sustainable use of forest resources and environmental protection; (d) facilitating forest policy dialogue and technical cooperation under the Network of Sustainable Forest Management and Forest Rehabilitation in Asia- Pacific Region, initiated at the 15th Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Meeting; (e) encouraging joint studies, working visits, exchange of experiences, among others; and (f) others activities mutually agreed.
Vendor Encouraging Members to bypass TIPS agreement Encouraging entities to purchase directly from the Vendor or through another agreement, when the Member has requested using the TIPS cooperative Agreement or price, and thereby bypassing the TIPS Agreement is a violation of the terms and conditions of this Agreement and will result in removal of the Vendor from the TIPS Program.
E6 Publicity, Media and Official Enquiries E6.1 The Contractor shall not:
VISIBILITY OF FUNDING FROM THE OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE Unless the SAIDC requests or agrees otherwise, any communication or publication made by the Final Beneficiary that relates to the action, including at conferences, seminars or in any information or promotional materials (such as brochures, leaflets, posters, presentations in electronic form, etc.), including tangible assets acquired from the project must: (a) indicate that the action has received funding from the Official Development Assistance, SlovakAid and (b) display the SlovakAid logo. When displayed in association with another logo, the SlovakAid logo must have appropriate prominence. The obligation to display the SlovakAid logo does not confer on the Final Beneficiary a right of exclusive use. The Final Beneficiary may not appropriate the SlovakAid logo or any similar trademark or logo, either by registration or by any other means. For the purposes of the first, second and third subparagraphs and under the conditions specified therein, the Final Beneficiary may use the SlovakAid logo without first obtaining permission from the SAIDC.
APPROVAL OF GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS Competitive Supplier may only communicate with Program participants and/or use the lists of Eligible Consumers/Program participants to send Department-approved education materials, opt- out notices, or other communications essential to the operation of the Program. Such lists may not be used by Competitive Supplier to market any additional products or services to Eligible Consumers or Program Participants. Competitive Supplier shall cooperate with and assist the Town in the drafting and sending of messages and information to Eligible Consumers concerning the Program or any matter arising under or related to this Agreement or the Program. Competitive Supplier shall, prior to sending any direct mail, advertising, solicitation, bill insert, electronic mail, or other similar written or electronic communication (collectively, “General Communications”) to Participating Consumers (but excluding individually drafted or tailored communications responding to a specific complaint or communication of an individual consumer), provide a copy of such General Communication to the Town for its review (for consistency with the Town’s purposes and goals) and approval. The Town shall have the right to disapprove such General Communications and suggest revisions if it finds the communication inconsistent with the purposes and goals of the Town, factually inaccurate, not essential to the operation of the program, or likely to mislead provided, however, that: (i) the communication shall be deemed approved if the Town fails to respond within ten (10) Business Days, and (ii) no approval shall be necessary for any communication (a) regarding any emergency situation involving any risk to the public health, safety or welfare; (b) that has been approved by the Department, the DOER; or (c) in the nature of routine monthly or periodic bills, or collection notices, except that any bill insert or message included at the bottom of such bill not within the scope of (a) or (b) above shall require advanced review and approval by the Town; and (iii) no approval or lack of approval shall relieve the Competitive Supplier of its obligations and responsibility for its actions and omissions under this Agreement, or other than as set forth in sub-clause ‘i’ of this Section 7.6, result in a waiver of any rights, remedies or defenses of the Town. The Town may reject or exclude any proposed General Communication that, in its reasonable judgment, is contrary to the interests and objectives of the Program or the Town.
