<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: china&#8217;s new labor contract law&#8230; for american readers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.chinalawandbusiness.com/2008/06/chinas-new-labor-contract-law-for-american-readers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.chinalawandbusiness.com/2008/06/chinas-new-labor-contract-law-for-american-readers/</link>
	<description>China law blog covering Chinese law, business, and non-profits by Thomas Chow</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2010 02:38:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: T Chow</title>
		<link>http://www.chinalawandbusiness.com/2008/06/chinas-new-labor-contract-law-for-american-readers/comment-page-1/#comment-651</link>
		<dc:creator>T Chow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2008 17:00:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chinalawandbusiness.com/2008/06/11/chinas-new-labor-contract-law-for-american-readers/#comment-651</guid>
		<description>I appreciate the clarification.  However, I &lt;strong&gt;did&lt;/strong&gt; give credit to China L&amp;P magazine for the article.  H/t refers to the fact that Dan Harris found and posted it before I did, and I am acknowledging that.  I also refer to Dan&#039;s other posts b/c that is part of his current post--a bunch of his own prior posts on topic.

No one has claimed any psuedo-authorship and I think you have inferred something that doesn&#039;t exist from the language in my post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I appreciate the clarification.  However, I <strong>did</strong> give credit to China L&#038;P magazine for the article.  H/t refers to the fact that Dan Harris found and posted it before I did, and I am acknowledging that.  I also refer to Dan&#8217;s other posts b/c that is part of his current post&#8211;a bunch of his own prior posts on topic.</p>
<p>No one has claimed any psuedo-authorship and I think you have inferred something that doesn&#8217;t exist from the language in my post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff Gregan</title>
		<link>http://www.chinalawandbusiness.com/2008/06/chinas-new-labor-contract-law-for-american-readers/comment-page-1/#comment-650</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Gregan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2008 11:32:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chinalawandbusiness.com/2008/06/11/chinas-new-labor-contract-law-for-american-readers/#comment-650</guid>
		<description>Tom, just to get your credits right please. The translation you mentioned was nothing to do with either Dan Harris or China Law Blog, and it is disingenous of both you and them to imply otherwise. It was actually published by the legal editorial team at China Law &amp; Practice, part of Asia Law &amp; Practice, owned by Euromoney Publications. If you&#039;re going to give credits, please ensure you credit the right people and not those who merely put up links on their blogs to other peoples work. This practice on China law blogs of claiming pseudo credit for China legal material that was sourced from other people&#039;s intellect and resources is becoming rather irritating.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tom, just to get your credits right please. The translation you mentioned was nothing to do with either Dan Harris or China Law Blog, and it is disingenous of both you and them to imply otherwise. It was actually published by the legal editorial team at China Law &amp; Practice, part of Asia Law &amp; Practice, owned by Euromoney Publications. If you&#8217;re going to give credits, please ensure you credit the right people and not those who merely put up links on their blogs to other peoples work. This practice on China law blogs of claiming pseudo credit for China legal material that was sourced from other people&#8217;s intellect and resources is becoming rather irritating.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
