> Who was talking about fear?
You, but you called it "Concern." :-D I prefer to describe emotion in it's primal form. "Afraid", "Concerned", makes little difference. In this context it's the same thing.
> You are the one who brought this one up, I don't think fear is
> a good thing to read into anything.
Well, that goes for "Concern" too. It's quite possible that a signed agreement capping damages, is relevant when being countersued for damages. Hell, I would have danced on it too. What better defence for liability is there, than a signed document relinquishing liability?
> I think Bill McEwEn was deliberately avoiding answering
> the question.
Obviously, his countersuit wouldn't make much sense if he had answered "Yes. Thendics liability is capped at $0, according to our contract"
That doesn't mean that Thendic believes they'll lose the case or is afraid/concerned... the countersuit isn't mutually exclusive to the suit. It's not impossible for both the suit and the countersuit to be found valid, and even win, indipendantly of each other.