-----Original Message-----

From: sherlock@vsnl.com Subj: [ILUG-BOM] [INFO] Software Liabilities. Date: Sun 2 Oct 2005 10:35 Size: 800 bytes To: "GNU/Linux Users Group, Mumbai, India" linuxers@mm.ilug-bom.org.in

The subject header should be MisINFO

Typical M$ shit.

"One argument against product liability for software is that it would destroy the industry by placing unacceptable costs on developers, and that it would wipe out the open source movement in its current form since there is no way an organisation like the Mozilla Foundation could distribute Firefox for free under those terms.

But if a system is unjust then it should not be supported, and an unwillingness to strip undeserved privileges from a group, however noble their cause, is not sufficient reason to maintain the current dispensation."

He forgets that closed software vendor liability is zero (they use a doc known as EULA to tell u this) and u pay a fat sum for it.

Actually he is complaining against closed source / proprietory software. He said that some people raise the matter of open-source to stop moving to software liability.

And his argument is valid. Even open source has to be ready to take responsility for the code they right. I remember being told how debian tests every package thoroughly before putting it in stable version. That is the correct way to work.

Saswata rgds jtd