|
| Thu, Jul 24th | home | browse | articles | contact | chat | submit | faq | newsletter | about | stats | scoop | 23:10 UTC |
|
login « register « recover password « |
| [Article] | add comment | [Article] |
Want to sell your own product but not have to worry about those silly guarantees and liabilities? It's easy -- start your own high tech company! Copyright notice: All reader-contributed material on freshmeat.net is the property and responsibility of its author; for reprint rights, please contact the author directly. Work without responsibilityConsider the automobile. The government regulates the safety equipment in your car. Airbags, side impact beams, 5MPH bumpers, seatbelts, and standard crash tests all help protect you and your passengers while in your car. Do you think most of these systems would exist without government legislation? Consider that airbag technology has existed since the 1970s. While the government tends to keep an eye on the automotive industry, the computer industry seems to be able to operate with virtual impunity. Let's look at some examples: Look at the recent proposed settlement between the United States Department of Justice and Microsoft. Many in the business and computer world consider it a farce. Have you actually read the End User License Agreement (EULA) on any of your software? Did you know that, in spite of the thousands of hours of development and testing that make up the expensive price of software, there is no guarantee of any kind? If you buy the software and it doesn't work or destroys your data, it's not the software company's fault. It's no one's. Try to swallow these EULAs: Two separate software companies:One:
"(name withheld) does not warrant that the Software will meet your requirements or that operation of the Software will be uninterrupted or that the Software will be error-free." "REGARDLESS OF WHETHER ANY REMEDY SET FORTH HEREIN FAILS OF ITS ESSENTIAL PURPOSE, IN NO EVENT WILL (name withheld) BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, INDIRECT, OR SIMILAR DAMAGES, INCLUDING ANY LOST PROFITS OR LOST DATA ARISING OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE SOFTWARE, EVEN IF (name withheld) HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES." "IN NO CASE SHALL (name withheld) LIABILITY EXCEED THE PURCHASE PRICE OF THE PRODUCT." Two:
"TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, IN NO EVENT SHALL (name withheld) OR ITS SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF BUSINESS PROFITS, BUSINESS INTERRUPTION, LOSS OF BUSINESS INFORMATION, OR ANY OTHER PECUNIARY LOSS) ARISING OUT OF THE USE OF OR INABILITY TO USE THE SOFTWARE PRODUCT OR THE PROVISION OF OR FAILURE TO PROVIDE SUPPORT SERVICES, EVEN IF (name withheld) HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. IN ANY CASE, (name withheld)'S ENTIRE LIABILITY UNDER ANY PROVISION OF THIS EULA SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE GREATER OF THE AMOUNT ACTUALLY PAID BY YOU FOR THE SOFTWARE PRODUCT OR U.S. $5.00; HOWEVER, IF YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO A (name withheld) SUPPORT SERVICES AGREEMENT, (name withheld)'S ENTIRE LIABILITY REGARDING SUPPORT SERVICES SHALL BE GOVERNED BY THE TERMS OF THAT AGREEMENT." From a hardware company:
"Any Product requiring service during the Warranty Period should be returned to (name withheld) in accordance with the "Return Material Authorization" Process set forth in the documentation for that product and on the (name withheld) Web site." "EXCEPT FOR THE EXCLUSIVE REMEDY SET FORTH ABOVE, IN NO EVENT SHALL (name withheld) HAVE ANY LIABILITY TO PURCHASER OF THIRD PARTY FOR ANY CLAIM, LOSS OF DAMAGE OF ANY KIND, EVEN IF (name withheld) HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBLY (nice grammar) OF SUCH DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOST PROFITS, CONSEQUENTIAL, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, PUNITIVE OR INDIRECT DAMAGES, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH (A) THE PERFORMANCE, USE OF OR INABILITY TO USE ANY PRODUCT OR ANY DATA, SOFTWARE, OR EQUIPMENT RELATED THERETO OR USED IN CONJUNCTION HEREWITH, OR (B) INFRINGEMENT OF ANY PATENT, COPYRIGHT, TRADEMARK, OR OTHER INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHT OF ANY THIRD PARTY. IN NO EVENT SHALL (name withheld)'S LIABILITY FOR DAMAGES, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE, WARRANTY, OR INFRINGEMENT OF ANY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHT, EXCEED THE PURCHASE PRICE PAID BY THE PURCHASE FOR THE PRODUCT." From an ISP:
"(name withheld) assumes no liability whatsoever for any claims, damages, losses, or expenses arising out of or otherwise relating to the unavailability of the Service in your geographical area, even where such unavailability occurs after installation of the Service." You would think these statements relieving the companies of any responsibility would satisfy them. Think again. Companies are now trying to hide any evidence of their poorly-functioning products behind the law. Consider the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) that makes it a criminal offense in America to create software that would demonstrate a weakness or defect in the security of any software or hardware product. This article at the Register talks about how Microsoft is attempting to prevent any discloser of bugs in their software. Business Week has an article in which an ISP tells a customer to remove his firewall security or they can't help him with his broadband Internet connection. "Psst, wanna buy a TV?" whispers Shady Jim in a trenchcoat. He points to the back of his truck parked in the alley. People do this all the time. When you buy Shady Jim's TV, do you expect to bring it back if something is wrong? Of course not. But what if you bought the TV from a store? What if you bought it from the manufacturer? Of course you should be able to return it. Not so with software -- once you open that shrink wrap, the software is yours, no matter how dissatisfied you are. Disclaimer: The information supplied by the author is for reading purposes only. Should any of the information contained herein cause loss of data, destruction of property, empty love life, bad social standing, or any other event of natural or unnatural origins to the reader or any third party, the author will not liable in this universe or any other. Author's bio: Neil Watson works in the greater Toronto area as a network administrator. He lives in Markham, Ontario, Canada, where he spends his spare time running his own domain and learning Perl. He is married and loves his wife Lisa very much. He can be reached at freshmeat@watson-wilson.ca. T-Shirts and Fame! We're eager to find people interested in writing articles on software-related topics. We're flexible on length, style, and topic, so long as you know what you're talking about and back up your opinions with facts. Anyone who writes an article gets a t-shirt from ThinkGeek in addition to 15 minutes of fame. If you think you'd like to try your hand at it, let jeff.covey@freshmeat.net know what you'd like to write about. [Comments are disabled]
[»]
Well paint me red and call me a wagon! Of all the EULA's I have looked at this was the nicest. I guess I never
would have expected this from MS. This is from the VC++ .NET EULA. There
are questions to be answered like the definition of a "defect"
and so on. But this looks like a real life software warranty.
[»]
Slightly Off topic What I would like to see is some accountability for
[»]
the EULA One think many of you may have never done is to have worked in a computer retail store like CompUSA. I get customers day in and day out that will moan and cry over a piece of software that they THOUGHT would do what they want. The problem is that they don't read the box, or find information on it over the internet.. they look at the pretty pictures on the front of the box. BTW, most computer problem are the result of the user, who likes to use new software as a scapegoat ("I installed Unreal Tournament and it gave me a virus!"). Then again, what do you expect from someone who will argue until they day he died that he just installed 128 ghz of ram in his modem? The majority of customers, and end users for that matter, are idiots.
[»]
Re: the EULA
--
[»]
Re: the EULA
[»]
Holding back information Once an exploit is out in the wild, it's usually a matter of hours before you risk being hit by it. So there is good reason to allow software producers some reasonable time before publishing an exploit or information that can be used to reproduce it. By reasonable time, I mean a few days. The alternative is to have companies rush out half-solutions that don't solve the problem. Of course, a month is just silly. Nobody can expect the problem to go unnoticed for that long. About the ISP who wanted the user to turn off his firewall: what are they otherwise supposed to do? A sufficiently paranoid configuration, or misconfiguration, is indistinguishable from a cut cable.
[»]
Umm As far as the article linked to regarding the person having trouble with their cable-modem provider not supporting their system that had zone alarm installed... That's not something that any ISP should or could support. It's one thing to have the guy un-install it, but to just turn it off while they help the user trouble-shoot isn't much to ask, and is to be expected. Zone-alarm by default won't even allow the system to be pinged, which is a normal tool used to trouble-shoot. I don't see any problem with asking a user to turn off a firewall. Actually, if you call your ISP, and have a firewall turned on.. I wouldn't expect to get support.. it just adds too much complexity to trouble-shooting an issue.
[»]
Re: Umm
[»]
Re: Umm I agree. When troubleshooting, cut different thing to minimum. Once it works add more thing until it doesn't, and you (hopefully) know what's wrong. Cutting down the firewall temporarily is the same thing as going to a known-to-work power outlet just to see if it's the device or something else.. --
[»]
Not Really An Issue I don't think this is really a very important issue.
--
[»]
Re: Not Really An Issue
See your local search engine for endless references. Just type in, "UCITA". Ick.
[»]
Enterprise Grade Software Then again, there's some software that guarantees that it will function
exactly as its documented. In the case of a particular enterprise
object-database, if an API didn't function as documented (ie, had a bug)
you would have cause to demand action to be taken.
[»]
Re: Enterprise Grade Software Hehe, take a look at what D. Knuth says about TeX :) There you have your guarantees. But that is old and proven software - he knew very few bugs had been found lately when he put that price up... Most softwarre is pretty new and haven't had the time to maturre enough. Perheaps if people stopped wanting new features we could get some really good s/w. Think of cars; how much new featurres have you seen lately (and not car stereo enhancements, but real features of the car itself)? How many bug-fixes and security updates? I would say allmost no new features, but a hell lot of bug-fixes and security add-ons. --
[»]
Re: Enterprise Grade Software
--
[»]
Re: Enterprise Grade Software
[»]
Re: Enterprise Grade Software
[»]
Liability and Support. In very many cases these 'I don't care' type of shrink wrapped liscences
are not only due to the amount of resources it requires to support a
sigificant user base but as well customers love to blame vendors for their
problems and will sue at the drop of a hat. I really don't blame companies
for throwing out these life-rafts for themselves.
[»]
Re: Liability and Support.
This is not actually the case. The reason that you see fewer bugs in console software is that before you can release, you have to be approved by the console's manufacturer. On the Dreamcast, for example, this meant that you had to survive a run on a memory debugger (which checked for common mistakes such as NULL or otherwise illegal pointer dereferences, doubly-deallocating memory, etc) for 24 hours of continuous play. If that debugger found ANY problems during that time (much less if the game crashed or froze!), you'd be rejected, and have to fix the bugs before resubmitting for another try. And each resubmission was a moderately expensive process. mewse
|