RE: product liability (was 'we should all be uncomfortable with the extent to which luck..')

["David Schwartz" <davids () webmaster com>]

> Perhaps a different approach is in order -- product liability.

> When Firestone made a large number of bad tires, they compensated the
> purchasers by PAYING for replacement, including those that had not yet
> been injured.  That included the upgrade, and the installation cost.

> Network operators have been injured by the distribution of buggy
> software from M$.  We need to be compensated for our time and expenses.

> End users need to be compensated for their costs to upgrade.

> A check in the mail would be a better incentive to administrators than
> "automatic" updates.

        Please don't force a benefit on me that I don't want and still have to pay
for. I'd rather pay less for software and hold manufacturers responsible
only for deliberate damage.

        And if we force Microsoft, do we also force the authors of software that is
given away for free? It seems to me that even if Firestone gave away their
tires, their liability for defective ones would be the same.

        DS