LinuxSA Mailing list archives

  From: Rick Marshall <rjm@herzfeld.com.au>
  To  : Michael Pearson <alcaron@ozemail.com.au>
  Date: Thu, 26 Nov 1998 11:03:18 +1100

Re: To the LINUX Advocates/Evangelists among us...

Michael Pearson wrote:

> > OK... so - by you - LINUX fails a test for
> > suitability for real-world usage?
> >
> > Are you therefore suggesting that anyone
> > who INSTALLS such an operating system may
> > suffer the same "inconvenience(s)" as are
> > posited above...?
>
> Read the GPL. GPL'ed software (which 90% of linux stuff is) comes with no
> warranty etc etc. What this means is:
>
> - The gov would probably not accept it on their page anyway
> - We would either not suffer any lawsuit, or be charged with misquoting a
> license or suchlike.
> - I'm not saying that GPL'ed software is buggy, but with anything that
> doesn't come with a warranty, the Y2K bug is the least of your
> problems.
>
> Something like the above, anyway.
>

There is something more here. If you _PAY_ someone for something you have
rights. e.g. fitness for purpose. This means a warranty is implied at least
and may be required by law. Even without the current legislation you would
probably have common law rights to a product that works as represented in
exchange for the money you paid.

If you don't pay (the product is free) then none of the above matters.
(Although the definition of "pay" might be extended to mean you purchased
hardware on the recommendation of the supplier of the free product etc - no
telling what a lawyer can get up to).

Bottom line is if govt/business don't pay then they can't blame, seek
retribution etc. OSS just doesn't fit this model.

On the plus side OSS is usually written and maintanined by people who use it.
So it is more likely to work better than software written by people who don't
use it.

My view is that anyone who charges for certifying Y2K software or povides
upgrades as part of Y2K compliance should be required to deposit a % of the
fee in a gov't managed compensation fund so that when the Y2K problems start,
all those who paid for certification can be compensated for the failure of
that certification. My guess is that most Y2K certification/compliance
companies will cease trading shortly before Dec 31, 1999. Merry Xmas.

We should leave this alone and just keep quietly doing the job. That's what
we're paid for and why we have the respect we have.

My US$0.01 worth.

RJM

-- 
Check out the LinuxSA web pages at http://www.linuxsa.org.au/
To unsubscribe from the LinuxSA list:
  mail linuxsa-request@linuxsa.org.au with "unsubscribe" as the subject