2 ms·
I think you misunderstand. What i'm saying is, if sold by ansible to a consumer, these disclaimers are completely ineffective in a bunch of states. The UCC (w
by DannyBee 9y ago
I think you misunderstand.
What i'm saying is, if sold by ansible to a consumer, these disclaimers are completely ineffective in a bunch of states.
The UCC (which is what governs these transactions) is model legislation, and provides for a few options that states can choose in various parts. One option allows disclaimer of implied warranty in all transactions. One option allows disclaimer of implied warranty in all transactions except those with consumers. One option disallows disclaimers of implied warranties.
Depending on which option a given state chose, the language you are citing would have different effectiveness.
- closeparen 9y agoWhy hasn't the open source community figured this out? Seems like a bad idea to ever distribute source code at below the cost of liability insurance. Or should we be geo-restricting open source software? "Sorry, Linux is not available in your state." Thanks for pointing this out. I imagine most people who publish open source software aren't aware of this risk, and will stop when they learn about it.
- DannyBee 9y ago1. If you aren't selling it, the UCC doesn't apply. Most people don't sell their open source software. 2. Most folks are aware of this risk when they start companies to sell open source software. 3. Most do not sell the software directly to consumers, and outside of the few states that don't allow disclaiming at all, most states are fine with disclaiming warranties in b2b transactions, just not b2c. Most don't sell the software directly at all, and those that do are often selling support anyway :)