> demanding opening the source code once security updates for the device stop Copyright law is not in agreement with this. Reasonably, a manufacturer could arg

> demanding opening the source code once security updates for the device stop Copyright law is not in agreement with this. Reasonably, a manufacturer could argue that follow up installments of the software are still actively sold. Then one question is why the fixes wouldn't be ported back to the old release and I guess because differences in the code require significant effort to adapt the fix. Regulation should seek to equalize ... > manufacturers liable for the damages caused by security holes in their devices This is not easy if a chain of bugs in different programs is used to create an exploit. And it would be damaging to warranty wavers especially in open source. After all, the server side will likely run full fledged open source stack. This is where service providers step in. Google would probably like to do monitoring and instrumentation as a service, among others.