4 ms·
> Do you really want liability for software bugs? For free software? No. No payment, no obligation. For paid products? Yes. If you are selling a device, you s
by tonyztan 8y ago
> Do you really want liability for software bugs?
For free software? No. No payment, no obligation.
For paid products? Yes. If you are selling a device, you should be liable for it, just like a car manufacturer would have liability if the brakes failed because they were improperly installed.
- rad_gruchalski 8y agoA lot of these routers contain tons of oss libraries. Would it then depend on which component caused the bug? It‘s a rabbit hole.
- tonyztan 8y agoNo matter which component caused the bug, the device vendor that made the final product should always be responsible, unless it has a contract outsourcing the responsibility for a specific component to another entity. If the vendor simply used open source libraries, then it needs to review and take responsibility for the code, or hire a contractor to do so. This might also incentivize them to provide timely security updates, in order to minimize damages.
- namibj 8y agoYou need to bundle mandatory, sizable insurance as a requirement for getting the license to sell/not selling illegally (i.e., treat the device as illegal as an insurance provider who is not licensed to sell insurance, not as an unlicensed medical doctor). The insurance would make the vendor fix his shit. And he can't just chicken out. Make some way for sufficiently large companies to self-insure, or they will be mad. If they don't get mad, they probably like the reduction in competition.
- rad_gruchalski 8y agoAt the end of the day, the end consumer will pay.
- namibj 8y agoYes. But he better try to line the incentive's of those he does business with up with those you have.
- Dolores12 8y agoIf they were liable there is no profit margin. These products will never exist.
- dcow 8y agoNo, they still would. People do amazing things under constraints.
- rad_gruchalski 8y ago> If the vendor simply used open source libraries, then it needs to review and take responsibility for the code, I can imagine a lot of licensing hassle here. Worked for Technicolor in Edegem, not on routers / STBs but know the challenges. There are tons of libraries used by virtually every device in the field that no company will touch b/c of licensing hell.
- rrix2 8y agoIt would also incentivize vendors to fund critical FLOSS with direct development support on safety-critical functionality.
- DougN7 8y agoThis doesn’t make sense. Why is liability tied to payment? If someone 3D prints brakes and they give them away for free, are they liable? This is a tough problem. We want to punish negligence, not destroy lives because of honest mistakes.
- ge0rg 8y agoThe security levels of most electronics products connected to the Internet, be it IoT or routers, can only be described as criminal negligence. There is no financial incentive for the manufacturers to invest into proper security, and they typically just add some junk to the firmware they get from the SoC vendor and ship. I'm not sure I agree that making the vendors liable in case of vulnerabilities is the right way. It should probably suffice to require vendors to define a guaranteed product support period, where they are obliged to provide security patches, and then hold them liable if they fail that.
- whatshisface 8y agoIf you install someone's free plastic brake pads, you're at fault for whatever happens - and if someone offers to give you something for free and you agree, they don't have to follow through. If you buy them, there's an implied contract that you will receive them. In that implied contract, our society has also inserted "and they won't kill you." The idea that every time a dollar changes hands an implied contract is made underlies US business law. Related to this idea is how rights holders will be offered money for photographs they're giving away for free - because the person who wants to use the image wants to be protected by the implied contract. In this system money is the magic spice that makes agreements real. (If someone gives you their car for free, the courts will sometimes let them take it back. Not so if they sell it for a dollar.)
- adventured 8y agoThat's not how liability works at all. That's an idealistic interpretation of the law that has never actually existed. It does not matter if you charge for your service or product, nor how much you charge, you can still be found criminally negligent or reckless if it kills people and your actions played an important role. There are very few exceptions to that. In civil terms it's far more straight forward: if your free brakes kill people, you will be sued for it (almost guaranteed). From there they will attempt to prove that you were negligent regarding the quality of the free brakes you created. You give away thousands of free chicken sandwiches, that without your knowledge happen to contain bacteria that causes food poisoning and ends up killing several people. You did a very poor, careless job at food prep (similar to the dangerously manufactured brakes). You're almost guaranteed to be pursued criminally and civilly for the deaths.
- ryanlol 8y agoCarmakers will not be liable if I break your brakes. Why should your router manufacturer be liable if I break your router? Clearly in both cases the company failed to manufacture a secure enough product.
- BenjiWiebe 8y agoOne difference: you can repair your brakes, or replace them, without having to get a new car. Most routers do not have updates available after the first one or two patches, and you can't even install your own OS on most. Your only options are: live with it, or buy a complete new router.