3 ms·
Laws don't necessarily need to be specific, but if you rely solely on interpretation to distinguish between different types of responsibility involving third-pa
by cpgxiii 6y ago
Laws don't necessarily need to be specific, but if you rely solely on interpretation to distinguish between different types of responsibility involving third-party software, you will either achieve (1) appeals courts defining responsibility as narrowly as possible, or (2) the complete destruction of third-party software and all independent software development as no vendor is willing to risk exposure.
- Retric 6y agoLiability is always limited to the value of the company. Thus even in the extreme case liability would at worst force companies to run each pice of software as it’s own legal entity. Aka Microsoft is going to keep selling Windows as an OS even if they need to spin off a subsidiary.
- cpgxiii 6y agoWell, then you've still destroyed small independent software vendors, open source projects, and individual projects for which the cost and complications of running an LLC as a liability shield is unsustainable. The issue with defining liability here is primarily what conduct should make a company liable in the first place (and doing so in a way without horrible consequences for user freedom), not what the damages can be.