4 ms·

> What you wrote puts a shiver down my spine. If I can't disclaim any sort of warranty, and my FOSS has a bug which a company incorrectly thinks is nefarious co

> What you wrote puts a shiver down my spine. If I can't disclaim any sort of warranty, and my FOSS has a bug which a company incorrectly thinks is nefarious code, what defense do I have should that company decide to sue me? I am not a lawyer, you are not my client and this is not legal advice. My layman’s understanding is that it is not possible to disclaim liability for malicious action which harms another. If someone believes that you have maliciously harmed him, then he may try to recover damages from you for doing so — this is independent of software (he could do the same if you broke his leg). > And now you suggest it might be otherwise, and I might end up paying a lot in lawyer and court costs over years? Yup. The mechanism for sorting out claims of truth and liability is court, and wise plaintiffs and defendants engage lawyers. Unfortunately, this can be expensive, and in some cases the process is the punishment: one might be exonerated, but only after years and years of litigation and worry. I imagine that generally a potential plaintiff’s lawyers would advise him that absent clear evidence of malice that he is unlikely to win, and would be wasting his money. Particularly if you have no real assets, the game is not likely to be worth the candle. But if he is rich or foolish, he might waste it anyway.

eesmith 3y ago
> for malicious action which harms another Here's are things a lawyer might be able to answer. What specifically is my action that I am legally responsible for? I did not install my software on your machine - you did that. And I explicitly warned you not to trust it. Yet some reason you decided not only to trust that code base, but to keep trusting me in the future enough to auto-update, likely without even telling me. What makes it malicious? I can sell you a tool to re-format your hard disk. That is not malicious, because I described it that way. So how well do I need to document some "malicious" feature before it's no longer legally malicious? And, if I sell my company to another company, who then carries out these actions, is it my responsibility? Are these criminal liabilities, or civil? What is the relevant law? What is the maximum penalty? > Yup. The mechanism for sorting out claims of truth and liability is court Sure. But clearly invalid cases can get summary judgement for far less than taking the whole thing to trial, and I've been judging my risk based on the former overriding any of my users' claims of malicious intent. This doesn't seem like a topic that can go any further without an appropriate lawyer involved.

eesmith 3y ago

> for malicious action which harms another Here's are things a lawyer might be able to answer. What specifically is my action that I am legally responsible for? I did not install my software on your machine - you did that. And I explicitly warned you not to trust it. Yet some reason you decided not only to trust that code base, but to keep trusting me in the future enough to auto-update, likely without even telling me. What makes it malicious? I can sell you a tool to re-format your hard disk. That is not malicious, because I described it that way. So how well do I need to document some "malicious" feature before it's no longer legally malicious? And, if I sell my company to another company, who then carries out these actions, is it my responsibility? Are these criminal liabilities, or civil? What is the relevant law? What is the maximum penalty? > Yup. The mechanism for sorting out claims of truth and liability is court Sure. But clearly invalid cases can get summary judgement for far less than taking the whole thing to trial, and I've been judging my risk based on the former overriding any of my users' claims of malicious intent. This doesn't seem like a topic that can go any further without an appropriate lawyer involved.