2 ms·
No. They should have started by competently and carefully thinking through the consequences of the liabilities they were about to impose on open source, rather
by x0x0 3y ago
No.
They should have started by competently and carefully thinking through the consequences of the liabilities they were about to impose on open source, rather than obligating open source to expend limited resources explaining the obvious consequences.
These problems were obvious to anyone competent who spent even a second thinking about it: people who give software away cannot accept liability for doing so, and the act of giving software away can't impose obligations to people who receive nothing or they will obviously have to stop.
- wolverine876 3y agoI'd much rather they consult open source people about open source needs, rather than try to guess. IME, you need to talk to the people on the front lines. In fact, unless I talk to people I know best, even family members, I don't really know.
- x0x0 3y agoThey didn't consult. They made open source go lobby them to avoid having to block the EU. That's the exact opposite of asking open source, in advance of legislation, what would happen if they did X.