kenyon@nmtvax.UUCP (03/27/85)
To all [ex-]Software Publishers, How many of you ship software packages without disclaimers stating that you take no responsibility for the software you sell regarding its fitness for any given purpose and all that bullshit? I think this is slightly illegal. When I buy something, I have a right to get a product that will fullful the purpose for which it was intended. (At least in California this is true, Just ask Judge Wapner...) If not, that is breach of contract and I am allowed to recieve damages. You sold me something under the impression that it would do what I wanted. If just one company took responsibilty on paper for its product and used that as a selling point for their software, I'm sure that if they were careful about distribution. (I. E. Selling to informed customers using competent staff. (Yes, I realize that there are not too many places that have competent staff.)) In theory, software publishers should be able (or just plain, should) warrant their product to at least work, but, maybe not just the way people want. If it can be proven in court that the product is functional, there shouldn't be any problems with lawsuits. Maybe the seller's of software to the public ought to be held responsible for the software they sell? I don't know. There must be a solution. Disclaiming everything is not a solution, it's running away. No Offense Meant, Robert Kenyon ...ucbvax!unmvax!nmtvax!kenyon ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer: Robert Kenyon hereby disclaims all sense of intelligence from the enclosed text. No responsiblity is taken for the points made nor ideas expressed or their suitability for any application. So There. ----------------------------------------------------------------------
kenyon@nmtvax.UUCP (03/27/85)
Addendum to "Standing up for products":
Replace the word "without" with the word "with" on line one.
Thank you,
Robert Kenyon
...ucbvax!unmvax!nmtvax!kenyon