From owner-freebsd-chat Thu May 13 15:36:38 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from smtp2.vnet.net (smtp2.vnet.net [166.82.1.32]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 510CE1518B for ; Thu, 13 May 1999 15:36:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rivers@dignus.com) Received: from dignus.com (ponds.vnet.net [166.82.177.48]) by smtp2.vnet.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA29966 for ; Thu, 13 May 1999 18:37:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lakes.dignus.com (lakes.dignus.com [10.0.0.3]) by dignus.com (8.9.2/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA04366 for ; Thu, 13 May 1999 18:36:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from rivers@localhost) by lakes.dignus.com (8.9.2/8.6.9) id SAA44632 for chat@freebsd.org; Thu, 13 May 1999 18:36:32 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 18:36:32 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas David Rivers Message-Id: <199905132236.SAA44632@lakes.dignus.com> To: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BSD, GPL, the world today. In-Reply-To: <373B4B46.8DDE6A1E@softweyr.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > And, being a software manafacturer myself (see http://www.dignus.com) - the > > thought of having legal responsibility for a potential problem in my > > software (which you've mentioned, despite anyone's best efforts, will > > have bugs) is very scary. I would want to pass that responsibility to > > the developers who wrote it, just as a bridge engineer is responsible > > for the bridge he designs. > > I'm with you so far, and trust me, you ARE responsible for problems in > your software. Anyone who can prove either negliegence or misintent can > sue you for damages regardless of how many feet of tiny type you put on > your packaging. We don't have any on-the-package licensing.. it's not shrink-wrap, that is... we're a lot more up-front than that. As I understand it; the shrink-wrap license doesn't hold up in court; because you don't have an opportunity to agree to what the license says. I don't like the idea of shrink-wrap licenses, but I also don't like 20 page license agreements that take 5 lawyers to hammer out. Ours is a compromise between the two. > > > Then, the developers would, presumably, have > > to become licensed and have professional development/malpractice insurance... > > which ultimately drives up the price of the software. > > Would it really? I think we just have a skewed idea of the total cost > of software. How expensive is that $39 word processor when it crashes > and dumps the last four hours of your work into the bit bucket? I think > a lot of current software has a much higher cost than we really account > for. That's a really good point - which, I'll admit, hadn't occurred to me before. Seems like the software can "cost" more than the money that changes hands. Our software isn't sold, it's leased; and technical support is included in the yearly license... So, if you have a problem with our software, you can call and get it fixed - you're not left hanging. > > > So, as everyone else, we disclaim everything up-front in our license > > agreement and sell our software at reasonable prices. > > No, we sell it at prices that people are willing to pay for it. They > might be willing to pay more, if they more fully understood the true > cost, but I doubt it. Lets face it, MOST software is sold, or at > least oriented towards, those of us here the "land of the all you can > eat buffet." All that crashware (not implying yours here!) isn't > necessarily cheap, but it is flat-rate. ;^) Yes - most of the software is just thrown out there... - Dave Rivers - To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message