[LINK] Identity theft virus infects 10,000 computers

[Craig Sanders]

On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 03:48:52PM +1000, Deus Ex Machina wrote:
> Craig Sanders [cas at taz.net.au] wrote:
> > this argument is bogus - there's no one to sue even with proprietary
> > software.
> > 
> > no one has ever sued microsoft (or novell or ibm or any other
> > proprietary software developer) for their shoddy software, and likely no
> > one ever will. even if someone ever started the process, it is extremely
> > unlikely that it would even get to court, let alone be successful.
> 
> again this is false. you cant waive away all responsiblity in an eula,
> regardless of what the eula says. its fairly common in contracts to
> claim to waive away rights granted by law, but the reality is you
> cant.

yes, i'm aware of that. 

it wasn't the EULAs that i was basing my argument on. it was the
complete absence of any legislation anywhere in the world to hold
software developers liable for faults/negligence in their software.

plus the fact that microsoft etc have large teams of trained attack
lawyers on staff.

success in court often has a lot more to do with how much money you can
throw at your case than it has to do with the facts or with justice.

craig

PS: shrink-wrap EULAs are all bogus. contracts are not binding unless
you have a chance to read and agree with them. and none of them can
override statutory rights.

-- 
craig sanders <cas at taz.net.au>           (part time cyborg)