piracy and oss

[Scott Wood]

--- Ben Pfaff <pfaffben@msu.edu> wrote:
> Scott Wood <treii28@yahoo.com> writes:
> > I disagree to some extent here.  Nothing is free.  I pay $40 a month to
keep
> > connected to the internet.  I pay also for my system upkeep, storage and
> > storage media, etc.
> 
> *shrug*  You pay those costs whether you use Windows 95 or
> FreeBSD.  (You're not telling me you *only* use your Internet
> connection to download free software, right?)

Even then - when not downloading 'free software', I may be doing something for
work or even for leisure.  I don't know about you, but I assign great value to
my leisure time these days not that it seems to be limited in supply.  Even on
a cable modem, a good size download (say, the latest mandrake ISO's spanning
3-4 images if you want the sources, docs and upgrades) can chop the hell out of
a good audio stream and allthough surfing is probably still a reasonable course
of action, I seldom trust winblows (since we are talking at least 'some
proprietary - and since many ISP's still don't like to admit they have linux
users) to handle both a large download and concurrent surfing, streaming or
other tasks without locking up Explore/IExplore sooner or later.

> > Equally notable, the lack of any implied or expressed
> > warrantees or service agreements on open source is a 'cost' as
> > well - no direct line of accountability to performance per
> > specification or for 'fitness of purpose'.
> 
> You're telling me the situation is different for proprietary
> software?

Yes, legal agreements like that can sign away some of your liability - but to
participate in an open marketplace, certain 'overriding' consumer laws apply to
all sales (except perhaps to those stated as 'as is' in no uncertain terms).  I
suggest strongly, that anyone who is in business for themselves and doubts
this, take a consumer law course before making any undue assumptions.

Commercial Software is not and cannot be sold wide scale, "as is"... Otherwise,
eventually no one would want to 'pay' to assume the associated risk.

I mentioned the 'Implied Warranty for Fitness of Purpose' as it is one of the
more profound and easiest to demonstrate 'overruling' consumer law examples. 
It is also relevant to the discussion.  i.e. you have no promise what-so-ever
from 'as is' [by it's nature] OSS software package.  Although a software
company may claim by their legal documentation to avoid some responsibilities,
they are still - by nature of consumer law - to deliver a product that performs
as promised.  Regardless of the warranty or release language.

Granted, you aren't going to necessarily buy a Graphics program that is going
to turn out to be a address book, but if their box says it will "add 2 + 2 and
produce a result of 4 every time" and you find out it sometimes says 4 1/2
every time, they have made a false performance claim on their product.  Even if
in the scary world of abstraction which exists in polymorphic software 'suites'
of today you may not be able to find a direct A-to-B result such as that to
prove a 'lack' of fitness of purpose, legal realities (as well as ethical ones,
not to mention the finacial effects of legal realities - e.g. litigation costs
and damage to public perception) govern company policy in regards to handling
service and returns.
Very little of this exists in open source except to the extent that the
developers take 'pride' in developing a competitive or superior product.

> > (to quote the consumer law term related to implied warrantees
> > on all but 'as is' goods and services.  i.e. I have many time
> > gotten exchanges and even won small claims bouts in court when
> > non-tech-type sales guys 'claim' their latest widget is going
> > to solve one of my problems)
> 
> Then the place you bought the widget hasn't got proper
> disclaimers on their sales contracts.  I'm sure that this got
> remedied as soon as you won your judgment.

Again, I suggest you learn a bit about consumer law.  Disclaimer other than
those specifically state as an "as is" sales cannot override many implied
warranties under the current (US) Consumer Protections Act and associated
ammendments/addendums.

Now, these 'implied' warranties are also 'specific' in nature.  I am not
talking about something you can just walk in and request absolution from. 
Again, I mentioned the fitness of purpose specifically - in that sold goods are
subject to a implied guarantee to do whatever job they lay claim to be capable
of doing.

We are beginning to split hairs on this subject and I don't want to beat a dead
horse.  This was not necessarily the centerpeice of my response.  I just wanted
to state a 'legal reality' that most people likely 'assume' when buying vs.
downloading software.  Mainly, that people are likely to have a higher
expectation of getting a desired result from something they pay for than for
something someone gives them for free (or close-to-free).  And I mentioned
consumer law because to some extent it backs up that assumption with a avenue
for recourse.

> > Conversely, most if not all open source software is by it's
> > nature 'as is' - use at your own risk.
> 
> All software is that way.  You really expect to win a judgment
> against Microsoft when your IIS is r00ted?  Then Code Red is
> gonna cost them billions.

I re-iterate - my point being that the expectations of performance with a
avenue of recourse for failure to meet that expectation of performance exists
in proprietary software and not in OSS.  I wasn't talking about other problems
with security.
If Microsoft claimed IIS was the replacement for 'hackable servers', then we
would be talking about a whole new set of issues...

SW

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/