On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Prasad, Ramit <ramit.pra...@jpmorgan.com> wrote: > Mark Janssen wrote: >> But you see, there's the critical difference. First of all you're >> making two errors in your comparison. Firstly, a *person* is saying >> that she's going to *do something for you*. She's making a promise. >> If I put a piece of software online -- you're taking it! That's #1 >> (!) > > Theoretically isn't putting a piece of software "online" akin to > publishing it? Following that logic, then there is the possibility > of arguing an implicit promise that the software does what it is > supposed to. Any bugs would be the responsibility of the developer.
It is akin to publishing it. The law has not made a good distinction about responsibility in this area. But I'm telling you that unless money is exchanged THERE IS NO AGREEMENT MADE, implicit or otherwise. If there is no agreement, then another party can't blame you for something you didn't promise. Otherwise, I can blame you for insulting my fashion sense. > On a separate note, even if the judgment supports your view > and the developer is never responsible for damages, will you > still not be responsible for any court/lawyer fees? If someone brings you to court and fails to make their case, they've inconvenienced everyone. The fair thing would be for the court to require them to pay for your fees. >And > getting those fees paid by suitor will likely be another court case. Possibily, but don't accept this view of the legal system. Judges can be quite reasonable. They don't want more time taken for bullshit cases and would much prefer for things to be settled (that is what their duty is -- to settle matters, not to make lawyers wealthy). Mark -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
