You say "sue the bastards if they put out software they know is buggy." But at the moment, under most jurisdictions, software manufacturers can hide behind licensing agreements, and as the author pointed out, UCITA will only make it worse.

Somewhere along the line someone is going to have to assume responsibility. The easiest, and most market friendly, position to take is allow the market forces of supply and demand punish bad code, like the author stated. If insurance premiums increase, or if companies using the software experience higher operating costs, then they will have the incentive to ditch the software. If software developers are held liable, through litigation, for KNOWN bugs, it will be hard to prove their knowledge. And I disagree with strict liability for code, unless it causes directly causes physical injury.

Purchasers are going to have to incent developers to write better code. It can't come down through no fault litigation or regulation. But I do favor intentional, reckless or negligent standards for liability. But not strict liability.

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/47/9299#9299