🚀 go-pugleaf

On Tue, 13 Oct 1998 13:52:36 +0100, Simon Kinahan <simonk@cadence.com>
wrote:

>msissom@dnaent.com wrote:
>> >1) Anybody has the basic right to sell their software for money and
>> >withold the code, provided that the software is fully functional and
>> >entirely bug-free.
>> 
>> There will never be any 'commercial code'  released if it must
>> satisfy so generic a qualification. No other product must satisfy
>> this qualification, why should software?
>
>It does doesn't it ? There is are 'IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY
>AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE' to quote from the GPL. Software
>licenses always contain this clause disavowing such warranties, even though
>legally this is hogwash. To actual enforce these warranties on software
>companies would put most of them out business, since all software (without
>exception) in unfit for the intended purpose in one way or another. 
>
>This is *precisely* the problem. With current model of software copyright
>there is no way software companies could uphold such warranties.

Nonsense, without even resorting to legalsleaze hair splitting, there
are faults in every product available on every market. You expect a
perfect product from one particular industry even though you happily
accept imperfection in every other product that you purchase.

Straighten up. Either apply your ideals everywhere, or admit that
Eden doesn't exist and find a viable compromise. I'm all for the
second. I only expect the *same* from software manufacturers that
I expect from the manufacturers of other products. I don't expect
perfection from anyone.