Re: [linux-audio-dev] Broadcast 2000 removed from public access

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Broadcast 2000 removed from public access
From: D. Stimits (stimits_AT_idcomm.com)
Date: Wed Sep 12 2001 - 21:03:51 EEST


Nick Bailey wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 11 Sep 2001 3:09 am, you wrote:
>
> > They are saying that "no warranty" on the license is not
> > enough to avoid responsibility in some cases. The company
> > using the software has the knowledge, but the investors
> > don't, and apparently the investors are succeeding in using
> > the "deep pockets" idea of suing whoever is left standing
> > once the original company goes under. In an analogy, if you
> > were to give out free vodka, warning people not to drink
> > and drive, you'd probably still go to jail or lose a
> > lawsuit when the drunk actually runs over someone...whoever
> > got run over is not bound by your agreements with the
> > drunk. It seems wrong that it should be happening, but
> > apparently financially concerned third parties are not
> > bound by the license between source author and business
> > users of the source. Very stupid indeed (or at least that's
> > my interpretation in terms of computer source...drunk
> > driving is another story).
> >
> > D. Stimits, stimits_AT_idcomm.com
> >
> **What?!** Things are indeed very strange on the other side
> of the pond. Over here, if I employ somebody to decorate my
> house, he subcontracts it to an idiot who burns the place
> down, I can only sue the person I've got the contract with.
> There's no "privity of contract" between me and the idiot --
> so it's up to the person I employed to sue them to recover
> *his* loss.

I did use the words "very stupid". Just because the laws screw the
average person, doesn't mean I agree with it. But from what was said by
the Broadcast 2000 web page and general speculation, they are not
worried about being sued by the company using their product, but instead
by the investors in the company that went down. There are strong hints
that such idiot lawsuits have already succeeded in wasting some open
source developer somewhere.

D. Stimits, stimits_AT_idcomm.com

>
> Two lots of legal fees. Hmm.
>
> IANAL. (and proud of it)
>
> Nick/
>
> UK.


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Sep 12 2001 - 21:03:15 EEST