User: Password:
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Software liability laws: a dangerous solution

Software liability laws: a dangerous solution

Posted Sep 9, 2007 1:47 UTC (Sun) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954)
In reply to: Software liability laws: a dangerous solution by NAR
Parent article: Software liability laws: a dangerous solution

Not selling flawed software to the clueless users is also good for the (virtual) environment, meaning less botnets, less spam, less DoS attacks, etc.

OK, that's a good point and my argument may have wandered a little from the point. But I think it's still possible that putting the liability on the buyer does the job better. Hungary could have achieved the same thing by outlawing driving of new two-cycle cars, putting the regulation closer to the actual source of the problem.

I've thought for a long time that the solution to the spam problem is to make people -- even bot hosts -- pay to send email. This would cause users to demand that their ISPs limit their ability to send mail and to invest in virus control measures. Or software without bugs, if that's how the viruses are getting in.

(Log in to post comments)

paying to send email

Posted Sep 12, 2007 8:17 UTC (Wed) by copsewood (subscriber, #199) [Link]

A good idea, but unfortunately very difficult to see it happen unless the existing email system collapses, assuming that Metcalfe's law holds.

Nevertheless, I have written a paper and specified outline protocols for a payment system that might be of interest if the existing email system does collapse (or in connection with other mass applications for micropayments, assuming the preference for flat-rate communications costs becomes outweighed by the general desirability of being able to make larger numbers of smaller payments more flexibly.)

Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds