Bottomley: Solving the Looming Developer Liability Problem
Bottomley: Solving the Looming Developer Liability Problem
Posted Dec 14, 2023 16:41 UTC (Thu) by pizza (subscriber, #46)In reply to: Bottomley: Solving the Looming Developer Liability Problem by Wol
Parent article: Bottomley: Solving the Looming Developer Liability Problem
If "product" is limited exclusively to some sort of "physical good" then I retract my statements.
(However, if "product" can be pure software not supplied as part of a physical good, such as, say, Chrome, LibreOffice or Firefox) then I qualify just as much as they do; despite my several-orders-of-magnitude smaller operation.)
> What happened to those American regs about a software Bill Of Materials? All the doom-mongers saying it would be the end of Open Source? Just because it was mandating that people HAD to know what software was in their products!
(BTW, I'm on the record here many, many times saying BoMs are a _very good_ thing, but the CRA goes far beyond that)
Yes, the doomsayers over here screamed bloody murder over some of the proposals for the same reasons as the earlier CRA drafts -- invalidating "as-is, no warranties whatsoever" clauses suddenly makes individuals on the hook for effectively unlimited liabilities for activities beyond their knowledge, much less control.
IIRC the extent of the "American Regs" so far are executive orders that set requirements for upcoming federal contracts.
frankly While there are "recommended best practices" there's nothing that mandates them for general B2B or B2C activities.
(IMO, insurance carriers are going to be the ones pushing this stuff forward, but forced arbitration clauses in EULAs have removed the main lever non-legislators have to drive change...)
> The CRA is going to be an EQUALLY damn squib, as people begin to realise that all it is doing, is forcing them to do what they SHOULD be doing already - ie supplying products that are "secure by design" and "work as advertised".
The reason they don't already do these things is because it increases their costs considerably, which means they'd have to charge more. Potentially a _lot_ more.
I think the net practical effect of this is that domestic EU manufacturers (and importers of stuff manufactured elsewhere) will drastically cut back their advertised functionality/features while also significantly increasing their prices. It will lead to a round of industry consolidation as manufactures struggle to get to the scale where they have a chance of competing with already-established $megatech/$megacorp players that can easily eat a percent or two higher internal overhead.
> And if products DON'T fit that description, well, I'm a European who will be only too glad to see such shoddy crap forced off the market!
I thought you were British, and thus no longer part of the European Market? (Sorry, couldn't resist)
