Where UCITA Came From

alkali writes "The New Republic has a short essay by Brendan Koerner which explains some of the legal history behind UCITA. If you've never heard of Mortenson v. Timberline before, you need to read this." Pretty good review of the the concept of liability for defective software.

Let the Buyer Beware

[jjr]

Liability should not be taken away from the software vendors. The minimum we should ask is disclosure of bugs. With the UCITA not only will that be not be required but also it will illegal for someone list the bugs in software before the vendors does. We should try and stop the UCITA as soon as possible. SO it will not hurt the consumer

Re:Interesting tidbit

[egburr]

I don't expect cars to be safe. I wish cars were safe. If cars were safe, theirs bumpers would all be at the same height to minimize damage from collisions. If cars were safe, the rate of acceleration would be lower and the maximum speed would be only slightly above the highest speed limit. Cars are unsafe. The actions of the drivers have the potential to keep them safe.

In the same vein, I don't expect software to be safe (bug-free). I wish software were safe. I have learned through experience to save often when working on anything. I have learned to check figures if I have even the slightest feeling they are not correct. Software not only can make its own mistakes (has bugs), but it allows you to make your own mistakes. Without any indication of a problem, it will allow you to enter anything you want, correct or not, as long as it thinks the input is valid.

The problem is not so much that the cars are unsafe or that the software is buggy. The problem is responsibility and liability for it. The fuss about Firestone was not so much that the tires were unsafe but that the company tried to hide that fact. The fuss about the Timberline software was not so much that it was buggy but that the company knew about the bug and did nothing about it.

The problem with UCITA is that it strengthens the position that it was okay for Timberline to get away with neither informing its customers about known bugs nor correcting those bugs. Firestone never had a chance one the information was in the public eye. With UCITA, a case such as Mortenson v. Timberline probably would never even have made it to trial.

Edward Burr

Re:Interesting tidbit

[Kierthos]

The thing is, everyone _expects_ cars to be safe. Unsafe cars (or tires, in the case of Firestone) quickly grab the public's attention.

However, this is the same public, who if more then 0.01% read more of a software User Agreement beyond "I Agree", then it comes as a shock. The reason this is going by with just a whimper rather then an outcry is that it is not considered major news outside of computer/geek oriented magazines and sites. If it got reported on the Drudge Report, things would be different...

Just my 2 shekels.

Kierthos

UCITA

[IgKnight]

This bill should not be passed. I haven't read any of the revised copies of it in about a year, but it still doesn't sound like a good thing to me. My page has the bill and some more info on it, but it might be a little outdated. For more info on the bill, you can go here; http://www.2bguide.com

Slashdot Weirdness

[llywrch]

I saw this article mentioned in the ``YRO" box, but not in the general list of articles. Even then, it only took me a minute or two to track it down.

And there's already two off-topic or stupid posts here.

Interesting article, though.

]not sure if I'm logged in here at the Twilight Zone or not[

Geoff

Interesting tidbit

[bph]

What I found the most interesting was the author's hypothetical claim that if a piece of software for a set of brakes fails, the software writer is not liable for the death of the passengers.

This raises an interesting question. If a car manufacturer puts out a buggy car, they are required, by law, to issue recalls and fix the automobiles. If the car has a potentially hazardous problem because of a software only glitch, could the manufacturer simply say, "I am sorry, I am not issuing the recall, read your licensing agreement for the brakes"?

Of course, the first automaker to try that would suffer a PR nightmare. I don't think congress or the US court system would let them not issue a recall. So, god help them if they subcontract the software. They will be left holding the bag with the authors of the code saying, "too bad for you guys our code sucks."

Open source anti-lock brakes anyone?

Brendan Koerner has an interesting history...

[Prolog-X]

There's a short blurb [newamerica.net] on New America [arxiv.org] about Mr. Koerner:

Brendan Koerner was previously a Senior Editor at U.S. News & World Report, where he wrote more than 100 feature articles including six cover stories, since 1996 on subjects ranging from higher education to urban renewal to religion to business and technology. His stories have included "A Lust for Profits," a cover-story, study of the Internet pornography industry, and "Can Hackers be Stopped," a special report on information security.

As a Markle Fellow at the New America Foundation, Mr. Koerner will use the lens of the digital underground to examine some of the most critical issues affecting the future of information technology and the new economy--including the commercialization of the Internet; the struggle over copyright and patent law and the preservation of the information commons; the ethics of free speech on the Internet; and the increasing concerns over cyber-security. In his writing, Mr. Koerner will seek to meld traditional reportage with well-informed commentary that will be solutions oriented. In particular, his work will seek to suggest workable compromises and creative policy alternatives that might allow the wired establishment and its hacker critics to develop a less adversarial relationship.

His e-mail address and picture are also available at the URL above.