Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!ucsd!ucbvax!hplabs!hp-sde!hpcuhb!hpcilzb!rog
From: rog@hpcilzb.HP.COM (Roger Haaheim)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: Re: Software ``Contracts''
Message-ID: <1070002@hpcilzb.HP.COM>
Date: 28 Dec 88 18:38:13 GMT
References: <1355@cps3xx.UUCP>
Organization: HP Design Tech Center - Santa Clara, CA
Lines: 98

/ hpcilzb:comp.misc / palowoda@megatest.UUCP (Bob Palowoda) /  5:21 am  Dec 23, 1988 /
From article <34222@think.UUCP>, by barmar@think.COM (Barry Margolin):
> In article <1355@cps3xx.UUCP> usenet@cps3xx.UUCP (Usenet file owner) writes:
>>What this means is that the software is not guarenteed to DO anything,
>>and even if it does, the manufacturer can not be held responsible for
>>it's performance or lack thereof.
>>  How do software manufacturers get away with this?
> 
> Here are my beliefs about the warranty disclaimors:
> 
> Mostly, such total disclaimors of warranties are not enforceable (just
> like the road signs that say "road under repair, pass at your own
> risk").  There are many implied warranties that are always in effect,
> no matter what the package says.  For example, the disclaimor doesn't
> permit them to distribute a program that they KNOW will destroy your
> data.  And a program that obviously doesn't do what is described in
> the manual is fraud.
> 
> Since no one yet knows how to write a non-trivial program without
> bugs, these disclaimors are necessary to keep people from suing
> because of minor problems.  Without them there would be very little
> software published.  Imagine a class action suit by all the people who
> bought MS Word 3.0 for the Mac.
> 
> Comparing software warranties to car warranties is unfair.  How much
> of the software you run on your PC is responsible for your physical
> well being?  When your car crashes you can lose your life; if a
> spreadsheet crashes you lose a few hours of work.
> 
     I think Barry has made a very important statement in the last
     paragraph. But lets twist it a bit.       
     How much of the software that you are running on your PC is
     responsible for the well being of your business? Now when
     we apply the contract it appears to indemnify the publishers 
     from even the smallest problems. This is the last resort
     that software support departments use if they cannot fit
     a bug fix in the pipe for the next revision.

     So what's all this have to do with copy protection? By my 
     observations after installing several office systems on
     verious networks it has quite evident it has alot to do
     with it. I have watched the owners of the systems buy
     business applications software in the 500 to 1500 range.
     The first time users of software go through the normal 
     learning curve, after that they find the bugs in the software.
     Than they go the software support route, this is where things
     tend to go amuck.   
     
     The aggresive one's are smart enough to know that legal 
     actions will result in a loss by contract. So they take
     alternate action. He/She has two alternatives.
     1.) Go out and buy another software package and make sure 
	 a similiar bug/feature is not there. 
     2.) Scrap the computers and do it manually.

     Simple two alternative's right? Wrong! You can guess what
     the third alternative is. In anycase what ends up happening
     is that they find a better software package to fit there
     needs. Read reviews and go through a much more extensive
     period of evaluation. This is where they find out that all
     software has bugs and they form an idea of least bug per
     package figure. From there they weight in the customer support,
     price and maybe a few rumors about the company. 
     Than they finially go out and buy another package. If the 
     previous software company fixes the bug in the meantime it
     they accept it reluctantly but it still gives them some
     sort of sense for justification on coping software on the next 
     package. If any software publisher/programmer wants to get in the 
     ring and fight this situation they look pretty silly out there
     in front of an audience with no opponenet. 

     Now to reinforce my originial claim that contracts have     
     something to do with copying software.

[some text deleted]
> 
> Another important clause in the disclaimor is the warning about
> "suitability".  It is the customer's job to make sure that the program
> is appropriate for the task.  Unless the publisher made obviously

     What does this statement promote?   

     I do not promote the copying of software nor ignorant clauses
     in software contracts that oppose sales.

     I do favor strong positive customer contacts and some sort of
     software publishing organization that inquires about other 
     software publishing companys support. Something like a 
     consumers report none biased for software evaluation.

     ---Bob

-- 
 Bob Palowoda                               
 Work: {sun,decwrl,pyramid}!megatest!palowoda                           
 Home: {sun,pryamid}aeras!grinch!legends!fiver!palowoda                
 BBS:  (415)656-9386 2400/1200   Voice:(415)656-9384                  
----------