prohibiting use that would result in death or personal injury

[Nils Lohner]

In message <00072623042000.01489 at nomad>, David Johnson writes:
>On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Nils Lohner wrote:
>
>>  Specifically mentioning not 'intending' software for nuclear 
>> labs etc. seems ridiculous to me
>
...
>Who is going to be targeted? Everyone! Including the poor schmoe that
>paved the reactor facility's parking lot. No disclaimer will keep you
>out of court. Sad but true.
>
...
>The odds of actually getting sued for loss of life because of your
>open source software are extremely remote, in my opinion. Losing such a
>case is even slimmer. Because the source code is wide open and you are
>not selling the software, you are very safe.
>
...

Agreed. 


>> So (first attempt): 
>>    "Any person using this software or including this software in another 
>> product does so entirely at their own risk.  The author makes no explicit or
>> implied statement about its functionality or reliability."
>
>Why not just cut at paste one of the disclaimers from an established
>license? The BSD license has a disclaimer that says much the same
>thing, but has been pored over by hordes of lawyers for a couple of
>decades.
>
  If they exist and are effective (loosely stated), then why do people feel 
the need to protect specifically against certain disasters that are a) 
unlikely and b) may get them sued anyway even with a disclaimer?
  That's my point: if the disclaimers (specific or general) only work up to 
a certain point, why not take widely used general ones?

Nils.