[License-discuss] Reconsidering the "unless required by applicable law" clauses on warranties and limitations of liability (CRA)
jamie at jamie.io
Fri Feb 24 07:28:01 UTC 2023
On the CRA, Mike was gracious enough to note in his first blog post
that, while Eclipse and a few other big shops might be able to
metabolize the overhead of all the
conformity/safety-testing-and-certifying that a regulatory regime
might impose ... most FOSS shops could not. But as he also notes,
this EU proposal probably comes from a place of good will: it's not a
deliberate attack on noncommercial / indie code development. In case
this didn't get mentioned in the thread, there's more of a discussion
of this ongoing legislative issue in Open Forum Europe channels.
Jamie usually from OASIS but personal views only here.
On 2/23/2023 at 2:39 PM, "Mike Milinkovich" wrote:
On 2023-02-20 1:36 p.m., Brian Behlendorf wrote:
On Sat, 18 Feb 2023, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
What is a CRA? Assuming you don’t means clan
restoration act here…
Cyber Resiliency Act, the prompt for this thread:
For those who are interested in this topic, I've written a
second blog post on the unintended consequences of the Cyber
I have also recently come to realize that the CRA needs to
understood as a companion piece to the revised Product
Liability Directive. AIUI the CRA is the legislation that
makes the open source community _responsible _for the CE Mark
validation for all of its software, and it is the PLD that makes
the open source community _liable _for any defects.
I cannot stress enough how damaging these soon-to-be laws are to
the future viability of open source as we know it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the License-discuss