[47528] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: e-postage yet again, was anybody else been spammed by "no-ip.com" yet?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Sun May 5 21:29:31 2002
Message-Id: <200205060128.g461SuQn003839@foo-bar-baz.cc.vt.edu>
To: "Nathan J. Mehl" <memory-nanog@blank.org>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 05 May 2002 18:15:15 EDT."
<20020505181515.Z25531@blank.org>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Sun, 05 May 2002 21:28:56 -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Sun, 05 May 2002 18:15:15 EDT, "Nathan J. Mehl" <memory-nanog@blank.org> said:
> people that this had happened to? I'd file a class-action liability
> suit against Microsoft for selling a defective product that lost my
> clients thousands of dollars.
>
> I suspect I'd have a good chance of winning, too.
EULA.
Computer software is unique in that not only are the producers not held
liable for defects, but quite often manage to avoid any of the usual
"suitability for purpose" requirements - there is a presumption that
(for instance) a toaster is supposed to be able to actually toast a
piece of bread - and that therefore any toaster that is unable to do
so is inherently defective *and it's the vendor's problem to make it
right*, whether via replacement, repair, or refund. Quite often,
vendors of software manage to disclaim even the requirement that
a word processor be able to process text, etc.
