On Mon, 18 Dec 2000 21:44:40 -0500, Samuel W. Heywood wrote:
> Designers and manufacturers of products that can easily be proven to be
> defective and capable of causing great damage and harm can be sued big
> time and the lawyers can make a pile of money. Why aren't they suing the
> designers, producers, and vendors of Windows email clients? If they would
> just sue them, then the people that are producing the buggy software
> would have to clean up their act, and the threat of virii attack would be
> minimized, and all the good netizens would be happy, and even the lawyers
> would be happy gloating over their success and their money. In short,
> almost everyone except the defendant is happy whenever a lawsuit is won for
> a good and just cause. All Windows email clients that fail to meet
> safety standards should be recalled.
I've seen intelligent, knowledgable discussion on this. I didn't really
understand it all. What I _did_ understand is that in any suit involving
negligence, it's difficult for the plaintiff to succeed unless it's
shown that the defendant's actions weren't up to accepted or established
practice. Windows e-mail clients, especially Outlook, ARE the accepted,
established practice, for good or ill. Correction: for ill.
In order to have a good shot at fairness, there would have to exist at
least two other clients in just as wide use that treated attachments in
the truly proper way. Until that happens it's still actionable, but much
much harder to win.
Bob
Starts April 1, 2001
-- Arachne V1.69, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/
