On October 16, 2004 02:24 pm, Michael Giagnocavo wrote: > And thus, you've just sealed how the lawyers are going to treat this:
> "Manufacturer X could have been more careful and reduced the chances of > this tragedy occurring. Now all we can do is seek punishment for the people > who contributed to the loss of life." > You believe walking in and saying "Our policy states..." is going to work? I don't know. You don't know. It's up to the jury. At any rate I do believe that this thread has shifted slightly; it was at first about how having the software open source would make things bad; now it's about how the lawywers would make open source bad. Open-sourcing the control software to a critical system isn't bad, it doesn't make it more likely that someone will screw with the system. Someone else has already made a point that the schematics, service drawings/notes and very likely algorithms are already provided to the people who service the equipment. The point's moot, IMO; litigation has a funny way of making things completely nonsensical. I think this has been proven in this thread. :-) -A. _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
