On 19/02/16 04:03 PM, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
Yeah the FCC's "That's not what we meant with our directive" is appearing
to turn into exactly what people thought it would given I don't think
the manufacturers see any other obvious way to obey the directive.
Alas, the cheap approach makes the vendor responsible for fixing any
compliance-critical bugs, and by their adopting the proposed rulemaking
before it was passed, they voluntarily prohibited the persons who are
legally responsible, the owners, from fixing their own equipment.
IMHO, the first compliance-critical bug they don't fix with a recall
renders the devices they sell "not suitable for the purpose sold" (under
the Statute of Frauds, which I taught to my fellow militiamen, once in
my ill-spent youth).
This week, the routers that don't actively avoid using glibc have just
such a bug, and, IMHO, are looking forward to a nice expensive
class-action suit courtesy of Our American Cousins (;-))
--dave
--
David Collier-Brown, | Always do right. This will gratify
System Programmer and Author | some people and astonish the rest
[email protected] | -- Mark Twain
---
Talk Mailing List
[email protected]
https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
