[lkml]   [1997]   [Sep]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Solaris 2.6 and Linux
    Jeffrey B. Siegal <> wrote:
    > Sigh. It is a good idea, and I encourage you to pursue it. However, it
    > doesn't "solve" the problem. The manufacturer needs to contract with
    > you, which means they need to investigate whether you are legitimate
    > or not. They need to monitor whether the service you are providing is
    > of acceptable quality for them to be associated with (can't have you
    > dis'ing their customers). They need to have a plan for what happens if
    > you go out of business prior to their three year obligation. Etc.

    To a large degree, these things are covered by existing product
    liability laws, and contract laws. In practice, most companies would do
    a brief check (make a few phone calls, maybe) then not worry about it
    unless problems cropped up.

    Also, unless I've completely mis-read the GPL, when I offer such a
    service, I become liable for fulfilling it. [The company which provides
    the source needs to announce that that's how the source code becomes
    available, but unless there's something very fradulent going on their
    responsibility ends there.]

    > It is entirely possible that the transaction costs involved with
    > outsourcing their obligation are higher than the cost of satisfying it
    > internally.

    As the bulk of the transaction cost is the cost to make a decision,
    what you're really saying (now) is that in some companies it's
    too expensive to make decisions.

    > Nothing comes free.

    As do many other things...


     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:40    [W:0.018 / U:17.380 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site