On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Ciaran Farrell <cfarrell@suse.de> wrote:

On Thursday 19 May 2011 17:17:56 Paul W. Frields wrote:

> The Fedora distribution itself is wrapped with GPLv2, which includes a

> "no warranty" statement.  To what extent does that not apply?


It seems that he is basing his analysis on a negligence claim rather than on a contract claim. The real issue would therefore be whether the distributor owes a duty to the user - which in turn draws in issues of foreseeability.


I hate to mention "that other company," but I think it's pretty clear that Microsoft has proven there's no legal threat from end users having their machines compromised by leaving vulnerable services open by default without informing that user.
 
--
Chris