On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Damien Miller wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Rick Welykochy wrote:
> > 1. Ford Motor Co. produces a car with a defect. The defect turns out
> > be a possible source of injury. The result: Ford is *legally liable*
> > to recall and fix said vehicles.
> >
> > 2. Johnson & Johnson produce defective silicon breast implants. Even
> > though J&J rigorously defends itself against a class action, it
> > is found guilty of its breach of care to its customers and pays
> > out $100's of millions in damages.
>
> [snip]
>
> > And Microsoft is home-free, sitting high on its proverbial
> > corporate backside, stuffed with $BILLIONS of ill-gained profits,
> > scraped out of consumer and corporate purses with narry a skerrick
> > of responsibility for the crappe product it is selling.
>
> I find this comparison inaccurate and quite distasteful.
>
> While Microsoft has undoubtedly caused much frustration and cost to
> individual and businesses affected by their shoddy software, this
> should not be compared with companies who have caused such a degree of
> personal suffering and loss of life.
While the suffering of the victims is certainly significant, I suspect
that the cases against Ford and J&J would have been based on the grounds
that the products weren't "merchantable".
Personally, I believe that many of Microsoft's products fall under the
same label.
-- Andrew Francis locust@iinet.net.au
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.1 : Fri Aug 31 2001 - 03:10:02 EST