[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
trewornan wrote: > > I'm no legal expert but I wonder if a court would take > that view - given that the software is free. I think you are confusing the meanings of free. Free software is not necessarily supplied free of charge (trying getting RHEL for example), and if you buy it you are entering a contract (written or implied) for software to do a task. So you better be sure that the software is fit to do that task. This equally applies with proprietary software, whether you are buying a license to use it or the software itself. It applies even if the software license says "we don't warrant this software to be fit for any purposes", as such clauses are invariably struck down under UK law if you made a purchase in good faith. Which is why most such contracts say "we disclaim as much responsibility as possible under applicable laws". Indeed it applies to anything you buy in the UK. You might be able to get away with it, if you can demonstrate that before supplying said goods you made it clear it might not do the job, and you wouldn't fix it, or refund money, if it didn't. But even then the contract might be deemed unfair, unless it was clearly part of some research project or similar. The possible get out is if you are employed to install said software as a contractor. i.e. You didn't supply the software, but merely the skills to install and configure it. Although again if it doesn't work, you are likely to have to refund the services provided. Amazing two people managed to confuse the meaning of free in two responses, you guys really need to spend some more time at FSF.org. -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html