Xah's Edu Corner: Responsible Software Licensing

[Pascal Bourguignon]

"Xah Lee" <xah at xahlee.org> writes:
> As i've indicated in the Responsible Licensing article, that today's
> software come with disclaimers that essentially say the producer is not
> liable even if the software don't work at all. It will be hard to
> change this zero responsibility stance to a 100% responsibility stance.
> However, we can start in small ways. Suppose, if you write a piece of
> email program, although there are a myriad scenarios that it will have
> problems sending email and in reality such problem happens often, but a
> responsible software programer can at least GUARANTEE, that the
> software WILL work to some extent of its described utility. In the
> email program example, a responsible author can say “We GUARANTEE
> that this software will send out emails in a normal setting. If not, we
> will refund the money you have paid, or, send you $1 USD.” Although
> this may seem fuzzy and silly, but it is a start. By giving a very safe
> minimal guarantee of functionality, possibly with a nominal liability
> assurance, the author will have made a _Responsible License_.

You have a problem of definition of the meaning of "normal setting".  

This problem is easily resolved with the source of the program: the
source of the program IS the CONTRACT.  If you respect the language
(the semantics, or underlying virtual machine expected by the
program), and if you respect the pre-conditions embedded in the
program, then you get the guarantee plainly written in the program as
post-conditions.  You cannot get it more explicitely than from the
sources of the program (and the specifications of its programming
language).

So wanting more than the mere sources, you are wanting to reject
programming language not formally specified, and programs provided
without the sources.  We can do better on the programming language
formal specifications side, but on the program sources side, I don't
know what we can do more than GPL or BSD...


Actually, the whole point is to let the _user_ of the program to take
_responsibility_ for the program he uses,  and not to cowardly 
discharge his (the user's) responsability to somebody else.


When you compute the tip to add to your invoice at the restaurant, you
don't ask the inventor of the multiplication algorithm or your
teachers to take any responsibility for your wrong or right
application of the operation.  Let the users be responsible!


-- 
__Pascal Bourguignon__                     http://www.informatimago.com/
Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never
stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and
neither do we. -- Georges W. Bush