Accountability vs. Liability

from the a-more-reasonable-solution dept

A different writer at ZDNet has followed up on yesterday's story about Howard Schmidt concerning the liability of software developers, and admitted that the original story was misleading (and was going to be changed). He followed up with Schmidt and clarified his thoughts to say that developers needed to be accountable, not liable, for flaws -- which makes much more sense. Yes, better training and better testing is needed, and, when flaws are found, they need to be addressed. That's reasonable. Adding liability to the equation isn't -- but it was apparently folks at ZDNet who did that, instead of Howard Schmidt.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Name
Email	Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
URL
Subject
Comment	this is for spambots, do not use this
Options	Plain Text HTML Save me a cookie

Plain Text: A CRLF will be replaced by break tag, all other allowable HTML is intact
HTML: No formatting of any kind is done without explicitly being written in
Allowed HTML Tags: <a> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>

<< Nanomedicine For Real Or Just More Hype? | The Price Of Anonymity Is That It Will Be Misused >>

Search Techdirt

And now, a word from our Sponsors..

15% off discount for Techdirt Readers

Subscribe to Techdirt's Daily Email Newsletter