David Rosenthal has written a blog post on how end users may be affected by tort law. Specifically, he discusses two points in The Internet of Torts raised by Rebecca Crootof:
- Introducing the Internet of Torts, in which she describes "how IoT devices empower companies at the expense of consumers and how extant law shields industry from liability."
- Accountability for the Internet of Torts, in which she discusses "how new products liability law and fiduciary duties could be used to rectify this new power imbalance and ensure that IoT companies are held accountable for the harms they foreseeably cause."
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:10PM (2 children)
It is a good point BUT there is no coercive force either. You cannot charge for GPL products, only for support of said products (for which the liability is not waived).
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:18PM (1 child)
The GPL does not say you can't charge for the GPL device. You can certainly charge someone for GPL software or devices with GPL firmware, you just are obligated to supply the source code when asked.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:48PM
My bad, you are of course correct.
My point was that it is possible for a sufficiently skilled person to build from source. On reflection I retract that as most people are not sufficiently skilled, so in the case of consumer devices that is not an option for the majority of users.
I was commenting in another thread regarding the implications of hardware (IoT) vs software. That is relevant here but I won't reproduce the thread.