Comment by satvikpendem

Comment by satvikpendem 2 months ago

> THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED “AS IS”, WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. - MIT license

When using open source, you take that risk. I've used a lot of libraries that have been abandoned over the years where I either had to switch to a fork, another library entirely, or just write the functionality myself. I know the risk inherent in OSS. For large projects like Linux, since it's so large, someone else would pick it up, but again, there's always a risk that someone doesn't.

Qem 2 months ago

Most proprietary software has similar scary warnings in their licenses/EULAs.

Reply View 2 replies

Digit-Al 2 months ago

The difference is this: No EULA can override an organisation's legal obligations. Most countries have fairly robust "fit for use" laws, so if you sell something and it is not fit for use you can be taken to court. If there is no sale then there is no "fit for use" protection.
I do not mean this to imply I think commercial software is superior to free software, I am a great believer in FOSS, I just wnat to show a reason why a "scary" warning in commercial software is not equivalent to the same warning in FOSS.

Reply View | 0 replies
satvikpendem 2 months ago

Sure but SLAs generally exist if you're buying proprietary software as B2B, not necessarily so for OSS, unless you buy support contracts as well, which some companies like RedHat provide.

Reply View | 0 replies