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

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...