I'm mostly curious what that means for something like the MIT license... For those who need a refresher, this is the part I mean.
> 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. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
Are there cases of open source projects being careless or negligent that have caused harm that this would address? Aside from some unintentional vulnerabilities that have been found, it’s hard for me to think of an example that would necessitate more regulation.
The author should have been liable for the damage they caused. The industry self-regulated itself but that is a case that I can think of, specifically caused by negligence.
> nothing specifying that you need to continue making your open-source package continually and indefinitely available.
There's a difference between making it available, and deliberately causing harm and untold productivity loss in a single day. This was a case of the latter.