Slashdot Mirror
Startup to Offer Open Source Insurance
ThePretender writes "From the Infoworld article, 'Open Source Risk Management LLC (OSRM), a startup company that last month hired Pamela Jones, editor of the popular Groklaw.net Web site, as director of litigation risk research, plans to soon begin offering insurance policies to companies using open source software but fear that they may be sued, according to a company spokeswoman'. What's next - Developers having to pick up 'code malpractice' insurance? Egads." Might as well get some alien abduction insurance while you're at it.
Unless the insurance premium is kept low - it could be low now, but we only need a couple of alligation to push up the premium - eventually, only big development houses can afford such insurance, and what are part-time freelance developers going to do?
The main problem is, when you have such 'standard protection' for malpractice, consumers want to see that you're insured.
Rock that crushes, Paper & Scissors that don't matter.
Forget Linux vs SCO and who's right or wrong..
Look at the broader picture. All that stuff out there on sourceforge. Someone in some cubicle at some business decides some obscure project is useful, and starts using it.
But, that project is illegal. It's stolen code, violating patents and copyrights.
It's that kind of a bullshit legal snare that could send a young business into chapter 11.
If MS or Apple or Adobe stole code for their products, they'd be on the hook for using that stolen code for profit.
If the code was open source though, who do you go after? The people profiting from it - the end user.
Makes absolute sense. In fact, it was the lack of this sort of protection that has kept the company I work for away from OSS. Perhaps I could sway them now.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Up to now, the alternatives were:
by buying this insurance, the risk averse company hedges their risk, while still presumably getting a better deal on their software. It's open source capitalism at its finest.
Is it just me, or is anyone else worried about the incentive structure this sets up?
I mean, now an unscrupulous open source developer could intentionally insert some blatantly stolen code, claiming it's their own; some in-cahoots business with a copyright on the code can take everyone to court; the insurance will have to pay out big time, and the company slips a million to the asshole developer under the table.
The Open Source movement gets a bunch of bad PR, the code needs an emergency re-write, some scoundrels make a killing, and the insurance company rethinks its business model.
I know insurance investigators can go about investigating and trying to stop this from happening, but it seems like a very hard thing to prove, as along as the payment to the programmer is channeled very secretly.
Can anyone tell me how to set my sig on Slashdot?
In reality you'll always find some clever lawyer or easily-swayed jury that rules the other way.
Without even going that far, the act of being sued can be devastating, even if you just fight for a year and then they back off and it never really goes to trial.
Let's say a hundred bucks or so every time your lawyer picks up the phone. Several hundred for a letter. A grand for a simple motion. A couple months of just futzin' around and the legal bills can add up in a hurry.
I know of a judge who treats every petty charge as if it were a federal case. Really comes down hard on everyone, right down to a simple parking violation. And yet if you look at his conviction records they're no different than average.
When asked what gives he said, " I make them have to get a lawyer. Now that is punishment."
It isn't usually losing a suit that hurts. It's simply being involved in one. You have to get a lawyer. And anyone can sue you over damned near anything.
KFG
This sounds like a hoax to me. PJ continues to post articles to Groklaw so I don't think she's the former editor. I also haven't heard anything about this venture from there, nor has she been particularly enthusiastic for OSS indemnification in the past.
I could be wrong, but for the moment, I'll hold off taking them seriously.
" I'm no legal expert, but couldn't all of this be avoided with a proper disclaimer in the licence for the software?"
ABSOLUTELY NOT! Trust me on this one. Insurance is about having a guy on your side with a team of experienced lawyers. That is what it is for. If you don't have that, they can skin you alive. Because of some bad advice I got from my insurance broker, I spent over $100,000 on attorneys fees for a case that a jury would have laughed out of court. But that's the rub: the plaintiff's lawyers make it as expensive as possible to get to court, and even there you better be good looking and well spoken or the jury might decide to split the difference. Heck, with all those big words getting thrown around, you could lose because a single juror misunderstood something trivial.
The reality is that there is no justice for a small business standing alone. Lawyers are sharks and you are penguins. Tasty, tasty, defenseless penquins. They know they can wear you down, because there is nothing you can do to stop them. You can't represent yourself, because one mistake in filing means you lose the whole case and your house, savings and life goes down the tubes.
Despite the above, I'm not really bitter. It's over and I'm glad it is over. But I really understand the need for insurance now, which is to bring your own personal shark to the party...
-Jim
The quick honest answer is that you can't, and even lawyers depend upon other lawyers to defend themselves.
You can acquire a certain facility with the law, in some cases of specific law even a superiour facility than the legal general practitioner. This will allow you, at least, to do a reasonable job of arranging settlements and plea bargains, although not generally quite as good as you could obtain with a lawyer.
If only because the lawyer has a professional acquaintence with the judge and DA. They have a way of doing business with each other. You're just some scmuck.
But where even a mediocre lawyer is going to kill you, even in those circumstances where you know law and logic to a greater degree than the lawyer, is in purely procedural matters. The pure mechanics of moving a case through the courts. It's second nature to him, done without thought. It's terra incognito to you.
Just as a physicist may know more about mechanics than an engineer, but a civil engineer is more likely to build a sounder bridge.
Your only real defense is in that most cases are petty. They cost no more to capitulate to than to sucessfully defend against.
Spend what little money you have for lawyers up front, in drafting your contracts and business procedures. Become well acquaited with whatever boilerplate you might use. Use the law prophylatically and you have a better chance when representing yourself in court.
And when all else fails there's little you can do other than taking your losses with a benign resignation to fate. Don't take the failure personally. It isn't a moral issue. Pay the judgement, pick up the pieces and get on with your life, knowing that it would have likely cost as much to "win" anyway.
KFG