[consulting] Contract > Developer liable for bugs?

[Domenic Santangelo]

The two problems I see here are:

1) There is no time box (e.g. you can be "liable" forever)
2) Correcting your code resolves your "liability", but what about  
"damage" and "loss" (as called out in the beginning as separate from  
"liability")?

I'd hire an attorney to review it for you if the job is worth it. It  
could be that the legal meanings where the contract is executed are  
less severe than the language implies.

-D

--
Domenic Santangelo
WorkHabit, Inc.
[Direct  ]530-902-2576
[Office  ]866-WorkHabit
[Skype   ]dsantangelo
[Freenode]entendu @ #drupal






On Aug 6, 2008, at 3:06 PM, Morbus Iff wrote:

>
> I've been writing software (for hire or otherwise) for ten years or  
> so.
>
> I've never run into an instance, or heard of a case where, once a  
> piece
> of software has been "shipped" or "finished", the developer of that
> software is liable for Things That Go Wrong With It. (I'm exempting
> trojans and viruses, etc. - assume legitimate software here).
>
> Specifically, I've received a contract for a new job which states  
> that I
> (as the Consultant) would be financially liable for any bugs in my
> created Drupal code. I balked that I'd never heard of such a thing
> before and received a revised version which now reads like this:
>
>   "The Consultant will also be responsible for any damage, loss or
>   liability (whether criminal or civil) of or suffered by  the
>   Company ... in connection with any act or omission of the
>   Consultant ... In order to compensate for this, the Consultant
>   agrees to resolve any issue with his code (and his code only)
>   as it arises at no additional cost to the Company. Correcting
>   the problem code is the limit of liability to which the
>   Consultant will be held."
>
> I'm still cautious about this - while the final two lines state that  
> my
> only liability is fixing bugs for free (which is perfectly fine with
> me), the first line still contains scares like "civil" and "criminal
> liability", "damage" and "loss". Being "responsible" for "loss" still
> sounds like I'd pay money if "problem code" caused financial damage.
>
> A few questions:
>
>  * has anyone else seen something like this?
>
>  * has anyone else /agreed/ to something like this?
>
>  * are my worries about financial responsibility accurate?
>
>  * how should I respond to this?
>
> -- 
> Morbus Iff ( and think about the bad things that I didn't do )
> Technical: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/779
> Enjoy: http://www.disobey.com/ and http://www.videounderbelly.com/
> aim: akaMorbus / skype: morbusiff / icq: 2927491 / jabber.org: morbus
> _______________________________________________
> consulting mailing list
> consulting at drupal.org
> http://lists.drupal.org/mailman/listinfo/consulting