[consulting] Contract > Developer liable for bugs?

[Sam Cohen]

I didn't even know I was on this list or that it existed.

When building a Drupal site, I would never assume liability for bugs, unless
bugs are very clearly defined as part of something I wrote.   It's not like
they're paying a $100,000 licensing fee for the software.  It's open source
after all. There are going to be bugs -- I recently had a client who thought
I should fix something -- for free -- not working right with TinyMCE -- I'
always tell clients that they're saving a lot of money using Drupal but
they're going to have to pay me hourly to fix any bugs that they run into.

Sam

On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 7:06 PM, Chris Miller <chris at trailheadinteractive.com
> wrote:

> You can always threaten to walk away...
>
> Adam - I'd love to see your liability language...  It's something I've
> debated and kicked around on several occasions.
>
> I once did some work for a law office and asked them to review my liability
> and indemnification language on a trade basis.  When I read their changes
> carefully, they carefully removed any protection I'd previously given
> myself.  So I'd also suggest trying to find a *neutral *lawyer to review
> contracts.  :)
>
> Later,
>   Chris Miller
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 4:52 PM, Adam Mordecai <mordecai at advomatic.com>wrote:
>
>> I asked Aaron Welch, my business partner and legal expert on this
>> stuff and this was his response:
>>
>> NONONONONO nononono no. no. no. no. N.O.
>>
>> Do not do this. That is totally fucked, no way, no how. No. you should
>> always limit your liability to the amount of money paid to you for the
>> work, allowing for additional liability or offering a warranty or
>> saying that the product is suitable for any particular purpose is not
>> acceptable. The client should bear the risks of operating the product
>> for any particular purpose, not you for making it for them, to their
>> specifications. If you sign this, you will be fucked. Get a lawyer. I
>> am not a lawyer, but this would be totally not acceptable to us, it
>> should not be to you unless you are being paid an absurd amount and
>> you have a huge errors and omissions general liability insurance policy.
>>
>> I'd be happy to share the contract we use, that specifically says the
>> opposite of this.
>>
>> -A
>> Adam Mordecai
>> Advomatic Partner
>> ---------
>> AIM: AdamMordecai
>> Main: (303) 733-0215
>> Cell: (646) 625-9010
>> Fax: (213) 402-3541
>> ----------
>> Advomatic
>> 243 5th Ave, Suite 460
>> New York, NY 10016
>> http://www.advomatic.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 6, 2008, at 8/6/08•4:06 , 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
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> consulting mailing list
>> consulting at drupal.org
>> http://lists.drupal.org/mailman/listinfo/consulting
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> consulting mailing list
> consulting at drupal.org
> http://lists.drupal.org/mailman/listinfo/consulting
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/consulting/attachments/20080806/c5447b06/attachment.htm