RE: [cobalt-users] Cobalt to provide compensation for server hack?

[Rodolfo Paiz <rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> >  Whether the lawsuit they
> > get hit with eventually is or is not "valid," however, I cannot say.
> >
> I thought, based on
> http://list.cobalt.com/pipermail/cobalt-users/2001-February/03
> 4053.html that
> you already decided that any such lawsuit was baseless.
> "You, on the other hand, as the server owner and administrator are
fully
> responsible for the use/operation/security/safety/functionality of
your
> server software and services; which responsibilities you have *not*
> adequately fulfilled as clearly evidenced by the fact that you were
> hacked."
>
> I guess with you on the jury, Cobalt would have no worries.

Not so. My point that he/she, as owner and administrator of the server,
is responsible and liable for delivering the service he/she charges for
by keeping said server up and running, does not per se exonerate Cobalt
from *their* responsibility to provide a product that delivers on their
promises.

Personally, I find that Cobalt's promises are slightly deceptive, as in
true but misleading. They promise that you don't have to know Linux/Unix
to run one of their servers, and this is TRUE; you don't. However, they
don't promise to make the box secure or easily secured, and of course
it's not. So they're delivering on their promises, but they're quietly
failing to promise some things that they most definitely *should*
promise.

I've tried to give examples of lawsuits that I would consider more than
valid; again, my original point was that the original post said, in
effect: "Hey, my RaQ was hacked; maybe I can sue..." which is bullshit
in and of itself. The problem is that this thread has delved deeper into
other subtleties related to the topic than my first response covered.

Again, I'm no longer running my business on Cobalt gear because I have
concluded that they deliver on what they promise... but that those
promises are not enough for me, and that I find the product handicapped.
Thus I'm paying the price in time and effort to learn how to do the
whole thing "by hand," which is what I originally thought I wouldn't
have to do by buying Cobalt, and which I found out I had to do anyway.
:(

I like Dom's point better: we should compile a short list of the points
in the warranty and/or product features that we find woefully deficient,
and try to pressure Sun to make some changes. If we succeed, we get a
better product. If we fail, we learn that Sun doesn't care as much as we
thought it did... either way we gain something of value.

--
Rodolfo J. Paiz
rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>