On 19/02/16 04:03 PM, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
Yeah the FCC's "That's not what we meant with our directive" is appearing to turn into exactly what people thought it would given I don't think the manufacturers see any other obvious way to obey the directive.
Alas, the cheap approach makes the vendor responsible for fixing any compliance-critical bugs, and by their adopting the proposed rulemaking before it was passed, they voluntarily prohibited the persons who are legally responsible, the owners, from fixing their own equipment. IMHO, the first compliance-critical bug they don't fix with a recall renders the devices they sell "not suitable for the purpose sold" (under the Statute of Frauds, which I taught to my fellow militiamen, once in my ill-spent youth). This week, the routers that don't actively avoid using glibc have just such a bug, and, IMHO, are looking forward to a nice expensive class-action suit courtesy of Our American Cousins (;-)) --dave -- David Collier-Brown, | Always do right. This will gratify System Programmer and Author | some people and astonish the rest davecb@spamcop.net | -- Mark Twain