Warranty (globally) on software licenses: Beerware vs BSD-0 Clause, does beerware imply liability?
<p>Hi most FOSS licenses like 0-clause BSD <a href="https://opensource.org/license/0bsd/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://opensource.org/license/0bsd/</a> contain something like this:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED “AS IS” AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL
WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES</p>
</blockquote>
<p>From MIT:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED &quot;AS IS&quot;, WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, ...</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Can the beerware license mean that the author of some code can be sued or something in some
jurisdictions, which? Only in 'murica' or even globally?</p>
<blockquote>
<p>&quot;THE BEER-WARE LICENSE&quot; (Revision 42):  * phk@FreeBSD.ORG wrote this file.  As long as you retain this notice you  * can do whatever
you want with this stuff. If we meet some day, and you think  * this
stuff is worth it, you can buy me a beer in return.   Poul-Henning
Kamp  *</p>
</blockquote>
<p>It feels a bit awkward that the reason people always put somekind of license on their code, usually MIT or BSD for the more permissive ones that negotiates away liability. I cannot see in what universe the person who wrote some code and put it up can be responsible for anything.</p>
<p>Shoudlnt something that a person makes and gives away for free, lets say on github.com automatically cancel out all warranties and supplier laws.</p>
<p>The only reference I could find online was American consumer laws, which should be of little considerations for an international website, or someone not based in US.</p>

<h2>Such clauses are problematic</h2>
<p>For example, the Australian Consumer Law imposes statutory <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/buying-products-and-services/consumer-rights-and-guarantees" rel="nofollow noreferrer">guarantees</a> on the supply of goods and services to consumers even when when these are supplied as gifts. The one we are interested in for software is they must be provided with Due care and skill:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Service providers must carry out all services using an acceptable level of care and skill. Their work must be at least as good as what a competent service provider with average skills and experience would provide. They must also take reasonable steps to avoid causing loss or damage when providing the service.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>A blanket “as is” statement does not and cannot remove the requirement that the software author must “ take reasonable steps to avoid causing loss or damage when providing the service.” Further, claiming that they have no obligation when they actually do is misleading and a breach of the law all by itself (<a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/valve-to-pay-3-million-in-penalties-for-misrepresenting-gamers-consumer-guarantee-rights" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Valve to pay $3 million in penalties for misrepresenting gamers' consumer guarantee rights</a>)</p>

licensing