I'd agree in principle, but a jungle of software patents, code cross-pollination, and strong dependency on, and exposure of, company internals when one changes hand make it hard for some products to be shuffled around. IE: if they had to put DS up for sale, what happens to patented and shared high profile properties? What about an eventual, high performing propietary codec shared across products in example? (Something that in the past had set Avid apart for many years)
You'd also open the doors to qualify software as a discrete commercial unit with identity, which is another legal jungle to navigate, and has just as many or more negative side effects for the software industry serving you as it has benefits for the user as a consumer with rights. They could also price it so ridiculously that it'd default to a kill. Unless you're also implying there should be a fair price scheme of sort, which is another thing that has more thorns than anybody wants to deal with. "A company" also happens to be awfully generic. Would this be corporate law for companies with stock, or would this apply to any software? If the latter how do you propose development done by individuals or garage operations is treated? Should there be a world software registry you need to join before you can distribute your software so it's all regulated? And what about the knee breaking hit to agility in that case? It's really not that simple :) On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 6:48 AM, Bk <p...@bustykelp.com> wrote: > I think if a company wants to discontinue a product with a user-base that > relies upon it then by law they should have to first offer it for sale. And > only have the option of shelving it if there is shown no interest in it. > >
