

Begin forwarded message:

I said:
> BTW - Oracle & other commercial vendors handle these contingencies by 
> buying insurance policies.

I think I should probably correct the above statement. I think Oracle 
specifically has a large enough revenue stream that they have no need to 
purchase an insurance policy. It is technically possible for them, or 
any other vendor, to do so if they chose to. Many insurance companies 
offer insurance products to offset the legal responsibility for the 
performance of a software package. Many such policies are sold each year.




Thu, 27 Jun 2002 00:52:22 -0600
Tim Hart <timjhart@shaw.ca>
Fwd: Support (was: Democracy and organisation)
On Thu, 2002-06-27 at 02:52, Tim Hart wrote:
> 
> 
> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> I said:
> > BTW - Oracle & other commercial vendors handle these contingencies by 
> > buying insurance policies.
> 
> I think I should probably correct the above statement. I think Oracle 
> specifically has a large enough revenue stream that they have no need to 
> purchase an insurance policy. It is technically possible for them, or 
> any other vendor, to do so if they chose to. Many insurance companies 
> offer insurance products to offset the legal responsibility for the 
> performance of a software package. Many such policies are sold each year.

Perhaps, but in this case who protects Oracle from the insurance company
when the insurance agency Oracle based database corrupts and loses the
Oracle policy?

This is why I think Oracle should promote PostgreSQL for instances where
a database issue could be conflicting ;)




27 Jun 2002 08:40:53 -0400
Rod Taylor <rbt@zort.ca>
Re: [HACKERS] Fwd: Support (was: Democracy and organisation)