[eyelidlessness]

I’m not concerned that the case will result in a decision voiding the liability clause of the MIT license in the UK. That seems so unlikely as to be amusing we’re even discussing it.

I’m concerned that any court… at least any court with a reputation remotely in the realm of “not a plainly obvious farce intentionally designed to boast its illegitimacy for intimidation purposes”… would pick a precedent-setting case of this magnitude, where the defendant is anything but flanked by an army of lawyers.

By all means, set the obvious precedent. But there has got to be a case which isn’t set up to probably ruin the life of an eventually vindicated open source developer defendant.

Edit: and I should also clarify I’m not concerned about crypto or whatever. I’m concerned that anyone at all working on clearly warranty-free software can have their lives sucked up into a case of national and probably international impact just because some court decides to make an example of their plaintiff.