But if the owner of the dog didnt train the dog to be mean, then there would be no problem if the dog got loose, so yes, the owner should be responsible for the dog, even if it wasnt his fault that he got loose.

it was mentioned that a virus is like drugs, no, i differ on that comparison. drugs do not seek out a person and hurt them on purpose. if drugs got loose and fell on the street, they will not go to the next person by them selves and cause harm. the same with a gun. if you put a gun on the sidewalk and left it there, it will not aim itself and pull the trigger to hurt someone. a computer virus is like a living thing, it lives to hurt and cause trouble and anyone that writes one with the intent to destroy computer data, whether they intent to let it loose or not, should be fined. there are many more things that programmers could write to see if they can do it or not.

i for one have been attacked by a virus and lost 6 months worth of work. i had backups of all my data and thought I was safe. but the backups were also infected and all was lost. I now use virus scanners and keep everything checked. So i am a little bitter about viruses and anyone that writes one, whether in fun or with the intent to let it loose and cause harm.

Ron


>Hi Ron;
>
>Some people might say the dog owner isn't responsible if he took every precaution to keep the dog fenced in (because it was dangerous) and it was beyond his control that the dog got out.
>
>I think I might possibly agree with your statement on viruses - I feel that anyone that makes a virus just for fun or for improper intentions should be fined - but I don't believe that is the case today.
>
>What would the rules be? How would the law define the code that is *BAD* and subject to prosecution?
>
>The better course, I think, is if you think someone has done you damage, sue them. It's a civil offense, not criminal.
>
>Maybe in some macabre way, the virus writers of the world are helping to point out the weaknesses and deficiencies in our systems. I'm not suggesting they are providing a public service but the ideas and thought that has been provoked does have some value.
>
>
>>What if you put this virus in terms of dogs and humans. we train a dog to be mean and to attack people, but we will always keep the dog fenced in. no problem, right? well the mail man opens the fence and lets the dog out, now this mean dog is going to attack everyone it sees. do we fine the dog owner because he trained the dog or do we put down the dog? right now we do both which is the way it should be. what about the people that this dog has attacked, they have damage done to them and what if it was a child? I feel that anyone that makes a virus just for fun or for improper intentions should be fined.
>>
>>just my opinion
>>
>>Ron