Why we should not allow to add 3rdparty support to product infos

[usta]

I'm strictly against adding 3rd party support info directly to our projects ( unless that 3rdparty support is mentioned in related product's webpage).

This will just bring us responsibilities and in many countries this can be a possible reason to get sued because of if some harm happens to customer ( for example missing support or any Unkept promises ).
So from my side strict 👎

We are well aware that our primary goal is to assist our users, but we must not forget that if such an action leads to potential problems or irreversible issues, we are taking on that responsibility. If we set aside the issue of responsibility, there are also very important legal implications to consider.

[usta]

@marcwrobel @BiNZGi @captn3m0

[ljharb]

Can you elaborate on in which countries it's the case that simply linking to another site would create legal liability? That seems like it'd make most of the internet effectively illegal, including social media sites.

[marcwrobel]

I don't quite understand the legal implications we could face (but I am not a lawyer ;)) and I tend to agree with @ljharb.

About the main subject, which is whether or not we should mention third-party support on endoflife.date, we don't have a very well defined policy. I usually accept contributions only if:

• the third-party provider is clearly mentioned in related product's website,
• the third-party provider is well-known (which is very hard to assess, especially if I am not familiar with the product).

The other contributions are rejected as endoflife.date is not a mean to advertise for third-party providers IMO.

In any case I think our policy should be clearly stated in https://endoflife.date/contribute.