They sure do, but at the consumer level, products that maim or otherwise harm people tend not to last too long on the market.
That's a moot point to this discussion, but I love that reasoning: There's no need for safety regulations since manufacturers will wisely and responsibly take a dangerous product or component off the market after it stops selling well.
LOL! So tell me why again the free market should regulate the software market again? If the product doesn't work, people won't buy it.
Wow, you are dense. I wrote that very answer in my previous post. Since your reading comprehension level is obviously quite low, here it is again. The free market method of regulation doesn't work here because all purveyors in this industry exempt themselves from liability as a condition to use the product. I guess you never actually read a software end-user liceense agreement (EULA). In addition, almost all retailers will not refund an opened software/video game purchase. So, once the publisher has the consumer's money, it doesn't need to worry about his dissatisfaction. By the time its next game comes out, the consumer will have forgotten, or the publisher will have changed names or merged with another one.
Want a good real world example that free-market regulation doesn't work for this industry? Just look at EA. Many if not most of EA games are significantly broken at release (and still broken years later) and yet EA has yet to go out of business or suffer financially for it. When the consumer can't return the product or successfully sue the manufacturer, there's no financial reason for the company to care about quality.This comment was edited on Jun 18, 00:27.