It’s fairly trivial to write a law that makes those illegal.
The only industry with a broad "no liability for torts" is gun manufacturing.
Almost all software everywhere comes with a 'no liability' clause. And arguable, open source couldn't exist without it.
The exceptions where liability is wanted negotiate that specifically.
We protect people because they have failed. These regulations tend to follow actual injuries; they are rarely promulgated in anticipation of them.
You don't negotiate the contents of your burger with McDonald's. If you don't like it, you go to Burger King or have a Döner Kebab.
There's plenty of tacit negotiations here.
> We protect people because they have failed. These regulations tend to follow actual injuries; they are rarely promulgated in anticipation of them.
Homeopathic medicine tend to follow actual health problems, too. That doesn't mean they are a good idea.
Not every industry is a competitive one with practically unlimited choices. Natural monopolies or industries with high barriers to entry tend to have the most leverage over their customers. Most people have only a single electricity provider, and there are only two major mobile OS vendors worth speaking of.
> Homeopathic medicine tend to follow actual health problems, too. That doesn't mean they are a good idea.
Some work; some don’t. The key is figuring out which solutions are effective and which aren’t. Nobody is proposing keeping fixes around whose costs aren’t worth the benefits to society.
Couldn't you just include selling a product or a licence for it as a requirement?
Generally most GPL'd software isn't sold (terms and conditions may apply).
Pretty well, actually, as long as you can download the software for free.