本文作者指出，德國產品責任法以及德國民法上的產品製造人責任（以德國民法第八二三條第一項為基礎），均適用於軟體製造人。在此，德國產品責任法第一條所稱之「產品」，不應以是否具有形體為判斷標準，而應當考量該法之規範目的，對產品概念採用目的性擴張的解釋。民法上的產品製造人責任，則向以廣義的產品概念為基礎。不過，作者進一步指出，在適用德國產品責任法與民法上產品製造人責任於軟體製造人時，應當考量軟體相較於傳統商品所具有之特性，對其注意義務提出新的界定。在此基礎上，作者嘗試為軟體製造人於軟體上市後的警告義務與提供修補程式的義務，提出一貫的釋義學基礎。

The author of this article indicates that both the German Product, Liability Act and the producer liability in German BGB (based on § 823 I) should be applied to producer of software. The “product” of § 1 of the German Product Liability Act shouldn’t be defined by the criterium of corporeality. Considering the purpose of the Product Liability Act, an extended concept of product should be adopted. On the other hand, the producer liability of the German BGB presupposes a broader concept of product. However, the author further indicates that, while the German Product Liability Act and the producer liability of the German BGB apply to producer of software, we should take the characteristics of software in contrast to traditional products into account and redefine the due diligence accordingly. Based on such observations, the author tries to provide a coherent doctrinal foundation for software producer’s duty of warning and providing patch after the release of software.