TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Re: Warnings and liability (was: Plagiarism vs Fixed Botches)
Subject:Re: Warnings and liability (was: Plagiarism vs Fixed Botches) From:Peter <pnewman1 -at- home -dot- com> To:Kat Nagel <katnagel -at- eznet -dot- net> Date:Tue, 21 Mar 2000 07:43:37 -0500
Kat Nagel wrote:
> >
> >Just out of curiosity, would this raise any liability issues? I realize your
> >defense would be that you were following instructions, but would that stand up
> >in court?
>
> '
> Liability issues? Oh my, yes!
>
> Not for me, 'cuz my contract shoves all the liability on them for stuff
> like that (I make sure I get questionable change requests in writing, and I
> keep copies in a safe place <smile>). But THEIR liability, as product
> manufacturers, would have been horrendous.
>
> I forwarded a request to their Regulatory Affairs office and let THEM slap
> him down. You could hear the smack echoing through the halls for weeks
> afterward.
> '
Better think twice about that. A third party is not bound by your
private agreement and in most jurisdictions their "obligation" to
reimburse you may or may not be valid. If you knowingly participate, no
amount of protest will absolve you. The "I'm only following orders"
defense is not valid at all. Consult your local attorney. Sign me, met
too many good people who thought as you do.
--
Peter
Arguing with an engineer is like mud wrestling with a pig.
You soon realize they both enjoy it.
