Re: Legal review of documentation

[Wendy Lewis <wlewis -at- NCLOGIC -dot- COM>]

Legal review?

For 11 years, I worked at a company that produced
industrial x-ray machines. These were hazardous
electrically, mechanically, and in radiation exposure.
We had strict safety regulations in house. But... the
company had no interest in the documentation.

I was the only writer and when I left, they did not replace
me for over a year. Not only did I not have legal review of
documentation, I rarely had any review. The manuals were
often no more than my opinion. I put in a spattering of
warnings and caution notices, but minimized these in
favor of clarity, as I've heard others mention.

As a restaurant worker will often not eat where they work
after knowing what goes on in the kitchen, I would never
be an operator of one of the machines we made. I know that
the radiation exposure is cumulative and would not want to be
exposed to the maximum allowed leakage on a daily basis.
The machines we sent to third world countries did not need
to meet our governments maximum allowed leakage, just the
less strict regulations of that country. "Labor is cheap."

Even with all their problems and attitudes, I never heard of a
legal problem associated with the liability of the machines, in
 the 15 year existence of the company.

I don't know what this proves except maybe that legal review of
documentation is probably overkill.

 >
>I would like to know how many companies (or individuals) have their
>documentation reviewed by lawyers before it is released.
>
>If you don't have your documentation reviewed by lawyers, why not?
>
>Suzanne Gerrior


Wendy Lewis
North Coast Logic

Never moon a werewolf.
-- Mike Binder