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.
Milan DavidoviÄ wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 10:42 AM, McLauchlan, Kevin
> <Kevin -dot- McLauchlan -at- safenet-inc -dot- com> wrote:
> > Is there anything on record stating or implying that even
> > one of those dense little packets of non-information has
> > ever saved anyone from insult or injury, since they became
> > so common-place?
>
> If not, they may still save someone from -- or at least mitigate the
> outcome of -- criminal charges or a civil suit against the
> manufacturer.
I think we all know _why_ those volumes of legalese are
part of product packaging. That's not my point.
The legal structure is <supposedly> predicated upon
the notion of what a "reasonable person" would do
in a situation.
Given my contention - and nobody has yet disagreed -
that (almost) nobody ever, ever, ever reads that stuff,
are we to conclude that almost nobody is a "reasonable
person" under the law? Or are we to conclude that this
aspect of legal posturing is based on actions other than
what "reasonable persons" do?
In other words, the whole very expensive exercise seems
predicated upon a fiction. That sort of thing makes a
body take the rest of the legal system less seriously,
since the legal system still takes this stuff seriously
enough that they <collude to> require companies to keep
doing it, regardless of the cost and the apparently
nonsensical nature of it.
In other, other words, it runs counter to what techwriters
are supposed to accomplish when documenting product.
Having said that, I'm sure many of us write tons of
instructional and expository prose who's only function
is as fodder for the Help Desk to say: "Well, if you
read page xyz of the manual...".
Not in the aircraft or medical industries, of course.
Anyway, does anybody on the list participate in those
reams of legalese, or is it handed down from the legal
department with instructions to make no alterations?
- kevin
<bumpfstart>
The information contained in this electronic mail transmission
may be privileged and confidential, and therefore, protected
from disclosure. If you have received this communication in
error, please notify us immediately by replying to this
message and deleting it from your computer without copying
or disclosing it.
Create and publish documentation through multiple channels with Doc-To-Help.
Choose your authoring formats and get any output you may need. Try
Doc-To-Help, now with MS SharePoint integration, free for 30-days. http://www.doctohelp.com
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
