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.
Several writers have talked about "malpractice insurance":
When I was visiting the Oracle Headquarters in California, a contract writer
told me he had been asked to sign an agreement with a potential
contracting employer (NOT Oracle) stating his own liability for any errors or
omissions in the documentation. This meant that, should a customer ever sue the
software company for something resulting from erroneous documentation, the
technical writer, and not the company, would be liable.
He, and I, were rightly appalled. Given all the dependencies a documentor has
in information sources, etc., I think it is unreasonable to pin this on the
writer. Also, it seems to me just another way for a big company to sucker the
little guy.
I have heard of nothing like this in Canada. I hope this isn't a trend that
makes it way here, as is so often the case (for good and bad, lest you think I
am Yankee-bashing :-) )
