Re: Liability for manuals?

[Tim Altom <taltom -at- IQUEST -dot- NET>]

At 04:50 PM 11/13/97 -0600, you wrote:

>
> Tim went on to wonder if a specific warning message such as
> <<Mixing these two chemicals could result in an explosion,
> toxic gas, and attendant death of bystanders>> was equally
> suspect in a court of law.
>
> There's a huge difference between the two. I'm not a
> lawyer, not even on this list, but what I _have_ read about
> the law is that the judge rules on such cases based largely
> on intent.

Uh, actually no. It's a factor, but not the basis for most civil liability.
In fact, often the test is "he knew or should have known" that something or
other would result in harm to another. You may not have intended that your
car lost its brakes and rolled backwards into a fruit stand, but if you knew
the brakes were in sad shape, you're liable in most jurisdictions.

 If the people at Paladin had written a clear and
> detailed book on ways to avoid accidentally killing people,
> and someone died anyway, they would almost certainly win
> the case. Since they instead produced a book that
> specifically breaks the laws of every civilized society I'm
> familiar with, it's not rocket science to see why a judge
> would throw out their first amendment protection. "Free
> speech" has almost never been interpreted as the right to
> break the laws of the land, particularly well-known and
> time-tested laws that judges have already ruled an
> acceptable way to constrain free speech.

Yeah, and let's be clear that Paladin hasn't actually been to court on the
merits, but only to determine if the book was shielded by the First
Amendment. But folks, our stuff usually isn't shielded, either.
>
> In your example, liability will generally only result if
> the injured party could prove that your warning was
> inadequate, misleading, inaccurate, or otherwise likely to
> lead to an injury. Of course, given the stories we hear
> occasionally about the U.S. legal system, that's not to say
> that a judge couldn't find just about anything actionable.
>
My hypothetical wasn't concerned with somebody who gets hurt IN SPITE OF a
warning, but in the bizarre but real possibility of being hurt BECAUSE OF A
WARNING. Would the manual's author/owner be held liable for passing on
deadly advice IN THE NEGATIVE?

And, to follow up on that, I wouldn't be too worried about this whole issue
if cool heads are passing judgement on it, like an appeals court. My worry
would be in the more chaotic lower courts where you can rack up a six-figure
legal tab even if you win.

Tim Altom
Vice President, Simply Written, Inc.
317.899.5882 (voice) 317.899.5987 (fax)
FrameMaker support  ForeHelp support
FrameMaker Conversions
PDF Consulting and Production


Posts: mailto:techwr-l -at- listserv -dot- okstate -dot- edu
Commands: mailto:listserv -at- listserv -dot- okstate -dot- edu (e.g. SIGNOFF TECHWR-L)
Archives: http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html,
	http://www.documentation.com/, or http://www.dejanews.com/
Subjects: JOB:, QUESTION:, SUMMARY:, ANNOUNCE:, or none of these.