3 ms·
If you are doing something that isn't significantly risky and isn't identified by policy as likely to give rise to a significant risk, then you don't need to as
by james_in_the_uk 4y ago
If you are doing something that isn't significantly risky and isn't identified by policy as likely to give rise to a significant risk, then you don't need to ask a company lawyer.
If you ask them anyway, it might take a while to get a reply, because they'll be prioritising significant risks.
- ellyagg 4y agoBut then they also say no.
- james_in_the_uk 4y agoYes we have a special protocol for time-wasters ;)
- ineedasername 4y agoAh, so you deploy malicious obstructionism against people with honest questions that want to make sure they stay on the right side of the law.
- ineedasername 4y agoThere are plenty of things short of significant risk that would be useful to have a professional legal opinion on. You are also making the faulty assumption that policy has sufficient coverage to avoid ambiguities and cover all events. It doesn't. Something not particularly risky, not covered by policy, but touching on a legal matter are not uncommon. Your comment is rather strange in fact given the actual linked article's example.