4 ms·

> they aren't accepting legal liability and are just a convenience over doing it yourself This is not a thing when it comes to regulated professional services.

> they aren't accepting legal liability and are just a convenience over doing it yourself This is not a thing when it comes to regulated professional services. A provider doesn't get to choose whether they "accept" liability, or be "just a convenience".

fddhjjj 4y ago
Why not?
- kube-system 4y ago
  Because laws override contracts.
s1artibartfast 4y ago
Yes, they do get to choose exactly that. I am not a lawyer, and this isn't legal advice, but I think your interpretation of constitutional law is obviously incorrect. If someone needs a certified survey from a licensed professionals, they are not offering that service. If someone want a drawing of their lot in proximity, something that a homeowner could do with a tape measure, or even just guess at, they will do it for you.
- KennyBlanken 4y ago
  You do not get to choose whether you are liable when providing a service or product. You can't just say "Sorry, not liable if this widget blows up." Otherwise, and I know this is a big brain moment: everyone and every corporation would "choose" to not be liable for anything. If the customer signs a waiver, that's different - but even waivers can't waive all liability. Half the stuff in a waiver isn't even legally effective, it's just there to make you think you can't pursue damages, because they assume you'll read it and go "well shucks, this says..." instead of talking to an attorney. > I am not a lawyer That's pretty obvious.
  - modeless 4y ago
    > You can't just say "Sorry, not liable if this widget blows up." Clearly you can. Every software license has a disclaimer of liability. It's not like those are there for no reason. No, they are not an absolute shield that's effective in every circumstance, but you can and should have one.
  - s1artibartfast 4y ago
    In this case, the work product does not need to be generated by a licensed professional. Informal drawings are useful for a multitude of purposes. If the user of the drawing doesn't need it to be certified, and I can make one on a napkin, why should it be illegal for a third party to draw it on napkin for me.
    - shakna 4y ago
      What is exchanged for the napkin, though? That's generally where courts draw the line between helping out a friend, and providing a service. If you exchange something, like money, then you may be providing something under an oral contract, even if nothing is signed. And if you introduce a waiver, then you turn that oral contract into a written one.
      - d110af5ccf 4y ago
        > That's generally where courts draw the line between helping out a friend, and providing a service. The point is that it isn't the same service being provided and they are very upfront about that with the customer.
        shakna 4y ago
        When you provide what is legally considered to be a service, it comes with legal guarantees. You don't generally get to escape by saying something doesn't count, no matter how upfront about it, that you are. Consumer protections exist, regardless of whether you say they shouldn't apply. One of the guarantees that probably applies in this situation, especially as it is California which tend to have a few stronger guarantees, is fitness-to-purpose. If there is a service, where an exchange is taking place, there is a guarantee that the product should be considered fit-to-purpose. > The warranty of fitness for a particular purpose is not limited to sales by a merchant as is the warranty of merchantability. It may be imposed on any seller possessing sufficient skill and judgment to justify the buyer’s reliance. The Code drafters suggest, however, that a nonmerchant seller will only in particular circumstances have that degree of skill and judgment necessary to justify imposing the warranty.” (4 Witkin, Summary of California Law (10th ed. 2005)) The products themselves are unmarked, which means it doesn't matter how upfront that they are with the first customer, because the product is allowed to be resold, and then the limitation on purpose aren't guaranteed to be seen anymore, but it needs to be, if you want to reduce your liability.
- lbotos 4y ago
  I am also not a lawyer, but I think states don't want there to be confusion between "licensed professionals" and people providing a service that could be mistaken for work done by a licensed professional: https://www.new-york-lawyers.org/unauthorized-practice-of-a-profession-ny-ed-law-6512.html https://www.new-york-lawyers.org/unauthorized-practice-of-a-... You have to remember that if "someone draws up a lot line for you" for money then you might be providing a licensed service without a license. The rules to cut hair in NY are harder than the rules to be a computer programmer: "Complete a 1,000 hour approved course of study and pass both the New York State written and practical examinations." - https://dos.ny.gov/cosmetology https://dos.ny.gov/cosmetology
  - djoldman 4y ago
    It's somewhat interesting to use the disclaimer that one isn't a lawyer in a paragraph stating that such disclaimers are invalid. In my experience, people generally believe that stating one isn't a doctor or lawyer protects against an accusation of practicing without a license.
    - jehb 4y ago
      > In my experience, people generally believe that stating one isn't a doctor or lawyer protects against an accusation of practicing without a license. I can't believe you that as a lawyer you would claim that!
    - HWR_14 4y ago
      There's a difference, in that discussing the law and the implications of it are things we expect people to do constantly and not just by lawyers. For instance, I'm sure a lot of discussions in Wall Street around the contract Musk signed for Twitter were done by non-lawyers. I do not think that such a disclaimer would help if we were talking about your, djoldman's, plea bargain negotiations.
  - Tangurena2 4y ago
    > The rules to cut hair in NY are harder than the rules to be a computer programmer: Occupational licensing was a key element in Jim Crow. Why should there be exams and licenses for barbers (who are legally allowed to cut facial hair) or cosmetologists (who are prohibited from cutting facial hair - beards & mustaches)? Because black people might get away with doing the job. And if black people were doing that job, then other black people would never go to a white barber or cosmetologist. Vagrancy (the crime of not having a job) was enforced almost exclusively against only non-white people. Then, they'd be sentenced to work on the chain gang (or other slavery-equivalent) in accordance with the 13th Amendment. Requiring a license (which minorities could never get) made it far easier to punish people for failing to be born white. Whenever something in America seems to make no sense at all, the key is to think about how a white supremacist would use it to abuse non-white people. One key to understanding the history of racial inequality and civil rights in America would be to imagine that the South actually won the Civil War. TL;DR - it is racism all the way down.
- kube-system 4y ago
  It depends. You can’t just disclaim: “Want to buy pizza at my restaurant? (This restaurant not inspected by health department and pizza is not for human consumption)” Because it’s obvious BS. But you can say: “This is dog food, not for human consumption.” On actual dog food. Now I don’t know whether it’s BS in this instance or not but it would be very relevant to the situation.
  - tacostakohashi 4y ago
    Dog food is regulated by the FDA, 'not for human consumption' doesn't get you out of food safety requirements.
    - kube-system 4y ago
      Fair, I was thinking in the context of state/local regs…but you get my point.
    - londons_explore 4y ago
      And typically dog food is rated for human consumption anyway, simply so that when a baby eats the dog food and coincidentally gets sick, the dog food manufacturer can avoid expensive legal battles.
- IgorPartola 4y ago
  “I am not an electrician and will not accept liability for any house fires. Having said that, what do you need rewired in your kitchen?”
  - d110af5ccf 4y ago
    In that case you are selling the equivalent service (ie rewiring, which is regulated). In this case the service being sold is not the same (approximate versus legally certified maps).
Turing_Machine 4y ago
He's not claiming to provide "regulated professional services", in fact quite the opposite. If the California statute or regulation in question says that it is, it's wildly overbroad. I recently used AcreValue.com to find the rough location of some remote timberland my late mother owned. I've never been there, nor has any other living member of my family. My niece is in the area, and wanted to go out and take a look at it (mainly to make sure no one has set up a meth lab out there or something). The map from AcreValue is perfectly adequate to navigate her to the area. Now, we would be foolish to use that map in lieu of a professional surveyor if we were planning on building a wall around it or something, but we're not doing that, or anything like it. I'm guessing from what people are saying that is that the AcreValue site is also illegal under California law. Edit: I can tell that it's adequate because I also looked at the official county plat map, and can see that the AV map is congruent with the plat map, in respect to the (dirt) roads and geographic features of the surrounding area. I don't (and shouldn't) need to hire a surveyor for this.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
7952 4y ago
But it is perfectly normal to limit liability on the basis of known limitations of the product. And liability will often depend on the client working within certain constraints. For example you could hire an architect, ask them to do a preliminary sketch, fire them, add an extra floor to the design, and then construct the building based on that design. You cannot expect them to take liability.

fddhjjj 4y ago

Why not?

kube-system 4y ago
Because laws override contracts.

s1artibartfast 4y ago

Yes, they do get to choose exactly that. I am not a lawyer, and this isn't legal advice, but I think your interpretation of constitutional law is obviously incorrect. If someone needs a certified survey from a licensed professionals, they are not offering that service. If someone want a drawing of their lot in proximity, something that a homeowner could do with a tape measure, or even just guess at, they will do it for you.

KennyBlanken 4y ago
You do not get to choose whether you are liable when providing a service or product. You can't just say "Sorry, not liable if this widget blows up." Otherwise, and I know this is a big brain moment: everyone and every corporation would "choose" to not be liable for anything. If the customer signs a waiver, that's different - but even waivers can't waive all liability. Half the stuff in a waiver isn't even legally effective, it's just there to make you think you can't pursue damages, because they assume you'll read it and go "well shucks, this says..." instead of talking to an attorney. > I am not a lawyer That's pretty obvious.
- modeless 4y ago
  > You can't just say "Sorry, not liable if this widget blows up." Clearly you can. Every software license has a disclaimer of liability. It's not like those are there for no reason. No, they are not an absolute shield that's effective in every circumstance, but you can and should have one.
- s1artibartfast 4y ago
  In this case, the work product does not need to be generated by a licensed professional. Informal drawings are useful for a multitude of purposes. If the user of the drawing doesn't need it to be certified, and I can make one on a napkin, why should it be illegal for a third party to draw it on napkin for me.
  - shakna 4y ago
    What is exchanged for the napkin, though? That's generally where courts draw the line between helping out a friend, and providing a service. If you exchange something, like money, then you may be providing something under an oral contract, even if nothing is signed. And if you introduce a waiver, then you turn that oral contract into a written one.
    - d110af5ccf 4y ago
      > That's generally where courts draw the line between helping out a friend, and providing a service. The point is that it isn't the same service being provided and they are very upfront about that with the customer.
      - shakna 4y ago
        When you provide what is legally considered to be a service, it comes with legal guarantees. You don't generally get to escape by saying something doesn't count, no matter how upfront about it, that you are. Consumer protections exist, regardless of whether you say they shouldn't apply. One of the guarantees that probably applies in this situation, especially as it is California which tend to have a few stronger guarantees, is fitness-to-purpose. If there is a service, where an exchange is taking place, there is a guarantee that the product should be considered fit-to-purpose. > The warranty of fitness for a particular purpose is not limited to sales by a merchant as is the warranty of merchantability. It may be imposed on any seller possessing sufficient skill and judgment to justify the buyer’s reliance. The Code drafters suggest, however, that a nonmerchant seller will only in particular circumstances have that degree of skill and judgment necessary to justify imposing the warranty.” (4 Witkin, Summary of California Law (10th ed. 2005)) The products themselves are unmarked, which means it doesn't matter how upfront that they are with the first customer, because the product is allowed to be resold, and then the limitation on purpose aren't guaranteed to be seen anymore, but it needs to be, if you want to reduce your liability.
lbotos 4y ago
I am also not a lawyer, but I think states don't want there to be confusion between "licensed professionals" and people providing a service that could be mistaken for work done by a licensed professional: https://www.new-york-lawyers.org/unauthorized-practice-of-a-profession-ny-ed-law-6512.html https://www.new-york-lawyers.org/unauthorized-practice-of-a-... You have to remember that if "someone draws up a lot line for you" for money then you might be providing a licensed service without a license. The rules to cut hair in NY are harder than the rules to be a computer programmer: "Complete a 1,000 hour approved course of study and pass both the New York State written and practical examinations." - https://dos.ny.gov/cosmetology https://dos.ny.gov/cosmetology
- djoldman 4y ago
  It's somewhat interesting to use the disclaimer that one isn't a lawyer in a paragraph stating that such disclaimers are invalid. In my experience, people generally believe that stating one isn't a doctor or lawyer protects against an accusation of practicing without a license.
  - jehb 4y ago
    > In my experience, people generally believe that stating one isn't a doctor or lawyer protects against an accusation of practicing without a license. I can't believe you that as a lawyer you would claim that!
  - HWR_14 4y ago
    There's a difference, in that discussing the law and the implications of it are things we expect people to do constantly and not just by lawyers. For instance, I'm sure a lot of discussions in Wall Street around the contract Musk signed for Twitter were done by non-lawyers. I do not think that such a disclaimer would help if we were talking about your, djoldman's, plea bargain negotiations.
- Tangurena2 4y ago
  > The rules to cut hair in NY are harder than the rules to be a computer programmer: Occupational licensing was a key element in Jim Crow. Why should there be exams and licenses for barbers (who are legally allowed to cut facial hair) or cosmetologists (who are prohibited from cutting facial hair - beards & mustaches)? Because black people might get away with doing the job. And if black people were doing that job, then other black people would never go to a white barber or cosmetologist. Vagrancy (the crime of not having a job) was enforced almost exclusively against only non-white people. Then, they'd be sentenced to work on the chain gang (or other slavery-equivalent) in accordance with the 13th Amendment. Requiring a license (which minorities could never get) made it far easier to punish people for failing to be born white. Whenever something in America seems to make no sense at all, the key is to think about how a white supremacist would use it to abuse non-white people. One key to understanding the history of racial inequality and civil rights in America would be to imagine that the South actually won the Civil War. TL;DR - it is racism all the way down.
kube-system 4y ago
It depends. You can’t just disclaim: “Want to buy pizza at my restaurant? (This restaurant not inspected by health department and pizza is not for human consumption)” Because it’s obvious BS. But you can say: “This is dog food, not for human consumption.” On actual dog food. Now I don’t know whether it’s BS in this instance or not but it would be very relevant to the situation.
- tacostakohashi 4y ago
  Dog food is regulated by the FDA, 'not for human consumption' doesn't get you out of food safety requirements.
  - kube-system 4y ago
    Fair, I was thinking in the context of state/local regs…but you get my point.
  - londons_explore 4y ago
    And typically dog food is rated for human consumption anyway, simply so that when a baby eats the dog food and coincidentally gets sick, the dog food manufacturer can avoid expensive legal battles.
IgorPartola 4y ago
“I am not an electrician and will not accept liability for any house fires. Having said that, what do you need rewired in your kitchen?”
- d110af5ccf 4y ago
  In that case you are selling the equivalent service (ie rewiring, which is regulated). In this case the service being sold is not the same (approximate versus legally certified maps).

Turing_Machine 4y ago

He's not claiming to provide "regulated professional services", in fact quite the opposite. If the California statute or regulation in question says that it is, it's wildly overbroad. I recently used AcreValue.com to find the rough location of some remote timberland my late mother owned. I've never been there, nor has any other living member of my family. My niece is in the area, and wanted to go out and take a look at it (mainly to make sure no one has set up a meth lab out there or something). The map from AcreValue is perfectly adequate to navigate her to the area. Now, we would be foolish to use that map in lieu of a professional surveyor if we were planning on building a wall around it or something, but we're not doing that, or anything like it. I'm guessing from what people are saying that is that the AcreValue site is also illegal under California law. Edit: I can tell that it's adequate because I also looked at the official county plat map, and can see that the AV map is congruent with the plat map, in respect to the (dirt) roads and geographic features of the surrounding area. I don't (and shouldn't) need to hire a surveyor for this.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

7952 4y ago

But it is perfectly normal to limit liability on the basis of known limitations of the product. And liability will often depend on the client working within certain constraints. For example you could hire an architect, ask them to do a preliminary sketch, fire them, add an extra floor to the design, and then construct the building based on that design. You cannot expect them to take liability.