The new exam just gives states a way to evaluate applicants for licenses in software engineering. I haven’t heard that any state—not even Texas, which sponsore

The new exam just gives states a way to evaluate applicants for licenses in software engineering. I haven’t heard that any state—not even Texas, which sponsored development of the exam—has changed its engineering practice laws or regulations. If and when such changes are made, I expect the result would be something like the situation for electrical engineers now: a nominal requirement for licensure coupled with broad exemptions that make it practically irrelevant for most people working in the field. In most states, only a licensed (registered) engineer may use the title “electrical engineer,” practice electrical engineering, or offer electrical engineering services to the public, but there is usually a so-called “industrial exemption” from these requirements; this section of the California Business and Professions Code is typical: 6747. (a) This chapter, except for those provisions that apply to civil engineers and civil engineering, shall not apply to the performance of engineering work by a manufacturing, mining, public utility, research and development, or other industrial corporation, or by employees of that corporation, provided that work is in connection with, or incidental to, the products, systems, or services of that corporation or its affiliates. (b) For purposes of this section, “employees” also includes consultants, temporary employees, contract employees, and those persons hired pursuant to third- party contracts. As I understand it, this exemption exists because employers convinced the Legislature that corporate liability, including strict liability for product defects, would be an adequate substitute for licensure as a means to protect the public from professional incompetence. Practically speaking, the only electrical engineers who must have licenses are those designing electric power systems for buildings or working for public utilities, which often choose to employ only licensed engineers in positions of responsibility, even when this is not legally required. As a licensed engineer myself, I’m not sure this state of affairs is best for the public or for the engineering profession, but I’m also not convinced that software engineering, as a discipline, is sufficiently mature that even a nominal requirement for licensure would provide enough real benefits to justify the burden on practitioners.