bill@sigma.UUCP (William Swan) (02/11/89)
In article <2559@kalliope.rice.edu> phil@Rice.edu (William LeFebvre) writes: >>My opinion is that every moderator on Usenet runs an risk of being sued >>for anything posted in his group. >As a moderator [...] If someone were to use the advice posted to, say, >comp.sys.sun, and as a result lose vast amounts of data (because the advice >was wrong, misleading or not appropriate for his environment), could that >person sue [...] the moderator [...] and have a good chance of winning? >Does he have a valid claim in saying that I was negligent by not verifying >the message's correctness? This question clicked on one that I had been vaguely wondering about for a couple days. I think the two are (somewhat) related, so, I put it forward for the misc.legal beagles: This is the second question: >Is the author|publisher|distributer of a book giving the how to of an >illegal procedure lible if somebody actually tries it and gets hurt? What >if he says `for information only, DONT DO IT', like this guy? > >]The following information is from the book _Kitchen Improvised Plastic >]Explosives_ ...(the procedure was not given - dont bother looking ;-) >]KIDS: DON'T TRY THIS AT HOME. ... It looks like a good way to >]kill yourself (and anyone else in the same building). ... > >I havent seen the book; I dont know whether its title is legit, or if it >needs special processes or chemicals but uses `coffeecup' for `beaker' to >make it a `kitchen-proccess.' (If that, then maybe its false advertising >but who is going to say they tried an illegal procedure just to find out >it didnt work and sue him?) In the first case, somebody makes a (legal) procedure available, not as direct advice to the end user. Is a disclaimer sufficient protection against a negligence suit? Is it necessary? In the second case, somebody makes an illegal procedure available. Is a disclaimer here sufficient protection against a suit? Is it necessary? Is it necessary to state that the process is illegal if the book does not advise the reader to do it? (When I think of the books on moon-ligh..I mean ethanol fuel production..I've read :-) -- William Swan ..!tikal.Teltone.COM!sigma!bill # +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ # |Innocent but in prison in the State of Washington: | # | Debbie Runyan - Sentenced to 13.5 years for a crime not committed, | # | incarcerated 01/1989, scheduled release 07/2002. | # | In now: 0 years, 0 months, 3 weeks, 0 days. | # +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+