Re: Liability insurance

Subject: Re: Liability insurance
From: Lou Quillio <public -at- quillio -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 20:08:13 -0400

Tammy Cravit wrote:

I think if I was, such insurance would be
accompanied by a signed document indemnifying me in the event the client
fails to provide timely feedback or otherwise meet their deliverables.

Push-back. I like it.

You're fired.


Scat needs to predictably roll downhill. A client can choose not to use my work, not associate it with his product. If docs are faulty (or dissonant with the product, somehow) and the enterprise suffers liability exposure, that exposure is attached to the enterprise's independent decision to package those docs with the product, nothing else. Nothing else. It could've chosen not to. I don't control the product, I don't control the truth, and I can't cover a butt that's not mine.

Next it'll be my fault if they don't have "a quality marketplace experience, when the moment's right". On a safety note, let's remember to consult an accountant if quality marketplace experiences last more than four hours.



Accelerate the document lifecycle with full online discussions and unique feedback-management capabilities. Unlimited, efficient reviews for Word
and FrameMaker authors. Live, online demo:

You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Send administrative questions to lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Previous by Author: Re: Liability insurance
Next by Author: Re: An observation -- what you're used to
Previous by Thread: RE: Liability insurance
Next by Thread: RE: Liability insurance

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads