TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Client from Hell redux From:"Jeanne A. E. DeVoto" <jaed -at- jaedworks -dot- com> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Wed, 7 Jun 2000 19:55:06 -0700
At 4:12 PM -0700 6/7/2000, Michele Davis wrote:
>It seems to me that what Andrew did was proactive. He got the job done, that's
>what he was supposed to do. Why would you get lawyers involved? Lawyers should
>only be involved if he was distributing secure information, but it appears he
>wasn't.
Well, doing such a thing without specific authorization *is* a crime in
most jurisdictions. Getting lawyers involved doesn't seem out of line when
a contractor does something criminal, even in pursuit of the job.
The client might take the fairly sane position that "No harm, no foul" in
this case, as long as no security damage was done - although pulling a
stunt like that can easily cause an inadvertent security breach - but
they'd have every right to press charges if they wanted to. By way of
analogy, if he wanted information he needed for the job on a weekend, and
broke into the building to get it, the company might or might not sic the
cops on him - might not even fire him, depending - but there'd certainly be
a chat with lawyers and "Don't do that" would be clarified for him and/or
an agency he was working through.
