Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by FL410 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

FL410

> This comment is not legal advice.

Serious question, why do lawyers always do this? No other profession seems to feel the need to disclaim their dialog.

Is there some precedent for attorneys discussing their area of expertise and unwittingly becoming someone’s counsel?

View on HN

No problem, I'll give you a serious answer.

First of all, I'm not a lawyer. I'm a mechanical engineer.

And to answer your question, yes, many attorneys are in fact worried about giving legal advice online [1], especially the fact that it may imply some sort of legal representation being extended. This is why I added the disclaimer at the top and why I emphasized that this is not the right forum for this and that the original poster should in fact get an attorney (which strongly implies that I am not their attorney).

This is also why I did not discuss the specifics of the claims being made in the different patents, because that could imply that I am giving specific legal advice. I am not giving any legal advice. Instead, I just discussed broadly how the patent system works in this particular context, especially in regards to what parts of a patent are legally enforceable and how examiners examine patents (and how you can look up what they did).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IANAL

(Extended disclaimer for the sake of emphasis: I am not a lawyer. I am not your lawyer. This is not legal advice. My comments in this thread are merely educational in nature.)

If you were a lawyer then you'd be bound by bar standards and such. But you're not, so why the disclaimer? Is there some legal jeopardy a non-lawyer places themselves in by talking about the law? If so that sounds positively dystopian.

More generally I am entirely supportive of not giving unsolicited advice of any sort. Not for legal reasons, but because it's presumptuous, rude, and often even pompous.

I believe atrettel wanted to be transparent about the nature of their reply more than protecting themselves from jeopardy. Also, this is not unsolicited as OP has asked a specific question to the community.

I wanted to be both transparent and protect myself by adding the disclaimer. I perhaps should have added that I am not a lawyer to make it clearer.

It is usually illegal to give legal advice or represent someone without being a lawyer, so this disclaimer is meant to protect yourself against claims that you're doing so. I think.

> It is usually illegal to give legal advice or represent someone without being a lawyer

This is not true. It is usually illegal to give someone the impression that you are a lawyer when you are giving legal advice (it is fraud.) So careful people lead by making sure that no one has the impression that they are a lawyer when they are giving legal advice, and lawyers who are just talking off the top of their head and not being paid warn you that they are not giving you advice as a lawyer (i.e. they are not working at this moment as a lawyer.)

People who are not lawyers give each other legal advice all the time. It's a good thing if the advice is good, and a bad thing if the advice is bad, but not a crime.

Engineers are often bound by similar standards and organizations. Depending on the situation they may be licensed and PE, etc. We are often held accountable for our actions and statements in exactly the same fashion as lawyers are. Therefore we are trained, and it's good form to, be very clear about the circumstances around any advice we give.

This makes sense to me and other comments have covered why plenty well, but what does frustrate me is the constant insistence that nothing should ever be discussed in public and you must consult your own lawyer privately for every bit of basic information. That's just not realistic for the majority of people and even plenty of small businesses with how much lawyers cost.

Risk.

Whenever you provide legal advice, you take on risk. And big or small, there is always the possibility that that risk might end your career and cause years of training to go up in smoke.

Lawyers are experts in risk management, which is why you see them trying to minimize risk and exposure in every way possible.

(Lawyer here.)

Have you ever considered wearing a helmet in day-to-day life? I'm just curious how far flights of fancy might go for people dealing with risk management constantly.

I bet you'd find a higher percentage of lawyers' kids wearing helmets biking than average. And fewer of them owning trampolines.

When I was a kid, I really wanted a trampoline.

Now that I'm an adult and video websites exist, I'm REALLY glad I never got one. I almost certainly would have broken my back or next while attempting a flip, or broken an ankle by having more than one person on it.

There are several other professions which do it. Doctors and financial advisers immediately spring to mind. It's bound to happen in any tightly regulated profession where the professional is expected to give potentially life altering advice as part of their services.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com