Re: [PSES] standards update and legal madness
Brian - Threats of tort is commonly used to try to get someone else to absorb the types of costs described below. Depending on the actual cost of the required product fixes, one side or the other may decide to eat the costs, simply based on the typically exorbitant legal costs for pursuing a tort and the potential for losing. The contracted company's legal dweebs need to review the contract to see if professional incompetence is on their side or on the part of the contracting company. Meaning, how specific was the contract in specifying the applicable standards and was there any presumption of continuing compliance over time. This ties into John Shinn's question about, build to print, which is a contract manufacturer's backup Plan A. As far as the who's who, simply direct them to the committee responsible for the standard and let them tease out its membership. It should not be the contracted company's responsibility to take action beyond this minimal level, unless there's a desire to play extra nice until it's time to not play nice. If the contracted company's legal dweebs are on the ball, they're most likely already on these issues. Regards, Peter Tarver -Original Message- From: Brian Oconnell [mailto:oconne...@tamuracorp.com] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 10:46 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] standards update and legal madness None of this is a representation of my employer. A company makes a component for North American market designed for the needs of a single customer. The company received notices from CSA and UL with tabulation of standards corrections. The company informed affected customer of time and cost to update. The company then receives letter from the customer's legal dweebs - they want to see complete list of organizations and individuals that contributed to the errors that caused a mandatory update to the standard. The company's customer is considering pursuing a tort for lost opportunity and professional incompetence. Has this ever been done? Has a member of a TC/WG ever been served with a subpoena for this stuff? Is this stupid or just insane? - --- - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc- p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product- compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not an intended recipient, you may not review, use, copy, disclose or distribute this message. If you received this message in error, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] standards update and legal madness
Point 2 - the manufacturer likely built to the prints and requirements stated in the functional specification at the time the product was being bid, and subsequent development. If there were known changes coming into effect that would be a point of discussion during the product development and the functional specification update at that time to reference the changed standard. But they are not soothsayers who can predict the entire future of a standard. It appears the company in this case did exactly the correct thing. They built the equipment to the customers functional specifications, maintained the design in a consistent fashion with those specifications and when a change that was not in the functional specification came about they contacted the customer to see if they wished to make said changes, and informed them of the cost and time required to make them. Gary -Original Message- From: John Shinn [mailto:jmsh...@pacbell.net] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 1:09 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] standards update and legal madness 1. John Woodgate makes an excellent point regarding why didn't the manufacture know about the Standard Changes. 2. Does the manufacturer build to the customer's prints and requirements? If so, why didn't the customer know about the Standard Changes? John Shinn -Original Message- From: John Woodgate Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 11:45 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] standards update and legal madness In message 518cfcd229674efe916347038430c...@blupr02mb116.namprd02.prod.outlook.com , dated Fri, 8 Nov 2013, Brian Oconnell oconne...@tamuracorp.com writes: A company makes a component for North American market designed for the needs of a single customer. The company received notices from CSA and UL with tabulation of standards corrections. The company informed affected customer of time and cost to update. H'mmm. Why didn't the manufacturer know about the changes to the standards? Or is it a case of a running product that now needs to conform to updated, **improved** standards? That's how the real world works, not how the inhabitants of Planet Legal might like it to work. The company then receives letter from the customer's legal dweebs - they want to see complete list of organizations and individuals that contributed to the errors that caused a mandatory update to the standard. I'd be inclined to say that the culprits, if there are any, are UL and CSA and their managers! Standards committee members offer their work for approval at several stages in the organizations before the work is published. There is a big and vulnerable assumption that 'errors' are involved, but a defence based on 'state of the art' can be problematical because the legal people who have to present the case, however intelligent, cannot possibly absorb all the background that is involved in determining 'state of the art'. For example, what has been done once, or even a hundred times, in a university laboratory isn't state of the art in the real world. It's only state of the art if you can buy it or manufacture it. The company's customer is considering pursuing a tort for lost opportunity and professional incompetence. Has this ever been done? Has a member of a TC/WG ever been served with a subpoena for this stuff? Is this stupid or just insane? It is beside the point but in Britain the British Standards Institution has legal protection against such an action. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Nondum ex silvis sumus John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http
Re: [PSES] standards update and legal madness
- The customer could also view the situation as the standards body performing due diligence, and making corrections to the standard when they discover issues. Performing standards maintenance helps protect the customer in case of user lawsuits. - I wonder if there's an 'errors and omissions' clause somewhere in the standard or certification paperwork? Maybe the standards body already has insurance to cover issues like this. - Could a certification body choose to withdraw their certification (now or later) based on the hassle of a lawsuit? Go somewhere else to get approval. Pat On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Brian Oconnell oconne...@tamuracorp.comwrote: None of this is a representation of my employer. A company makes a component for North American market designed for the needs of a single customer. The company received notices from CSA and UL with tabulation of standards corrections. The company informed affected customer of time and cost to update. The company then receives letter from the customer's legal dweebs - they want to see complete list of organizations and individuals that contributed to the errors that caused a mandatory update to the standard. The company's customer is considering pursuing a tort for lost opportunity and professional incompetence. Has this ever been done? Has a member of a TC/WG ever been served with a subpoena for this stuff? Is this stupid or just insane? - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] standards update and legal madness
Hi Brian: ... they want to see complete list of organizations and individuals that contributed to the errors that caused a mandatory update to the standard. Errors is an assumption made by the customer lawyers. I would disagree that the mandatory updates were due to errors. Seldom do published and established standards have errors. Most standards changes are the result of new information which is considered important to be included in the standard. Safety standards published by UL (which are ANSI standards) and CSA are consensus standards. Everyone has a say in what is (or is not) in the standard. Sort of like naming Congress for errors in Obamacare. Rich - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] standards update and legal madness
FWIW, the legal dorks seem to be backing off. Probably because they did not see
a big pay day.
Agree, in part, with Mr. Woodgate that the industry 'gets what they deserve'.
But we have previously discussed the limits of corporate and individual
participation in the standards development process. The new CEO supports my
involvement, in both time and monies, in standards dev. During previous 15
months, have volunteered for six committees/groups; and have submitted nine
comments to various standards groups. three comments were acknowledged, and
one comment was given consideration (the three acknowledged comments were to
ANSI STPs). And kudos to UL for their support via the CSDS site.
Per Mr. Knute - also agree that the ANSI process seems to be run ok. But
participation for ANSI STP is limited for good reason - they try not to allow
any single interest category exceed 1/3, and most of these groups have more
than enough reps from industry/mfrs('Producers'). The other reason will never
serve on a committee is that I am not an expert on any single subject area, so
the respective chairpersons are probably doing well to not allow half-wit
redneck engineers, that want to write standards in Klingon, become members.
Finally, yes the company did design the product with consideration to 'future'
requirements. But I still need a report that indicates the correct version of
the standard.
In any case, it is a beautiful Saturday afternoon in Southern California, and
my dog misses me.
Brian
-
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to
emc-p...@ieee.org
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used
formats), large files, etc.
Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] standards update and legal madness
In message e2bb98c9e17843a6ad8d5d1d6159b...@blupr02mb116.namprd02.prod.outlook.com , dated Sat, 9 Nov 2013, Brian Oconnell oconne...@tamuracorp.com writes: The other reason will never serve on a committee is that I am not an expert on any single subject area, That's NOT a disadvantage, at least it hasn't been for me, and I've been doing standards work for 50 years. Clearly, you have to know when to speak and when not, but a naive question can often not only open a can of worms but administer an effective anthelmintic as well. Also, you can learn about new subjects and occasionally you find that the real experts don't know about something very helpful that can be adopted from another field. so the respective chairpersons are probably doing well to not allow half-wit redneck engineers, that want to write standards in Klingon, become members. In some committees, judging by the drafts they emit, those are the criteria for membership. Not exactly Klingon; English words are used but no useful meaning can be extracted from the sentences. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Nondum ex silvis sumus John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
[PSES] standards update and legal madness
None of this is a representation of my employer. A company makes a component for North American market designed for the needs of a single customer. The company received notices from CSA and UL with tabulation of standards corrections. The company informed affected customer of time and cost to update. The company then receives letter from the customer's legal dweebs - they want to see complete list of organizations and individuals that contributed to the errors that caused a mandatory update to the standard. The company's customer is considering pursuing a tort for lost opportunity and professional incompetence. Has this ever been done? Has a member of a TC/WG ever been served with a subpoena for this stuff? Is this stupid or just insane? - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] standards update and legal madness
There was a successful lawsuit against ASME years ago over conflict of interest , and this lawsuit affected how standards creation bodies have operated ever since (Google Hydrolevel vs. ASME---I think this is the case). Beyond that, I'm hoping the courts would recognize that a successful lawsuit such as you describe would severely damage voluntary standards creation and thus be not in the best interest of the public. I would think that the lawyers for the affected standards creation bodies would be well situated to respond to the customer's concerns and threatened suit. Mike Sherman Product Safety and Compliance Engineer Graco Inc. - Original Message - From: Brian Oconnell oconne...@tamuracorp.com To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Sent: Friday, November 8, 2013 12:45:43 PM Subject: [PSES] standards update and legal madness None of this is a representation of my employer. A company makes a component for North American market designed for the needs of a single customer. The company received notices from CSA and UL with tabulation of standards corrections. The company informed affected customer of time and cost to update. The company then receives letter from the customer's legal dweebs - they want to see complete list of organizations and individuals that contributed to the errors that caused a mandatory update to the standard. The company's customer is considering pursuing a tort for lost opportunity and professional incompetence. Has this ever been done? Has a member of a TC/WG ever been served with a subpoena for this stuff? Is this stupid or just insane? - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] standards update and legal madness
In message 518cfcd229674efe916347038430c...@blupr02mb116.namprd02.prod.outlook.com , dated Fri, 8 Nov 2013, Brian Oconnell oconne...@tamuracorp.com writes: A company makes a component for North American market designed for the needs of a single customer. The company received notices from CSA and UL with tabulation of standards corrections. The company informed affected customer of time and cost to update. H'mmm. Why didn't the manufacturer know about the changes to the standards? Or is it a case of a running product that now needs to conform to updated, **improved** standards? That's how the real world works, not how the inhabitants of Planet Legal might like it to work. The company then receives letter from the customer's legal dweebs - they want to see complete list of organizations and individuals that contributed to the errors that caused a mandatory update to the standard. I'd be inclined to say that the culprits, if there are any, are UL and CSA and their managers! Standards committee members offer their work for approval at several stages in the organizations before the work is published. There is a big and vulnerable assumption that 'errors' are involved, but a defence based on 'state of the art' can be problematical because the legal people who have to present the case, however intelligent, cannot possibly absorb all the background that is involved in determining 'state of the art'. For example, what has been done once, or even a hundred times, in a university laboratory isn't state of the art in the real world. It's only state of the art if you can buy it or manufacture it. The company's customer is considering pursuing a tort for lost opportunity and professional incompetence. Has this ever been done? Has a member of a TC/WG ever been served with a subpoena for this stuff? Is this stupid or just insane? It is beside the point but in Britain the British Standards Institution has legal protection against such an action. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Nondum ex silvis sumus John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] standards update and legal madness
1. John Woodgate makes an excellent point regarding why didn't the manufacture know about the Standard Changes. 2. Does the manufacturer build to the customer's prints and requirements? If so, why didn't the customer know about the Standard Changes? John Shinn -Original Message- From: John Woodgate Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 11:45 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] standards update and legal madness In message 518cfcd229674efe916347038430c...@blupr02mb116.namprd02.prod.outlook.com , dated Fri, 8 Nov 2013, Brian Oconnell oconne...@tamuracorp.com writes: A company makes a component for North American market designed for the needs of a single customer. The company received notices from CSA and UL with tabulation of standards corrections. The company informed affected customer of time and cost to update. H'mmm. Why didn't the manufacturer know about the changes to the standards? Or is it a case of a running product that now needs to conform to updated, **improved** standards? That's how the real world works, not how the inhabitants of Planet Legal might like it to work. The company then receives letter from the customer's legal dweebs - they want to see complete list of organizations and individuals that contributed to the errors that caused a mandatory update to the standard. I'd be inclined to say that the culprits, if there are any, are UL and CSA and their managers! Standards committee members offer their work for approval at several stages in the organizations before the work is published. There is a big and vulnerable assumption that 'errors' are involved, but a defence based on 'state of the art' can be problematical because the legal people who have to present the case, however intelligent, cannot possibly absorb all the background that is involved in determining 'state of the art'. For example, what has been done once, or even a hundred times, in a university laboratory isn't state of the art in the real world. It's only state of the art if you can buy it or manufacture it. The company's customer is considering pursuing a tort for lost opportunity and professional incompetence. Has this ever been done? Has a member of a TC/WG ever been served with a subpoena for this stuff? Is this stupid or just insane? It is beside the point but in Britain the British Standards Institution has legal protection against such an action. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Nondum ex silvis sumus John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] standards update and legal madness
The notices used phrases such as correction of typographical errors and correction of incorrect requirements and correction of incorrect reference and other terms that many would actually find a bit funny. So this is now a requirement that the mfr/designer must have a priori knowledge of mistakes in new standards? Figures, as my employer expects me to have a posteriori knowledge for new and future standards. I typically know that a product safety standard has problems when: 1. Someone in this august group questions the veracity of a clause. 2. The standard obviously contradicts building code or has requirements or allowances that conflict with referenced standards. 3. A standard has a clause that has obviously ignored physics or math. Brian -Original Message- From: John Shinn [mailto:jmsh...@pacbell.net] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 1:09 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] standards update and legal madness 1. John Woodgate makes an excellent point regarding why didn't the manufacture know about the Standard Changes. 2. Does the manufacturer build to the customer's prints and requirements? If so, why didn't the customer know about the Standard Changes? John Shinn -Original Message- From: John Woodgate Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 11:45 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] standards update and legal madness In message 518cfcd229674efe916347038430c...@blupr02mb116.namprd02.prod.outlook.com , dated Fri, 8 Nov 2013, Brian Oconnell oconne...@tamuracorp.com writes: A company makes a component for North American market designed for the needs of a single customer. The company received notices from CSA and UL with tabulation of standards corrections. The company informed affected customer of time and cost to update. H'mmm. Why didn't the manufacturer know about the changes to the standards? Or is it a case of a running product that now needs to conform to updated, **improved** standards? That's how the real world works, not how the inhabitants of Planet Legal might like it to work. The company then receives letter from the customer's legal dweebs - they want to see complete list of organizations and individuals that contributed to the errors that caused a mandatory update to the standard. I'd be inclined to say that the culprits, if there are any, are UL and CSA and their managers! Standards committee members offer their work for approval at several stages in the organizations before the work is published. There is a big and vulnerable assumption that 'errors' are involved, but a defence based on 'state of the art' can be problematical because the legal people who have to present the case, however intelligent, cannot possibly absorb all the background that is involved in determining 'state of the art'. For example, what has been done once, or even a hundred times, in a university laboratory isn't state of the art in the real world. It's only state of the art if you can buy it or manufacture it. The company's customer is considering pursuing a tort for lost opportunity and professional incompetence. Has this ever been done? Has a member of a TC/WG ever been served with a subpoena for this stuff? Is this stupid or just insane? It is beside the point but in Britain the British Standards Institution has legal protection against such an action. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] standards update and legal madness
In message ec11e1c1995c4e5a9a1245d6b62d3...@blupr02mb116.namprd02.prod.outlook.com , dated Sat, 9 Nov 2013, Brian Oconnell oconne...@tamuracorp.com writes: The notices used phrases such as correction of typographical errors and correction of incorrect requirements and correction of incorrect reference and other terms that many would actually find a bit funny. The first and third are almost certainly trivial in effect but the second one is more significant. That indicates a real 'error'. So everyone who *could* have noticed it and had it corrected is responsible. Subpoena everyone! So this is now a requirement that the mfr/designer must have a priori knowledge of mistakes in new standards? Well, you do have the power to do that, through the public consultation process, which is generally under-used. But it's even better to participate in the preparatory standards work. You get information and influence ahead of your competitors who don't participate. And although participation does cost, the advance information and influence you get may well be far more valuable. Figures, as my employer expects me to have a posteriori knowledge for new and future standards. Not easy for future standards unless you have a time machine. I typically know that a product safety standard has problems when: 1. Someone in this august group questions the veracity of a clause. 2. The standard obviously contradicts building code or has requirements or allowances that conflict with referenced standards. 3. A standard has a clause that has obviously ignored physics or math. 2 and 3 indicate failure of the 'checks and balances' embedded in the standards-making process, which includes the public consultation. There is a principle, related to apathy and inattention: Industry gets the standards it deserves, not those it expects. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Nondum ex silvis sumus John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
