[MR] Waterbearing going forward.

[sigrune at aol.com]

>From: Kelly Keck <kellylynne at gmail.com>
>Sent: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 2:01 pm

>The point was previously made that by taking away any official 
structure,
>waterbearing becomes, if anything, a greater health risk.  But that's 
all
>right, as long as the SCA doesn't get sued?  I understand that a large 
part
>of the BOD's job is to protect the corporation from legal liability, 
but
>that shouldn't be their sole and overriding concern.

A couple of people mentioned that they are mainly upset at the fact 
that the BoD is asking individuals to take on a liability themsleves 
instead of the SCA as a whole. I see the logic in this, there is almost 
some sound legal basis in it.

It like to point out though that one of the main reasons for these kind 
of liability lawsuits being filed in the firstplace is basied on the 
likelyhood of a payout.  Yes, technically if you, being charitable, 
bring a gallon jug of water to an activity, and freely offer it to 
people as an act of kindess, could possibly be sued if they got sick.

However it would take one heck of a lawyer to pull of an argument good 
enough to prevent a judge from simply throwing it out of court, because 
a lawyer would have to prove that there was either criminal intent, or 
gross negligence overriding the basic principle of individual 
responsibility and assumed risk.  In the end, an individual's ability 
to pay damages is more likely than not woefully under the amount to 
obtain such a skilled (and connected) lawyer needed to pull it off, 
thus making the prospect of a suit even being filed against and 
individual highly unlikely.

The SCA is a corporation and carries liability insurance, it's ability 
to effect a sufficent payout is decent enough for someone, someday to 
try to sue; we have seen some goofy suits filed or threatened 
already... The SCA as a corporation is a big enough target to draw some 
attempts.

In short, I do not take it as the SCA saying "we are going to stick you 
with this liability". I see them saying "If we keep doing this, we are 
a sitting duck;  however, if you want to take it on yourselves, who are 
not targets, we thank you."

-Takeda