> You can't just say "Sorry, not liable if this widget blows up."

Clearly you can. Every software license has a disclaimer of liability. It's not like those are there for no reason. No, they are not an absolute shield that's effective in every circumstance, but you can and should have one.

In this case, the work product does not need to be generated by a licensed professional. Informal drawings are useful for a multitude of purposes. If the user of the drawing doesn't need it to be certified, and I can make one on a napkin, why should it be illegal for a third party to draw it on napkin for me.

What is exchanged for the napkin, though? That's generally where courts draw the line between helping out a friend, and providing a service.

If you exchange something, like money, then you may be providing something under an oral contract, even if nothing is signed. And if you introduce a waiver, then you turn that oral contract into a written one.

> That's generally where courts draw the line between helping out a friend, and providing a service.

The point is that it isn't the same service being provided and they are very upfront about that with the customer.

When you provide what is legally considered to be a service, it comes with legal guarantees. You don't generally get to escape by saying something doesn't count, no matter how upfront about it, that you are. Consumer protections exist, regardless of whether you say they shouldn't apply.

One of the guarantees that probably applies in this situation, especially as it is California which tend to have a few stronger guarantees, is fitness-to-purpose. If there is a service, where an exchange is taking place, there is a guarantee that the product should be considered fit-to-purpose.

> The warranty of fitness for a particular purpose is not limited to sales by a merchant as is the warranty of merchantability. It may be imposed on any seller possessing sufficient skill and judgment to justify the buyer’s reliance. The Code drafters suggest, however, that a nonmerchant seller will only in particular circumstances have that degree of skill and judgment necessary to justify imposing the warranty.” (4 Witkin, Summary of California Law (10th ed. 2005))

The products themselves are unmarked, which means it doesn't matter how upfront that they are with the first customer, because the product is allowed to be resold, and then the limitation on purpose aren't guaranteed to be seen anymore, but it needs to be, if you want to reduce your liability.

As noted in many other places, the very lack of a mark is exactly why these cannot be used in places where they have to be certified. Anyone that accepts it in that case, is in the wrong.

And you do get to escape liability with disclaimers quite well. Just look at every tax reporting agency out there. Massive disclaimers about how you are still liable for any mistakes they may make.

It kinda depends on whether you're charging money and how. I can express legal opinions all day, without being a lawyer. I can write a blog with my legal opinions. I can sit in a room with you and regale you with them.

What I can't do is offer to represent you in a legal case, or imply (with signage, advertising, business cards etc) that I can provide any sort of legal services. And if I took money from you, it would have to be on the understanding that I was just providing entertaining opinions which it would be unwise for you to rely on.

At some point you have to grant that the clients of such a service have some agency and are able to evaluate straightforward disclaimers of liability or fitness.

The entire tax reporting industry would like a word with you. :(