We do probably more than 3,000 "identifications" annually here at the
Naturalist Center (Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History).
Most are typically of the glass slag/quartz or monetarily insignificant
type (e.g. bugs, bones, etc.)...
 
However, we are very sensitive to the
risk of specifying our information as an "authentication."  We expressly
state to our visitors that the information is only a personal opinion and
should in no way be interpreted as an authentication.  I seem to recall a
legal case a number of years ago, I believe having to do with art, where
a museum was sued over an incorrect authentication.  As I recall, the
museum told the owner the painting was an original somethingorother
and the owner sold the painting based on that authentication.  The purchaser
later discovered the authentication to be false, sued the previous owner who
then sued the museum for a museum version of malpractice...and won damages.
Museum curators/researchers are considered experts in their field, which is
why people think to come to them for authentications and appraisals.  I guess
that's why they could be liable for misinformation that is given without any
disclaimer such as an "in my humble opinion" (IMHO for those net-nicks).
 
We have a Request for Technical Information form that we have our visitors
fill out with a disclaimer that our legal counsel felt was adequate for
the types of requests we get here in the Center.  The visitors must sign the
disclaimer for their requests to be processed by our staff (when it needs to
be left for later examination).  If it's something that can be reviewed
quickly we verbally inform them of the same policy.
 
I guess a librarian would have more freedom from litigation because they
would be viewed as not being an art or science "expert."
 
Richard Efthim, Naturalist Center
National Museum of Natural History
Washington, DC 20560
(202)357-1503   fax:(202)786-2778   [log in to unmask]