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]