The issue of whether computer programming is a profession is important to the issue of software liability in this sense: professionals are held to higher standards of duty when it comes to negligence determinations. Non-professionals are held to the "reasonable man" standard while professional are held to a higher standard. For professionals, "The standard of care expected of a professional has traditionally been viewed as that of the ordinarily competent member of that profession" (Car and Williams, Computers and Law (Intellect 1994) at 240).
The roots of this discrepancy lie in the massive information advantage that professionals have over their clients. This information advantage gives the professional an opportunity to take advantage of the unknowing client.
The courts, however, have been reluctant to give programming a professional status. In Pezzillo v. General Telephone & Electronics Information Systems, Inc. (572 F.2d 1189 1978) the court, using the definition of professional in the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, ruled that programmers were not professsionals. In the decision, the court stated that programmers are analogous to drafters in that both perform mechanical functions (Scott, Computer Law (Wiley and Sons 1989) at 7-14).
One of the necessary elements of a profession is a unified body of knowledge. Another is that the member of the profession organize to promogulate codes of behavior and the like. The education of programmers vary widely. Organizations like CPSR and the ACM do promogulate professional standards.
It is our conclusion that computer programmers should be considered professionals because they posess a technical skill that should be used with great care and thought. This determination would give them a higher duty of care to meet in their work.