| Yes, the term in question for me is only "engineer". > (a) uses the title “professional engineer” or “ingénieur” or an abbreviation or variation thereof as an occupational or business designation; So (a) tells us rather clearly that we can't present ourselves as John Doe, Professional Engineer, or call our business a Professional Engineering firm, or whatever. > (a.1) uses the title “engineer” or an abbreviation of that title in a manner that will lead to the belief that the person may engage in the practice of professional engineering; Here, (a.1) seems to add, specifically as a sub-paragraph to (a), that it's also prohibited to call yourself an "engineer", or "eng.", etc., if it will make people think you're a professional engineer. According to Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts (1), one of the canons of interpretation is that "Material within an indented subpart relates only to that subpart". While (a.1) is not indented with whitespace (2), I believe the paragraph numbering is functionally equivalent. Further, the Fundamental Principle #4, "Presumption Against Ineffectiveness" is of some interest: "A textually permissible interpretation that furthers rather than obstructs the document’s purpose should be favored". Of course, it would not obstruct the purpose of the statute to interpret it as prohibiting whatsoever the use of the title "engineer". I bring up this principle because it implies that purpose is relevant to interpretation. That's why I think it's significant that the overall purpose of this statute is apparently to prevent people from being mistaken about who is and isn't a licensed professional engineer. So, if we take for example the matter of people calling themselves "software engineers": The phrase "professional engineer" or equivalent wasn't used, which would have been prohibited outright per (a). Now, for (a.1), is this use of the word "engineer" going to make a reasonable person believe that the SWE is a professional engineer who can sign off on plans of the sort that require licensure because people die if the plans are wrong? I don't think so, and as far as I can see, it is only in those circumstances that "engineer" by itself is a protected title. I suspect what happened is that people/companies largely opted to avoid trouble by avoiding the word entirely, leading to a common assumption that "engineer" per se is entirely off-limits unless you're a PE. 1. https://jm919846758.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09... 2. https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90p28#BK43 |