Randy - please stop sending these to me - you send me one every time I post to NANOG. If you don't like the signature that's appended to my emails (not by my choice), and the litigious society we live in, go ahead and block all email from me. Replies directly to you to stop sending me these emails have gone unanswered, which is why I am mentioning this here. -----Original Message----- From: Randy Bush [mailto:randy@psg.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 4:34 PM To: Temkin, David Subject: Re: Minimum prefix length? you have sent a message to me which seems to contain a legal warning on who can read it, or how it may be distributed, or whether it may be archived, etc. i do not accept such email, and have therefore deleted it. do not expect further response. randy IMPORTANT:The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.
Whilst we're sidetracking... I took some counsel on this not so long ago to see whether these were just novelty signatures or if they were real legal stuff. Turns out they could actually be used legally, interesting I thought. Howevers its curious that signatures such as this claiming to be confidential are posted to a list which is very much public and archived in several public websites.. not sure how right it is to autoappend them to all your mails as well as the private ones! Steve On Wed, 11 Jun 2003, Temkin, David wrote:
Randy - please stop sending these to me - you send me one every time I post to NANOG. If you don't like the signature that's appended to my emails (not by my choice), and the litigious society we live in, go ahead and block all email from me.
Replies directly to you to stop sending me these emails have gone unanswered, which is why I am mentioning this here.
-----Original Message----- From: Randy Bush [mailto:randy@psg.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 4:34 PM To: Temkin, David Subject: Re: Minimum prefix length?
you have sent a message to me which seems to contain a legal warning on who can read it, or how it may be distributed, or whether it may be archived, etc.
i do not accept such email, and have therefore deleted it. do not expect further response.
randy
IMPORTANT:The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.
On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 09:50:30PM +0100, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
Whilst we're sidetracking...
I took some counsel on this not so long ago to see whether these were just novelty signatures or if they were real legal stuff. Turns out they could actually be used legally, interesting I thought.
Howevers its curious that signatures such as this claiming to be confidential are posted to a list which is very much public and archived in several public websites.. not sure how right it is to autoappend them to all your mails as well as the private ones!
Unilateral NDA's, notices of confidentiality, and the ever famous "by reading this, you agree to xxxxx", are all a load of bunk. The ONLY way a notice of confidentiality could ever help you is if you have an existing, signed, and legally enforcable NDA already in place with the party who reeives the message. In that case, they can serve as notice that the communication falls under the these existing terms of confidentiality. The rest is complete garbage, the equivalent of an AOL "pass this message along" story for executives. -- Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC)
Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
Howevers its curious that signatures such as this claiming to be confidential are posted to a list which is very much public and archived in several public websites.. not sure how right it is to autoappend them to all your mails as well as the private ones!
There is a current belief (IANAL) that once you publicly post messages with such a disclaimer, the disclaimer will be unenforceable in court thereafter. I.E. John Doe posts something to public mailing list with the usual legalese disclaimer. I read John's posts, and realize that his disclaimer has no meaning- he has intended for the general public to see his communication and has authorized everyone explicitly. How can John later claim, if I inadvertantly received a misdirected private communication, that I was not authorized, since he has previously given blanket authorization to the public at large to read (some) communications? This might seem like splitting hairs, but I bet a good lawyer can make a whole case out of it.
participants (4)
-
Mike -
Richard A Steenbergen -
Stephen J. Wilcox -
Temkin, David