[way off-topic] legal disclaimers [Was: Re: Using Red hatEnterprise Linux (RHEL) at home]
Lelegard Thierry
Thierry.Lelegard at nagra.fr
Mon Jan 24 09:47:10 UTC 2005
> On Fri, 2005-01-21 at 12:28 -0500, Deron Meranda wrote:
> > On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 11:20:01 -0600, Aleksandar Milivojevic
> > <amilivojevic at pbl.ca> wrote:
> > > Lelegard Thierry wrote:
> > > > This message and any attachments (the "message") is
> intended solely for the
> > > > addressees and is confidential. If you receive this
> message in error, please
> > > > delete it and immediately notify the sender.
> > > > Any use not in accordance with its purpose, any
> dissemination or disclosure,
> > > > either whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval.
> > > > The E-Mail transmission can not guarantee the integrity
> of this message.
> > > > NAGRA FRANCE will not therefore be liable for the
> message if modified.
> >
> >
> > Yes, email "legal" disclaimers are usually pretty stupid and
> > mostly non-legally binding. You might want to see
> >
> > http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/
> >
> > I suppose there could be some legitimate ones, perhaps for
> > Government stuff. But for the most part they are nothing more
> > than an expression of some lawyer trying to show how powerful
> > he is without regarding any common sense.
> ----
> There are only 2 ways that disclaimers are put at the bottom
> of an email
> message.
>
> 1 - Either the end user has it put in as his signature -
> whereby he can
> have another signature for mail lists without this disclaimer and is
> rude for not doing so to mailing lists
> or
> 2 - The 'company mail server' appends the signature to each outgoing
> mail (often claimed by the transgressors) which constitutes an
> adulteration of the original message and thus is of suspect validity
> anyway.
>
> In reality, regardless of how stupid, how worthless, how ineffective,
> how unsupportable it may be in litigation, they will endure and I have
> little power to stop them so I will waste no more time ranting about
> them.
Being the one whose message provoked this flame, I confirm that item
2 is the right one: One company mail server appends this useless
disclaimer to *all* outgoing messages. You should see it again in
this message, although I do not see it while typing this message.
I am not the systeme administrator and I cannot do anything about
that.
Let me note that my message was a reply to a question in this list,
providing information to someone who requested it. In short, if I get
flamed about some stupid disclaimer that I did not want anyway when
I try to help someone, maybe the solution is to stop trying to help.
So please, stay focus on the message, not on the envelope.
-Thierry
More information about the users
mailing list