North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: "scanning" e-mail [WAS: 3 Free Gmail invites]

  • From: Patrick W Gilmore
  • Date: Fri Aug 20 11:06:55 2004 
On Aug 20, 2004, at 9:25 AM, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
i got told otherwise, but again this hasnt been tested in a court by me. i
forget the exact detail in the conversation but it was comparing the disclaimer
to what you get in regular mail.. so things like confidentiality, opening an
attachment meaning you agree to things are allegedly okay.
Maybe the UK is different than the US. But if I get something addressed to me in the mail (dunno about it if it was addressed to someone else and accidentally delivered), it is MINE. Period. If I did not order it, too damned bad, I get to keep it, it's a gift.

Bringing this back on topic, IFF that can be extended to e-mail (and my understanding is that it can), the disclaimer is worthless - at least the part about having to delete it. There is some question about whether I can post it publicly (as you saw earlier), and I don't have the motivation to test it in court, but I certainly feel perfectly comfortable reading the contents of the e-mail and any attachments, and doing whatever I like with the information, baring limitations set by any previous agreements (e.g. NDAs).

Would anyone care to correct me on this? IANAL, and don't even play one on TV. :-)


as you say tho this cannot be extended to some things such as by reading this
you owe me $1m etc but the reasonable and logical bits are allegedly enforceable
to some degree
Unclear on why telling me I have to delete something you sent me is logical. Just the opposite, in fact.

--
TTFN,
patrick