On Wednesday 19 October 2005 12:09 am, Phill MV wrote: > Well, it's just weird. What if said person is engaging in harassment?
That's a separate can of worms altogether. First you'd have to prove to the court that you are actually getting harrassed. A statement like the one automagically appended would have nothing to do with that situation. > Is it > then illegal to go about spam if they include the little disclaimer? Well, I think that's different as well. The spammers want you to share the spam with your friends/family/coworkers as they want the clicks/sales. A statement like the one that was on the OPs email would suggest that sort of thing was not wanted... > It > doesn't make sense to me :P but oh well. Me either. I'm pretty much a novice when it comes to the law, but I've been known to crack open a few books when necessary. Basically it's a CYA move by the companies to allow for litigation should one of their employees let something slip... > That's a different case. IIRC the guy who leaked the info on the iPod > shuffle/Mac mini broke an NDA he signed with Apple - which is then > perfectly legal. Trade secrets and the like, I suppose. But I think had that been an internal apple employee that sent it to an individual without an NDA, just a buddy he wanted to give a heads up to, and that buddy posted it on the net, the court may look at the wording of the blurb and apply a similar ruling. Then again, the whole thing might get thrown out by the court, but by that time you're bankrupt because you try to stand up for yourself. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
