On 11/25/2013 12:15 PM, Postmaster
wrote:
I guess we can debate about how
useful or useless those disclaimers are. However, just my 2p on
this issue:
- Let define it: A disclaimer is generally any statement
intended to specify or delimit the scope of rights and
obligations that may be exercised and enforced by
parties in a legally recognized relationship :))
- a legal opinion contains a huge disclaimer as well :)
- in several countries there is certain requirement towards how
communication can/cannot be conducted:
1. In Germany every bank is putting information about the
Board members and names (the same as on every headed paper)
2. In the UK, the FSA regulated companies are putting their
FSA registered number and other information in the footer
section (the same as on headed paper)
- I am a little bit surprised to learn that somebody thought
that disclaimer are legally binding.
I am not going to discuss the disclaimer on McDonald coffee:
"Carefully, very hot!". No way.....
If stupidity is outlawed will only outlaws be stupid?
Regards
Alex
On 25/11/2013 19:24, Dan McAllister wrote:
On 11/25/2013 1:11 PM, Eric Shubert
wrote:
The
problem has to do with electronic signatures. Any sort of
signing that's done needs to happen after the footer is added.
Having the server add a footer would break gpg that's
implemented by the client.
There might be a suitable way to add a footer on the server
for submitted (authenticated) messages that are otherwise
unsigned, before adding a DKIM signature. We can certainly
look into this at some point, but it's not a priority in my
view. Of course, anyone can make it their own priority and
write some code to do it. This is after all a community
project.
P.S. I'd beg to differ that "all" enterprises implement this
at the server, although many of them do. Many of them also run
Exchange, which I do not recommend in most cases. ;)
P.P.S. There is also some disagreement as to the effectiveness
of these disclaimers. Personally, I think they're rather silly
(although IANAL). I wonder if there's ever been a case in
court where a disclaimer had any effect.
To Eric's point:
I have a number of financial advisors and insurance agencies
that seem to think that these "signatures" are a requirement
(e.g.: "requests to bind insurance cannot be made via email",
etc.) However, recent legal opinions in several states have held
that these "signatures" cannot be legally binding -- in part
because they're being delivered via e-mail, which makes them
every bit as unenforceable as the typed of email they're warning
against.
Never the less, the professional organizations still
suggest that these disclaimers be present.
Kind of reminds me of the warning on the back of the peanut
butter jar that reads: "WARNING: This product is
manufactured in a plant that may use peanuts."
Really?
Dan
--
PLEASE TAKE NOTE OF OUR NEW ADDRESS
===================================
IT4SOHO, LLC
33 - 4th Street N, Suite 211
St. Petersburg, FL 33701-3806
CALL TOLL FREE:
877-IT4SOHO
877-484-7646 Phone
727-647-7646 Local
727-490-4394 Fax
We have support plans for QMail!
--
 |
