RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
Well I am not a legal speagle by any means, but the disclaimer issue it bad joke. The true responsibility of who the message went to is in the hands of the sender. If the message was addressed correctly then the need for disclaimers would be a non-issue. Sorry I watched this thread long enough that I had to put my two cents in there. I find it hard that anyone should accept the burden of responsibility for receiving an electronic message that was sent to them by mistake. And those disclaimers that try to shift the burden of responiblity from the shoulders of the sender to the reciever are a sad attempt at just that. -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 3:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers What about Klingon and Elvish? Google is available in both, so people must speak it. Should we not then make disclaimers available in these languages too? themolk. -Original Message- From: Martin Tuip [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 12:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers About a billion people on this planet speak Chinese ... going to included that as well ? I like the fact you are going to add Dutch to the disclaimer, but around 99% of the Dutch population speaks and understands English very well. ** Please prefix your subject header with BETA for posts dealing with Exchange 2003 ** -- Martin Tuip MVP Exchange Exchange 2000 List owner www.exchange-mail.org www.sharepointserver.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- - Original Message - From: Midgley, Ian [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:10 PM Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Yup, Greek and Double-Dutch are in the list of languages that need to be covered. Web links are unacceptable since there is no way of checking whether the recipient clicked the link, or they might not be online when they read the message. We thought of using Latin since most of the legal team know that. Esperanto is a bit too leading edge. -Original Message- From: Shotton Jolyon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 13:54 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers *Has* anyone tested email disclaimers in the courts in the UK, EU or US? I'm not aware of any cases. I do find it ironic that lawyers, who knowingly write in a way that most people do not find clear, should be concerned that the disclaimer should be written so as to be understood by any recipient. It's all Greek to me. Or double-Dutch. Perhaps your disclaimer could consist of Legal disclaimer - you must read this in every relevant language, each linked to a web page which contains the text in that language. Or write it in Esperanto. -Original Message- From: Midgley, Ian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 14:07 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups That's not funny !! I'm currently involved in discussions with our legal team regarding the validity of English language disclaimers on messages written in various different European languages (we route all our Internet mail through a single SMTP gateway in the UK). The legal team are pushing to add disclaimers in each language. Just because no-one ever reads disclaimers doesn't mean that they are not legally applicable - when was the last time you read the MS license agreement when installing software? And just because I select the other radio button and click OK doesn't mean that I have read the labels attached to those actions either. I would be interested in Williams disclaimer list if he would be happy to publish. Also, does anyone know of a disclaimer adder that is language aware? Otherwise I'm going to have to do some funny tricks with SMTP connectors and routing inside the company. The information contained in this e-mail is intended for the recipient or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential information that is exempt from disclosure by law and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any act in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete from your system. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED
RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
There's plenty to steal - just look at all the appliances and cars without wheels in people's front yards! -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 4:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers However, that might be due more to the fact that there isn't much to steal there! (My parents used to live right next door in Acworth.) Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roger Seielstad Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 1:32 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers It apparently has one of the lowest property crime rates in the area. But that's not the point. I'd love to see that court battle and the fall out that comes from the city losing it. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 12:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Sounds like it must be a real quite neighborhood From: Roger Seielstad [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 12:27:42 -0400 My guess is that it will be roughly equivalent to the law in the city of Kennesaw, Georgia (suburban Atlanta) in which the city requires all home owners to own a gun. To date, no one has been prosecuted for breaking that law. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 7:57 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Seems like that disclaimer (I do not give permission to forward) would be unnecessary. If the law requires express permission then the absence of any disclaimer wouldn't constitute permission and thus unless the message specifically said I *DO* give permission to forward it would be illegal to forward it. I'll be curious to know how many people they actually get prosecuted under this law. Aloha, -Ben- Ben M. Schorr, MVP-OneNote, CNA, MCPx4 Director of Information Services Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert http://www.hawaiilawyer.com-Original Message-From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 13:28To: Exchange DiscussionsSubject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Scott, and others, I totally get your point, and to some degree agree. An interesting addition... The Australian federal govt recently (last year) passed legislation to say that it is illegal to forward and e-mail without the authors express permission. Thus, a whole NEW addition to the disclaimer in Australia is popping up, saying that the author DOES NOT give permission for the e-mail to be forwarded. I think, whether we like it or not, the disclaimer is here to stay... It is how we as Admins manage it. My additional $0.02 (inc GST). themolk.-Original Message- From: Akerlund, Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 9:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Well I am not a legal speagle by any means, but the disclaimer issue it bad joke. The true responsibility of who the messagewent to is in the hands of the sender. If the message was addressedcorrectly then the need for disclaimers would be a non-issue. Sorry I watched this thread long enough that I had to put my two cents in there. I find it hard that anyone should accept the burden of responsibility for receiving an electronic message that was sent to them by mistake. And those disclaimers that try to shift the burden of responiblity from the shoulders of the sender to the reciever are a sad attempt at just that. -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 3:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions
RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
And all those guns must be worth a bob or two. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 20 June 2003 12:48 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers There's plenty to steal - just look at all the appliances and cars without wheels in people's front yards! The information contained in this e-mail is intended for the recipient or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential information that is exempt from disclosure by law and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any act in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete from your system. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
My guess is that it will be roughly equivalent to the law in the city of Kennesaw, Georgia (suburban Atlanta) in which the city requires all home owners to own a gun. To date, no one has been prosecuted for breaking that law. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 7:57 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Seems like that disclaimer (I do not give permission to forward) would be unnecessary. If the law requires express permission then the absence of any disclaimer wouldn't constitute permission and thus unless the message specifically said I *DO* give permission to forward it would be illegal to forward it. I'll be curious to know how many people they actually get prosecuted under this law. Aloha, -Ben- Ben M. Schorr, MVP-OneNote, CNA, MCPx4 Director of Information Services Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert http://www.hawaiilawyer.com -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 13:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Scott, and others, I totally get your point, and to some degree agree. An interesting addition... The Australian federal govt recently (last year) passed legislation to say that it is illegal to forward and e-mail without the authors express permission. Thus, a whole NEW addition to the disclaimer in Australia is popping up, saying that the author DOES NOT give permission for the e-mail to be forwarded. I think, whether we like it or not, the disclaimer is here to stay... It is how we as Admins manage it. My additional $0.02 (inc GST). themolk. -Original Message- From: Akerlund, Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 9:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Well I am not a legal speagle by any means, but the disclaimer issue it bad joke. The true responsibility of who the message went to is in the hands of the sender. If the message was addressed correctly then the need for disclaimers would be a non-issue. Sorry I watched this thread long enough that I had to put my two cents in there. I find it hard that anyone should accept the burden of responsibility for receiving an electronic message that was sent to them by mistake. And those disclaimers that try to shift the burden of responiblity from the shoulders of the sender to the reciever are a sad attempt at just that. -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 3:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers What about Klingon and Elvish? Google is available in both, so people must speak it. Should we not then make disclaimers available in these languages too? themolk. -Original Message- From: Martin Tuip [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 12:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers About a billion people on this planet speak Chinese ... going to included that as well ? I like the fact you are going to add Dutch to the disclaimer, but around 99% of the Dutch population speaks and understands English very well. ** Please prefix your subject header with BETA for posts dealing with Exchange 2003 ** -- Martin Tuip MVP Exchange Exchange 2000 List owner www.exchange-mail.org www.sharepointserver.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- - Original Message - From: Midgley, Ian [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:10 PM Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Yup, Greek and Double-Dutch are in the list of languages that need to be covered. Web links are unacceptable since there is no way of checking whether the recipient clicked the link, or they might not be online when they read the message. We thought of using Latin since most of the legal team know that. Esperanto is a bit too leading edge. -Original Message- From: Shotton Jolyon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 13:54 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers *Has* anyone tested email disclaimers in the courts in the UK, EU or US? I'm not aware of any cases
Re: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
I asked my wife about this, since she is an attorney strapping on flame-retardent underwear and her opinion was that it is used for its insurance value. If you sent the formula for Coke to the wrong person by accident it is accepted by the courts that it is common sense that this person does not have the right to freely distribute this and that they should know they recieved it by accident. Adding the legal disclaimer at the bottom just gives the attorneys extra ammunition in case it goes to trial. Hey, not only should common sense tell you that you cannot redistrbute this but WE did too. - Original Message - From: Steve Molkentin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 7:57 PM Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Ben, I agree... Sadly, due to all the legal eagles rubbing their hands in glee over more work, and the fact that unless you tell someone not to, independent of the law, they can get away with it somehow, it's been stated that you have to tell them that they do not have permission to forward. sigh... I am looking forward to seeing any prosecutions out of it too... I guess it is designed to protect people like that whole thing in the UK with that lawyer talking about the taste of her boyfriend's... Umm... I don't think I need to complete that sentence. You know what I mean. Most legislation re: IT in Australia is knee-jerk at best. For example, they are currently discussing the legality of making spam illegal - but whose problem is it (ISP, sender, etc, etc, etc). But I think that all this is a whole other thread. themolk. -Original Message- From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 9:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Seems like that disclaimer (I do not give permission to forward) would be unnecessary. If the law requires express permission then the absence of any disclaimer wouldn't constitute permission and thus unless the message specifically said I *DO* give permission to forward it would be illegal to forward it. I'll be curious to know how many people they actually get prosecuted under this law. Aloha, -Ben- Ben M. Schorr, MVP-OneNote, CNA, MCPx4 Director of Information Services Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert http://www.hawaiilawyer.com -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 13:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Scott, and others, I totally get your point, and to some degree agree. An interesting addition... The Australian federal govt recently (last year) passed legislation to say that it is illegal to forward and e-mail without the authors express permission. Thus, a whole NEW addition to the disclaimer in Australia is popping up, saying that the author DOES NOT give permission for the e-mail to be forwarded. I think, whether we like it or not, the disclaimer is here to stay... It is how we as Admins manage it. My additional $0.02 (inc GST). themolk. -Original Message- From: Akerlund, Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 9:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Well I am not a legal speagle by any means, but the disclaimer issue it bad joke. The true responsibility of who the message went to is in the hands of the sender. If the message was addressed correctly then the need for disclaimers would be a non-issue. Sorry I watched this thread long enough that I had to put my two cents in there. I find it hard that anyone should accept the burden of responsibility for receiving an electronic message that was sent to them by mistake. And those disclaimers that try to shift the burden of responiblity from the shoulders of the sender to the reciever are a sad attempt at just that. -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 3:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers What about Klingon and Elvish? Google is available in both, so people must speak it. Should we not then make disclaimers available in these languages too? themolk. -Original Message- From: Martin Tuip [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 12:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers About a billion people on this planet speak Chinese ... going to included that as well ? I like the fact you are going to add Dutch to the disclaimer
RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
Hey, where can I get some of that underwear? -Original Message- From: Chris H [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 19 June 2003 16:34 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers I asked my wife about this, since she is an attorney strapping on flame-retardent underwear and her opinion was that it is used for its insurance value. If you sent the formula for Coke to the wrong person by accident it is accepted by the courts that it is common sense that this person does not have the right to freely distribute this and that they should know they recieved it by accident. Adding the legal disclaimer at the bottom just gives the attorneys extra ammunition in case it goes to trial. Hey, not only should common sense tell you that you cannot redistrbute this but WE did too. - Original Message - From: Steve Molkentin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 7:57 PM Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Ben, I agree... Sadly, due to all the legal eagles rubbing their hands in glee over more work, and the fact that unless you tell someone not to, independent of the law, they can get away with it somehow, it's been stated that you have to tell them that they do not have permission to forward. sigh... I am looking forward to seeing any prosecutions out of it too... I guess it is designed to protect people like that whole thing in the UK with that lawyer talking about the taste of her boyfriend's... Umm... I don't think I need to complete that sentence. You know what I mean. Most legislation re: IT in Australia is knee-jerk at best. For example, they are currently discussing the legality of making spam illegal - but whose problem is it (ISP, sender, etc, etc, etc). But I think that all this is a whole other thread. themolk. -Original Message- From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 9:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Seems like that disclaimer (I do not give permission to forward) would be unnecessary. If the law requires express permission then the absence of any disclaimer wouldn't constitute permission and thus unless the message specifically said I *DO* give permission to forward it would be illegal to forward it. I'll be curious to know how many people they actually get prosecuted under this law. Aloha, -Ben- Ben M. Schorr, MVP-OneNote, CNA, MCPx4 Director of Information Services Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert http://www.hawaiilawyer.com -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 13:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Scott, and others, I totally get your point, and to some degree agree. An interesting addition... The Australian federal govt recently (last year) passed legislation to say that it is illegal to forward and e-mail without the authors express permission. Thus, a whole NEW addition to the disclaimer in Australia is popping up, saying that the author DOES NOT give permission for the e-mail to be forwarded. I think, whether we like it or not, the disclaimer is here to stay... It is how we as Admins manage it. My additional $0.02 (inc GST). themolk. -Original Message- From: Akerlund, Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 9:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Well I am not a legal speagle by any means, but the disclaimer issue it bad joke. The true responsibility of who the message went to is in the hands of the sender. If the message was addressed correctly then the need for disclaimers would be a non-issue. Sorry I watched this thread long enough that I had to put my two cents in there. I find it hard that anyone should accept the burden of responsibility for receiving an electronic message that was sent to them by mistake. And those disclaimers that try to shift the burden of responiblity from the shoulders of the sender to the reciever are a sad attempt at just that. -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 3:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers What about Klingon and Elvish? Google is available in both, so people must speak it. Should we not then make disclaimers available in these languages too? themolk. -Original Message- From: Martin Tuip [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 12:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions
RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
Sounds like it must be a real quite neighborhood From: Roger Seielstad [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 12:27:42 -0400 My guess is that it will be roughly equivalent to the law in the city of Kennesaw, Georgia (suburban Atlanta) in which the city requires all home owners to own a gun. To date, no one has been prosecuted for breaking that law. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 7:57 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Seems like that disclaimer (I do not give permission to forward) would be unnecessary. If the law requires express permission then the absence of any disclaimer wouldn't constitute permission and thus unless the message specifically said I *DO* give permission to forward it would be illegal to forward it. I'll be curious to know how many people they actually get prosecuted under this law. Aloha, -Ben- Ben M. Schorr, MVP-OneNote, CNA, MCPx4 Director of Information Services Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert http://www.hawaiilawyer.com -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 13:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Scott, and others, I totally get your point, and to some degree agree. An interesting addition... The Australian federal govt recently (last year) passed legislation to say that it is illegal to forward and e-mail without the authors express permission. Thus, a whole NEW addition to the disclaimer in Australia is popping up, saying that the author DOES NOT give permission for the e-mail to be forwarded. I think, whether we like it or not, the disclaimer is here to stay... It is how we as Admins manage it. My additional $0.02 (inc GST). themolk. -Original Message- From: Akerlund, Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 9:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Well I am not a legal speagle by any means, but the disclaimer issue it bad joke. The true responsibility of who the message went to is in the hands of the sender. If the message was addressed correctly then the need for disclaimers would be a non-issue. Sorry I watched this thread long enough that I had to put my two cents in there. I find it hard that anyone should accept the burden of responsibility for receiving an electronic message that was sent to them by mistake. And those disclaimers that try to shift the burden of responiblity from the shoulders of the sender to the reciever are a sad attempt at just that. -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 3:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers What about Klingon and Elvish? Google is available in both, so people must speak it. Should we not then make disclaimers available in these languages too? themolk. -Original Message- From: Martin Tuip [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 12:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers About a billion people on this planet speak Chinese ... going to included that as well ? I like the fact you are going to add Dutch to the disclaimer, but around 99% of the Dutch population speaks and understands English very well. ** Please prefix your subject header with BETA for posts dealing with Exchange 2003 ** -- Martin Tuip MVP Exchange Exchange 2000 List owner www.exchange-mail.org www.sharepointserver.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- - Original Message - From: Midgley, Ian [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:10 PM Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Yup, Greek and Double-Dutch are in the list of languages that need to be covered. Web links are unacceptable since there is no way of checking whether the recipient clicked the link, or they might not be online when they read the message. We thought of using Latin since most of the legal team know that. Esperanto is a bit too leading edge. -Original Message- From: Shotton Jolyon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 13:54
RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
Lowest crime rate in the nation, I understand. -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 9:35 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Sounds like it must be a real quite neighborhood From: Roger Seielstad [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 12:27:42 -0400 My guess is that it will be roughly equivalent to the law in the city of Kennesaw, Georgia (suburban Atlanta) in which the city requires all home owners to own a gun. To date, no one has been prosecuted for breaking that law. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 7:57 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Seems like that disclaimer (I do not give permission to forward) would be unnecessary. If the law requires express permission then the absence of any disclaimer wouldn't constitute permission and thus unless the message specifically said I *DO* give permission to forward it would be illegal to forward it. I'll be curious to know how many people they actually get prosecuted under this law. Aloha, -Ben- Ben M. Schorr, MVP-OneNote, CNA, MCPx4 Director of Information Services Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert http://www.hawaiilawyer.com -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 13:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Scott, and others, I totally get your point, and to some degree agree. An interesting addition... The Australian federal govt recently (last year) passed legislation to say that it is illegal to forward and e-mail without the authors express permission. Thus, a whole NEW addition to the disclaimer in Australia is popping up, saying that the author DOES NOT give permission for the e-mail to be forwarded. I think, whether we like it or not, the disclaimer is here to stay... It is how we as Admins manage it. My additional $0.02 (inc GST). themolk. -Original Message- From: Akerlund, Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 9:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Well I am not a legal speagle by any means, but the disclaimer issue it bad joke. The true responsibility of who the message went to is in the hands of the sender. If the message was addressed correctly then the need for disclaimers would be a non-issue. Sorry I watched this thread long enough that I had to put my two cents in there. I find it hard that anyone should accept the burden of responsibility for receiving an electronic message that was sent to them by mistake. And those disclaimers that try to shift the burden of responiblity from the shoulders of the sender to the reciever are a sad attempt at just that. -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 3:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers What about Klingon and Elvish? Google is available in both, so people must speak it. Should we not then make disclaimers available in these languages too? themolk. -Original Message- From: Martin Tuip [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 12:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers About a billion people on this planet speak Chinese ... going to included that as well ? I like the fact you are going to add Dutch to the disclaimer, but around 99% of the Dutch population speaks and understands English very well. ** Please prefix your subject header with BETA for posts dealing with Exchange 2003 ** -- Martin Tuip MVP Exchange Exchange 2000 List owner www.exchange-mail.org www.sharepointserver.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- - Original Message - From: Midgley, Ian [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:10 PM Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Yup, Greek and Double-Dutch are in the list of languages that need to be covered. Web links are unacceptable since
RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
Lawyers are like economists - any consensus they reach automatically becomes the truth because all the people who matter act as though it's true. -Original Message- From: Chris H [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 19 June 2003 17:34 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers I asked my wife about this, since she is an attorney strapping on flame-retardent underwear and her opinion was that it is used for its insurance value. If you sent the formula for Coke to the wrong person by accident it is accepted by the courts that it is common sense that this person does not have the right to freely distribute this and that they should know they recieved it by accident. Adding the legal disclaimer at the bottom just gives the attorneys extra ammunition in case it goes to trial. Hey, not only should common sense tell you that you cannot redistrbute this but WE did too. The information contained in this e-mail is intended for the recipient or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential information that is exempt from disclosure by law and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any act in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete from your system. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
It apparently has one of the lowest property crime rates in the area. But that's not the point. I'd love to see that court battle and the fall out that comes from the city losing it. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 12:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Sounds like it must be a real quite neighborhood From: Roger Seielstad [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 12:27:42 -0400 My guess is that it will be roughly equivalent to the law in the city of Kennesaw, Georgia (suburban Atlanta) in which the city requires all home owners to own a gun. To date, no one has been prosecuted for breaking that law. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 7:57 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Seems like that disclaimer (I do not give permission to forward) would be unnecessary. If the law requires express permission then the absence of any disclaimer wouldn't constitute permission and thus unless the message specifically said I *DO* give permission to forward it would be illegal to forward it. I'll be curious to know how many people they actually get prosecuted under this law. Aloha, -Ben- Ben M. Schorr, MVP-OneNote, CNA, MCPx4 Director of Information Services Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert http://www.hawaiilawyer.com-Original Message-From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 13:28To: Exchange DiscussionsSubject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Scott, and others, I totally get your point, and to some degree agree. An interesting addition... The Australian federal govt recently (last year) passed legislation to say that it is illegal to forward and e-mail without the authors express permission. Thus, a whole NEW addition to the disclaimer in Australia is popping up, saying that the author DOES NOT give permission for the e-mail to be forwarded. I think, whether we like it or not, the disclaimer is here to stay... It is how we as Admins manage it. My additional $0.02 (inc GST). themolk. -Original Message- From: Akerlund, Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 9:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Well I am not a legal speagle by any means, but the disclaimer issue it bad joke. The true responsibility of who the messagewent to is in the hands of the sender. If the message was addressedcorrectly then the need for disclaimers would be a non-issue. Sorry I watched this thread long enough that I had to put my two cents in there. I find it hard that anyone should accept the burden of responsibility for receiving an electronic message that was sent to them by mistake. And those disclaimers that try to shift the burden of responiblity from the shoulders of the sender to the reciever are a sad attempt at just that. -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 3:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers What about Klingon and Elvish? Google is available in both,so people must speak it. Should we not then make disclaimersavailable in these languages too? themolk. -Original Message- From: Martin Tuip [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 12:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers About a billion people on this planet speak Chinese ... going to included that as well ? I like the fact you are going to add Dutch to the disclaimer, but around 99% of the Dutch population speaks and understands English very well. ** Please prefix your subject header with BETA for posts dealing with Exchange 2003 ** -- Martin Tuip MVP Exchange Exchange 2000 List owner www.exchange-mail.org
RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
I am very certain that the net present value of that insurance is far less than the cost of the hours spent by the lawyer crafting the disclaimer. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris H Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 9:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers I asked my wife about this, since she is an attorney strapping on flame-retardent underwear and her opinion was that it is used for its insurance value. If you sent the formula for Coke to the wrong person by accident it is accepted by the courts that it is common sense that this person does not have the right to freely distribute this and that they should know they recieved it by accident. Adding the legal disclaimer at the bottom just gives the attorneys extra ammunition in case it goes to trial. Hey, not only should common sense tell you that you cannot redistrbute this but WE did too. - Original Message - From: Steve Molkentin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 7:57 PM Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Ben, I agree... Sadly, due to all the legal eagles rubbing their hands in glee over more work, and the fact that unless you tell someone not to, independent of the law, they can get away with it somehow, it's been stated that you have to tell them that they do not have permission to forward. sigh... I am looking forward to seeing any prosecutions out of it too... I guess it is designed to protect people like that whole thing in the UK with that lawyer talking about the taste of her boyfriend's... Umm... I don't think I need to complete that sentence. You know what I mean. Most legislation re: IT in Australia is knee-jerk at best. For example, they are currently discussing the legality of making spam illegal - but whose problem is it (ISP, sender, etc, etc, etc). But I think that all this is a whole other thread. themolk. -Original Message- From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 9:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Seems like that disclaimer (I do not give permission to forward) would be unnecessary. If the law requires express permission then the absence of any disclaimer wouldn't constitute permission and thus unless the message specifically said I *DO* give permission to forward it would be illegal to forward it. I'll be curious to know how many people they actually get prosecuted under this law. Aloha, -Ben- Ben M. Schorr, MVP-OneNote, CNA, MCPx4 Director of Information Services Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert http://www.hawaiilawyer.com -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 13:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Scott, and others, I totally get your point, and to some degree agree. An interesting addition... The Australian federal govt recently (last year) passed legislation to say that it is illegal to forward and e-mail without the authors express permission. Thus, a whole NEW addition to the disclaimer in Australia is popping up, saying that the author DOES NOT give permission for the e-mail to be forwarded. I think, whether we like it or not, the disclaimer is here to stay... It is how we as Admins manage it. My additional $0.02 (inc GST). themolk. -Original Message- From: Akerlund, Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 9:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Well I am not a legal speagle by any means, but the disclaimer issue it bad joke. The true responsibility of who the message went to is in the hands of the sender. If the message was addressed correctly then the need for disclaimers would be a non-issue. Sorry I watched this thread long enough that I had to put my two cents in there. I find it hard that anyone should accept the burden of responsibility for receiving an electronic message that was sent to them by mistake. And those disclaimers that try to shift the burden of responiblity from the shoulders of the sender to the reciever are a sad attempt at just that. -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 3:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers What about Klingon and Elvish? Google is available in both, so people must speak it. Should we
RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
However, that might be due more to the fact that there isn't much to steal there! (My parents used to live right next door in Acworth.) Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roger Seielstad Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 1:32 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers It apparently has one of the lowest property crime rates in the area. But that's not the point. I'd love to see that court battle and the fall out that comes from the city losing it. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 12:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Sounds like it must be a real quite neighborhood From: Roger Seielstad [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 12:27:42 -0400 My guess is that it will be roughly equivalent to the law in the city of Kennesaw, Georgia (suburban Atlanta) in which the city requires all home owners to own a gun. To date, no one has been prosecuted for breaking that law. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 7:57 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Seems like that disclaimer (I do not give permission to forward) would be unnecessary. If the law requires express permission then the absence of any disclaimer wouldn't constitute permission and thus unless the message specifically said I *DO* give permission to forward it would be illegal to forward it. I'll be curious to know how many people they actually get prosecuted under this law. Aloha, -Ben- Ben M. Schorr, MVP-OneNote, CNA, MCPx4 Director of Information Services Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert http://www.hawaiilawyer.com-Original Message-From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 13:28To: Exchange DiscussionsSubject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Scott, and others, I totally get your point, and to some degree agree. An interesting addition... The Australian federal govt recently (last year) passed legislation to say that it is illegal to forward and e-mail without the authors express permission. Thus, a whole NEW addition to the disclaimer in Australia is popping up, saying that the author DOES NOT give permission for the e-mail to be forwarded. I think, whether we like it or not, the disclaimer is here to stay... It is how we as Admins manage it. My additional $0.02 (inc GST). themolk. -Original Message- From: Akerlund, Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 9:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Well I am not a legal speagle by any means, but the disclaimer issue it bad joke. The true responsibility of who the messagewent to is in the hands of the sender. If the message was addressedcorrectly then the need for disclaimers would be a non-issue. Sorry I watched this thread long enough that I had to put my two cents in there. I find it hard that anyone should accept the burden of responsibility for receiving an electronic message that was sent to them by mistake. And those disclaimers that try to shift the burden of responiblity from the shoulders of the sender to the reciever are a sad attempt at just that. -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 3:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers What about Klingon and Elvish? Google is available in both,so people must speak it. Should we not then make disclaimersavailable in these languages too? themolk. -Original Message- From: Martin Tuip [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 12:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers About a billion people on this planet speak Chinese ... going
RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
*Has* anyone tested email disclaimers in the courts in the UK, EU or US? I'm not aware of any cases. I do find it ironic that lawyers, who knowingly write in a way that most people do not find clear, should be concerned that the disclaimer should be written so as to be understood by any recipient. It's all Greek to me. Or double-Dutch. Perhaps your disclaimer could consist of Legal disclaimer - you must read this in every relevant language, each linked to a web page which contains the text in that language. Or write it in Esperanto. -Original Message- From: Midgley, Ian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 14:07 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups That's not funny !! I'm currently involved in discussions with our legal team regarding the validity of English language disclaimers on messages written in various different European languages (we route all our Internet mail through a single SMTP gateway in the UK). The legal team are pushing to add disclaimers in each language. Just because no-one ever reads disclaimers doesn't mean that they are not legally applicable - when was the last time you read the MS license agreement when installing software? And just because I select the other radio button and click OK doesn't mean that I have read the labels attached to those actions either. I would be interested in Williams disclaimer list if he would be happy to publish. Also, does anyone know of a disclaimer adder that is language aware? Otherwise I'm going to have to do some funny tricks with SMTP connectors and routing inside the company. The information contained in this e-mail is intended for the recipient or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential information that is exempt from disclosure by law and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any act in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete from your system. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
LOL, yes lawyers will be first against the wall when the revolution comes...closely followed by accountants -Original Message- From: Shotton Jolyon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 14:54 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers *Has* anyone tested email disclaimers in the courts in the UK, EU or US? I'm not aware of any cases. I do find it ironic that lawyers, who knowingly write in a way that most people do not find clear, should be concerned that the disclaimer should be written so as to be understood by any recipient. It's all Greek to me. Or double-Dutch. Perhaps your disclaimer could consist of Legal disclaimer - you must read this in every relevant language, each linked to a web page which contains the text in that language. Or write it in Esperanto. -Original Message- From: Midgley, Ian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 14:07 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups That's not funny !! I'm currently involved in discussions with our legal team regarding the validity of English language disclaimers on messages written in various different European languages (we route all our Internet mail through a single SMTP gateway in the UK). The legal team are pushing to add disclaimers in each language. Just because no-one ever reads disclaimers doesn't mean that they are not legally applicable - when was the last time you read the MS license agreement when installing software? And just because I select the other radio button and click OK doesn't mean that I have read the labels attached to those actions either. I would be interested in Williams disclaimer list if he would be happy to publish. Also, does anyone know of a disclaimer adder that is language aware? Otherwise I'm going to have to do some funny tricks with SMTP connectors and routing inside the company. The information contained in this e-mail is intended for the recipient or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential information that is exempt from disclosure by law and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any act in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete from your system. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** This correspondence is confidential and is solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose, copy, distribute or retain this message or any part of it. If you are not the intended recipient please delete this correspondence from your system and notify the sender immediately. No warranty is given that this correspondence is free from any virus. In keeping with good computer practice, you should ensure that it is actually virus free. E-mail messages may be subject to delays, non-delivery and unauthorised alterations therefore, information expressed in this message is not given or endorsed by Sx3 unless otherwise notified by our duly authorised representative independent of this message. Sx3 is a trading name of Service and Systems Solutions Limited, a limited company registered in Northern Ireland under number NI 32979 whose registered office is at 120 Malone Road, Belfast, BT9 5HT. ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
Yup, Greek and Double-Dutch are in the list of languages that need to be covered. Web links are unacceptable since there is no way of checking whether the recipient clicked the link, or they might not be online when they read the message. We thought of using Latin since most of the legal team know that. Esperanto is a bit too leading edge. -Original Message- From: Shotton Jolyon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 13:54 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers *Has* anyone tested email disclaimers in the courts in the UK, EU or US? I'm not aware of any cases. I do find it ironic that lawyers, who knowingly write in a way that most people do not find clear, should be concerned that the disclaimer should be written so as to be understood by any recipient. It's all Greek to me. Or double-Dutch. Perhaps your disclaimer could consist of Legal disclaimer - you must read this in every relevant language, each linked to a web page which contains the text in that language. Or write it in Esperanto. -Original Message- From: Midgley, Ian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 14:07 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups That's not funny !! I'm currently involved in discussions with our legal team regarding the validity of English language disclaimers on messages written in various different European languages (we route all our Internet mail through a single SMTP gateway in the UK). The legal team are pushing to add disclaimers in each language. Just because no-one ever reads disclaimers doesn't mean that they are not legally applicable - when was the last time you read the MS license agreement when installing software? And just because I select the other radio button and click OK doesn't mean that I have read the labels attached to those actions either. I would be interested in Williams disclaimer list if he would be happy to publish. Also, does anyone know of a disclaimer adder that is language aware? Otherwise I'm going to have to do some funny tricks with SMTP connectors and routing inside the company. The information contained in this e-mail is intended for the recipient or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential information that is exempt from disclosure by law and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any act in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete from your system. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential to the intended recipient(s). If you have received the e-mail in error please notify the author by replying to this e-mail and delete it and all copies from your system. Any unauthorised disclosure, use, or dissemination, either whole or partial, is prohibited. Any views or opinions contained in this email are those of the author and are not necessarily endorsed by The Company, and The Company cannot be held responsible for any misuse. The Company does not accept responsibility or liability for any loss or damage arising in any way from its receipt or use or for any errors or omissions in its contents, which may arise as a result of its transmission. This email is covered by The Company Terms and Conditions of Business, a copy of which can be obtained on request. ** ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
About a billion people on this planet speak Chinese ... going to included that as well ? I like the fact you are going to add Dutch to the disclaimer, but around 99% of the Dutch population speaks and understands English very well. ** Please prefix your subject header with BETA for posts dealing with Exchange 2003 ** -- Martin Tuip MVP Exchange Exchange 2000 List owner www.exchange-mail.org www.sharepointserver.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- - Original Message - From: Midgley, Ian [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:10 PM Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Yup, Greek and Double-Dutch are in the list of languages that need to be covered. Web links are unacceptable since there is no way of checking whether the recipient clicked the link, or they might not be online when they read the message. We thought of using Latin since most of the legal team know that. Esperanto is a bit too leading edge. -Original Message- From: Shotton Jolyon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 13:54 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers *Has* anyone tested email disclaimers in the courts in the UK, EU or US? I'm not aware of any cases. I do find it ironic that lawyers, who knowingly write in a way that most people do not find clear, should be concerned that the disclaimer should be written so as to be understood by any recipient. It's all Greek to me. Or double-Dutch. Perhaps your disclaimer could consist of Legal disclaimer - you must read this in every relevant language, each linked to a web page which contains the text in that language. Or write it in Esperanto. -Original Message- From: Midgley, Ian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 14:07 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups That's not funny !! I'm currently involved in discussions with our legal team regarding the validity of English language disclaimers on messages written in various different European languages (we route all our Internet mail through a single SMTP gateway in the UK). The legal team are pushing to add disclaimers in each language. Just because no-one ever reads disclaimers doesn't mean that they are not legally applicable - when was the last time you read the MS license agreement when installing software? And just because I select the other radio button and click OK doesn't mean that I have read the labels attached to those actions either. I would be interested in Williams disclaimer list if he would be happy to publish. Also, does anyone know of a disclaimer adder that is language aware? Otherwise I'm going to have to do some funny tricks with SMTP connectors and routing inside the company. The information contained in this e-mail is intended for the recipient or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential information that is exempt from disclosure by law and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any act in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete from your system. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential to the intended recipient(s). If you have received the e-mail in error please notify the author by replying to this e-mail and delete it and all copies from your system. Any unauthorised disclosure, use, or dissemination, either whole or partial, is prohibited. Any views or opinions contained in this email are those of the author and are not necessarily endorsed by The Company, and The Company cannot be held responsible for any misuse. The Company does not accept responsibility or liability for any loss or damage arising in any way from its receipt or use or for any errors or omissions in its contents, which may arise as a result of its transmission. This email is covered by The Company Terms and Conditions of Business, a copy of which can be obtained on request. ** ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL
RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
Well you could probably format the link to let you track the clicks. But as we know, noone reads these things anyway so it really shouldn't matter - not that that will placate your legals, of course. Perhaps some good might come of this - if It was in a language I couldn't understand. becomes an accepted legal defence then the work of the Plain English Campaign (http://www.plainenglish.co.uk/) and similar bodies might become a lot easier. Back on the original point though, if you need a language targeted disclaimer you might be able to use a custom field on a mail form to set the language, add it to the mail header and add the disclaimer based on the content of this. It would mean the people sending the mails would have to remember to set the language field but at least it'd mean you wouldn't get a German disclaimer every time you wrote Schadenfreude. -Original Message- From: Midgley, Ian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] . . . Web links are unacceptable since there is no way of checking whether the recipient clicked the link, or they might not be online when they read the message. . . . The information contained in this e-mail is intended for the recipient or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential information that is exempt from disclosure by law and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any act in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete from your system. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
One of our depts is looking to send mail to an Exchange 5.5 server via Secure SMTP and I'm wondering if 5.5 supports it INCOMING. I know you can force Exchange to send outgoing, but do not know if Exchange - by default - will accept mail at port 465. Any Ideas? -Original Message- From: Shotton Jolyon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 10:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Well you could probably format the link to let you track the clicks. But as we know, noone reads these things anyway so it really shouldn't matter - not that that will placate your legals, of course. Perhaps some good might come of this - if It was in a language I couldn't understand. becomes an accepted legal defence then the work of the Plain English Campaign (http://www.plainenglish.co.uk/) and similar bodies might become a lot easier. Back on the original point though, if you need a language targeted disclaimer you might be able to use a custom field on a mail form to set the language, add it to the mail header and add the disclaimer based on the content of this. It would mean the people sending the mails would have to remember to set the language field but at least it'd mean you wouldn't get a German disclaimer every time you wrote Schadenfreude. -Original Message- From: Midgley, Ian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] . . . Web links are unacceptable since there is no way of checking whether the recipient clicked the link, or they might not be online when they read the message. . . . The information contained in this e-mail is intended for the recipient or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential information that is exempt from disclosure by law and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any act in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete from your system. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
What about Klingon and Elvish? Google is available in both, so people must speak it. Should we not then make disclaimers available in these languages too? themolk. -Original Message- From: Martin Tuip [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 12:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers About a billion people on this planet speak Chinese ... going to included that as well ? I like the fact you are going to add Dutch to the disclaimer, but around 99% of the Dutch population speaks and understands English very well. ** Please prefix your subject header with BETA for posts dealing with Exchange 2003 ** -- Martin Tuip MVP Exchange Exchange 2000 List owner www.exchange-mail.org www.sharepointserver.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- - Original Message - From: Midgley, Ian [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:10 PM Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Yup, Greek and Double-Dutch are in the list of languages that need to be covered. Web links are unacceptable since there is no way of checking whether the recipient clicked the link, or they might not be online when they read the message. We thought of using Latin since most of the legal team know that. Esperanto is a bit too leading edge. -Original Message- From: Shotton Jolyon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 13:54 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers *Has* anyone tested email disclaimers in the courts in the UK, EU or US? I'm not aware of any cases. I do find it ironic that lawyers, who knowingly write in a way that most people do not find clear, should be concerned that the disclaimer should be written so as to be understood by any recipient. It's all Greek to me. Or double-Dutch. Perhaps your disclaimer could consist of Legal disclaimer - you must read this in every relevant language, each linked to a web page which contains the text in that language. Or write it in Esperanto. -Original Message- From: Midgley, Ian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 14:07 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups That's not funny !! I'm currently involved in discussions with our legal team regarding the validity of English language disclaimers on messages written in various different European languages (we route all our Internet mail through a single SMTP gateway in the UK). The legal team are pushing to add disclaimers in each language. Just because no-one ever reads disclaimers doesn't mean that they are not legally applicable - when was the last time you read the MS license agreement when installing software? And just because I select the other radio button and click OK doesn't mean that I have read the labels attached to those actions either. I would be interested in Williams disclaimer list if he would be happy to publish. Also, does anyone know of a disclaimer adder that is language aware? Otherwise I'm going to have to do some funny tricks with SMTP connectors and routing inside the company. The information contained in this e-mail is intended for the recipient or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential information that is exempt from disclosure by law and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any act in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete from your system. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential to the intended recipient(s). If you have received the e-mail in error please notify the author by replying to this e-mail and delete it and all copies from your system. Any unauthorised disclosure, use, or dissemination, either whole or partial, is prohibited. Any views or opinions contained in this email are those of the author and are not necessarily endorsed by The Company, and The Company cannot be held responsible for any misuse. The Company does not accept responsibility or liability for any loss or damage arising in any way from its receipt or use or for any errors or omissions in its contents, which may arise as a result of its
RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
Well I am not a legal speagle by any means, but the disclaimer issue it bad joke. The true responsibility of who the message went to is in the hands of the sender. If the message was addressed correctly then the need for disclaimers would be a non-issue. Sorry I watched this thread long enough that I had to put my two cents in there. I find it hard that anyone should accept the burden of responsibility for receiving an electronic message that was sent to them by mistake. And those disclaimers that try to shift the burden of responiblity from the shoulders of the sender to the reciever are a sad attempt at just that. -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 3:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers What about Klingon and Elvish? Google is available in both, so people must speak it. Should we not then make disclaimers available in these languages too? themolk. -Original Message- From: Martin Tuip [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 12:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers About a billion people on this planet speak Chinese ... going to included that as well ? I like the fact you are going to add Dutch to the disclaimer, but around 99% of the Dutch population speaks and understands English very well. ** Please prefix your subject header with BETA for posts dealing with Exchange 2003 ** -- Martin Tuip MVP Exchange Exchange 2000 List owner www.exchange-mail.org www.sharepointserver.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- - Original Message - From: Midgley, Ian [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:10 PM Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Yup, Greek and Double-Dutch are in the list of languages that need to be covered. Web links are unacceptable since there is no way of checking whether the recipient clicked the link, or they might not be online when they read the message. We thought of using Latin since most of the legal team know that. Esperanto is a bit too leading edge. -Original Message- From: Shotton Jolyon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 13:54 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers *Has* anyone tested email disclaimers in the courts in the UK, EU or US? I'm not aware of any cases. I do find it ironic that lawyers, who knowingly write in a way that most people do not find clear, should be concerned that the disclaimer should be written so as to be understood by any recipient. It's all Greek to me. Or double-Dutch. Perhaps your disclaimer could consist of Legal disclaimer - you must read this in every relevant language, each linked to a web page which contains the text in that language. Or write it in Esperanto. -Original Message- From: Midgley, Ian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 14:07 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups That's not funny !! I'm currently involved in discussions with our legal team regarding the validity of English language disclaimers on messages written in various different European languages (we route all our Internet mail through a single SMTP gateway in the UK). The legal team are pushing to add disclaimers in each language. Just because no-one ever reads disclaimers doesn't mean that they are not legally applicable - when was the last time you read the MS license agreement when installing software? And just because I select the other radio button and click OK doesn't mean that I have read the labels attached to those actions either. I would be interested in Williams disclaimer list if he would be happy to publish. Also, does anyone know of a disclaimer adder that is language aware? Otherwise I'm going to have to do some funny tricks with SMTP connectors and routing inside the company. The information contained in this e-mail is intended for the recipient or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential information that is exempt from disclosure by law and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any act in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete from your system. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED
RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
Scott, and others, I totally get your point, and to some degree agree. An interesting addition... The Australian federal govt recently (last year) passed legislation to say that it is illegal to forward and e-mail without the authors express permission. Thus, a whole NEW addition to the disclaimer in Australia is popping up, saying that the author DOES NOT give permission for the e-mail to be forwarded. I think, whether we like it or not, the disclaimer is here to stay... It is how we as Admins manage it. My additional $0.02 (inc GST). themolk. -Original Message- From: Akerlund, Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 9:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Well I am not a legal speagle by any means, but the disclaimer issue it bad joke. The true responsibility of who the message went to is in the hands of the sender. If the message was addressed correctly then the need for disclaimers would be a non-issue. Sorry I watched this thread long enough that I had to put my two cents in there. I find it hard that anyone should accept the burden of responsibility for receiving an electronic message that was sent to them by mistake. And those disclaimers that try to shift the burden of responiblity from the shoulders of the sender to the reciever are a sad attempt at just that. -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 3:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers What about Klingon and Elvish? Google is available in both, so people must speak it. Should we not then make disclaimers available in these languages too? themolk. -Original Message- From: Martin Tuip [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 12:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers About a billion people on this planet speak Chinese ... going to included that as well ? I like the fact you are going to add Dutch to the disclaimer, but around 99% of the Dutch population speaks and understands English very well. ** Please prefix your subject header with BETA for posts dealing with Exchange 2003 ** -- Martin Tuip MVP Exchange Exchange 2000 List owner www.exchange-mail.org www.sharepointserver.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- - Original Message - From: Midgley, Ian [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:10 PM Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Yup, Greek and Double-Dutch are in the list of languages that need to be covered. Web links are unacceptable since there is no way of checking whether the recipient clicked the link, or they might not be online when they read the message. We thought of using Latin since most of the legal team know that. Esperanto is a bit too leading edge. -Original Message- From: Shotton Jolyon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 13:54 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers *Has* anyone tested email disclaimers in the courts in the UK, EU or US? I'm not aware of any cases. I do find it ironic that lawyers, who knowingly write in a way that most people do not find clear, should be concerned that the disclaimer should be written so as to be understood by any recipient. It's all Greek to me. Or double-Dutch. Perhaps your disclaimer could consist of Legal disclaimer - you must read this in every relevant language, each linked to a web page which contains the text in that language. Or write it in Esperanto. -Original Message- From: Midgley, Ian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 14:07 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups That's not funny !! I'm currently involved in discussions with our legal team regarding the validity of English language disclaimers on messages written in various different European languages (we route all our Internet mail through a single SMTP gateway in the UK). The legal team are pushing to add disclaimers in each language. Just because no-one ever reads disclaimers doesn't mean that they are not legally applicable - when was the last time you read the MS license agreement when installing software? And just because I select the other radio button and click OK doesn't mean that I have read the labels attached to those actions either. I would be interested in Williams disclaimer list if he would be happy to publish. Also, does anyone know of a disclaimer adder that is language aware
RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
Seems like that disclaimer (I do not give permission to forward) would be unnecessary. If the law requires express permission then the absence of any disclaimer wouldn't constitute permission and thus unless the message specifically said I *DO* give permission to forward it would be illegal to forward it. I'll be curious to know how many people they actually get prosecuted under this law. Aloha, -Ben- Ben M. Schorr, MVP-OneNote, CNA, MCPx4 Director of Information Services Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert http://www.hawaiilawyer.com -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 13:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Scott, and others, I totally get your point, and to some degree agree. An interesting addition... The Australian federal govt recently (last year) passed legislation to say that it is illegal to forward and e-mail without the authors express permission. Thus, a whole NEW addition to the disclaimer in Australia is popping up, saying that the author DOES NOT give permission for the e-mail to be forwarded. I think, whether we like it or not, the disclaimer is here to stay... It is how we as Admins manage it. My additional $0.02 (inc GST). themolk. -Original Message- From: Akerlund, Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 9:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Well I am not a legal speagle by any means, but the disclaimer issue it bad joke. The true responsibility of who the message went to is in the hands of the sender. If the message was addressed correctly then the need for disclaimers would be a non-issue. Sorry I watched this thread long enough that I had to put my two cents in there. I find it hard that anyone should accept the burden of responsibility for receiving an electronic message that was sent to them by mistake. And those disclaimers that try to shift the burden of responiblity from the shoulders of the sender to the reciever are a sad attempt at just that. -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 3:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers What about Klingon and Elvish? Google is available in both, so people must speak it. Should we not then make disclaimers available in these languages too? themolk. -Original Message- From: Martin Tuip [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 12:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers About a billion people on this planet speak Chinese ... going to included that as well ? I like the fact you are going to add Dutch to the disclaimer, but around 99% of the Dutch population speaks and understands English very well. ** Please prefix your subject header with BETA for posts dealing with Exchange 2003 ** -- Martin Tuip MVP Exchange Exchange 2000 List owner www.exchange-mail.org www.sharepointserver.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- - Original Message - From: Midgley, Ian [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:10 PM Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Yup, Greek and Double-Dutch are in the list of languages that need to be covered. Web links are unacceptable since there is no way of checking whether the recipient clicked the link, or they might not be online when they read the message. We thought of using Latin since most of the legal team know that. Esperanto is a bit too leading edge. -Original Message- From: Shotton Jolyon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 13:54 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers *Has* anyone tested email disclaimers in the courts in the UK, EU or US? I'm not aware of any cases. I do find it ironic that lawyers, who knowingly write in a way that most people do not find clear, should be concerned that the disclaimer should be written so as to be understood by any recipient. It's all Greek to me. Or double-Dutch. Perhaps your disclaimer could consist of Legal disclaimer - you must read this in every relevant language, each linked to a web page which contains the text in that language. Or write it in Esperanto. -Original Message- From: Midgley, Ian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 14:07 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups
RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
Ben, I agree... Sadly, due to all the legal eagles rubbing their hands in glee over more work, and the fact that unless you tell someone not to, independent of the law, they can get away with it somehow, it's been stated that you have to tell them that they do not have permission to forward. sigh... I am looking forward to seeing any prosecutions out of it too... I guess it is designed to protect people like that whole thing in the UK with that lawyer talking about the taste of her boyfriend's... Umm... I don't think I need to complete that sentence. You know what I mean. Most legislation re: IT in Australia is knee-jerk at best. For example, they are currently discussing the legality of making spam illegal - but whose problem is it (ISP, sender, etc, etc, etc). But I think that all this is a whole other thread. themolk. -Original Message- From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 9:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Seems like that disclaimer (I do not give permission to forward) would be unnecessary. If the law requires express permission then the absence of any disclaimer wouldn't constitute permission and thus unless the message specifically said I *DO* give permission to forward it would be illegal to forward it. I'll be curious to know how many people they actually get prosecuted under this law. Aloha, -Ben- Ben M. Schorr, MVP-OneNote, CNA, MCPx4 Director of Information Services Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert http://www.hawaiilawyer.com -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 13:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Scott, and others, I totally get your point, and to some degree agree. An interesting addition... The Australian federal govt recently (last year) passed legislation to say that it is illegal to forward and e-mail without the authors express permission. Thus, a whole NEW addition to the disclaimer in Australia is popping up, saying that the author DOES NOT give permission for the e-mail to be forwarded. I think, whether we like it or not, the disclaimer is here to stay... It is how we as Admins manage it. My additional $0.02 (inc GST). themolk. -Original Message- From: Akerlund, Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 9:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Well I am not a legal speagle by any means, but the disclaimer issue it bad joke. The true responsibility of who the message went to is in the hands of the sender. If the message was addressed correctly then the need for disclaimers would be a non-issue. Sorry I watched this thread long enough that I had to put my two cents in there. I find it hard that anyone should accept the burden of responsibility for receiving an electronic message that was sent to them by mistake. And those disclaimers that try to shift the burden of responiblity from the shoulders of the sender to the reciever are a sad attempt at just that. -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 3:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers What about Klingon and Elvish? Google is available in both, so people must speak it. Should we not then make disclaimers available in these languages too? themolk. -Original Message- From: Martin Tuip [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 12:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers About a billion people on this planet speak Chinese ... going to included that as well ? I like the fact you are going to add Dutch to the disclaimer, but around 99% of the Dutch population speaks and understands English very well. ** Please prefix your subject header with BETA for posts dealing with Exchange 2003 ** -- Martin Tuip MVP Exchange Exchange 2000 List owner www.exchange-mail.org www.sharepointserver.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- - Original Message - From: Midgley, Ian [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:10 PM Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Yup, Greek and Double-Dutch are in the list of languages that need to be covered. Web links are unacceptable since there is no way of checking whether the recipient clicked the link, or they might not be online when they read the message
