Does an email account constitute a "letterhead"? (was Re: [LINK]Licences required for IPTV)

[Adam Todd]

At 11:11 AM 15/03/2006, Webb, KerryA wrote:
>Stil wrote:
> > The dialog below raises an interesting point. If someone
> > *does* write from an email account that belongs to an employer,
> > is that equivalent to writing a letter on the employer's letterhead?
> > Or is it just the equivalent of stealing stationery?
>
>Good questions - and it highlights that we're still trying to work out how 
>this Internet thingy functions.
>
>1. A letter written on an employer's letterhead may impress you, but 
>before you make any big decisions based on it, you'd better be sure that 
>the author had the authority to write what they did.

Caveat Emptor

Just because it's written on a letterhead doesn't make it correct, truthful 
or accurate.  in fact there are so many judgements brought under the trade 
Practices Act because a letter "said" something that wasn't correct.

The fact that people are becoming more and more "knowledgeable" about the 
principals of Caveat Emptor, means that eventually the issues under trade 
Practices won't sustain in a legal proceeding.  If you did not undertake 
suitable due diligence and relied totally on the senders information, you 
may simply be negligent and suffer contributory negligence.

>Agreed.  In our case, though, we have permission to use our employer's 
>e-mail accounts to engage in work-oriented lists.  As I said, the footer 
>is applied to all outward e-mails.

<rofl> Link is a work oriented list?

(ducks fast.)

>There are two Kerry Webbs in the ACT Government, and it's usually pretty 
>clear when I get mail intended for her.  But it can be confusing.
>
>Kerry
>(talking for myself, on this occasion)

Or the other Kerry Webb?  She might be equally confused!