[LINK] RFI: Email Disclaimers

[Kim Holburn]

IANAL of course.
I don't think they've been tested in court.

How can you possibly know who the intended recipient was?  As I  
understand it the author has an automatic copyright over his or her  
emails without having to claim it.

I don't believe a disclaimer adds any rights and in fact may even  
negate some.  For instance if a company has a disclaimer saying that  
the email is confidential and company members routinely send emails to  
public email lists like say "Link" with such a disclaimer you could  
argue that the disclaimer was therefore invalid in other circumstances.
There's the obvious problem of adding a disclaimer at the end of a  
long email saying that you shouldn't read the email under certain  
circumstances, which you couldn't read until you had finished reading  
the email.

It always seemed to me that adding a disclaimer is along the lines of  
appearing to do something when possibly doing nothing would be more  
effective.

http://goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/
http://goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/list.html
http://attrition.org/security/rants/z/disclaimers.html
The Email Disclaimer Awards 2001:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/05/18/readers_letters_the_email_disclaimer/

http://www.news24.com/News24/Technology/News/0,6119,2-13-1443_1546258,00.html
> The sobering reality is, however, that the validity of these  
> disclaimers have not yet been tested by our courts and most  
> businesses draft and implement their disclaimers in such a way that  
> they are invalid, unenforceable and useless.


On 2008/Aug/21, at 5:42 PM, Roger Clarke wrote:

> During conversations on link and elsewhere some time back, we were
> pretty sus about the effectiveness of email disclaimers.
>
> I've been asked by a correspondent whether anything has changed.
>
> Can anyone point to any guides on the topic?
>
> My memory is that effectiveness depends firstly on whether the person
> is really constrained to see it.
>
> Then of course there's the question as to whether it generates some
> form of right (for the utterer) or responsibility (for the presumed
> utteree).  Is it a term of contract?  A term of a coyright licence?
> A notice that the contents are, or may be, being communicated in
> confidence?
>
> Simple test-cases:
> 'Before you print this, think of the trees you're using up' ?
> 'If this has reached you in error, please let the sender know, and
> please destroy your copy' ?
> 'Please read the disclaimer below'
> 'Please read the disclaimer at <URL>'
>
> Any difference depending on whether it's at the top or bottom of the  
> email?
>
> A related question is whether click-wrap on web-sites successfully
> imposes terms on the user.  If not, then any email disclaimer would
> seem to be doomed to have no legal effect?
>
> Thanks for any leads!
>
>
> I don't use anything on my emails, but do on my web-site, at the
> bottom of my copyright notice, which is pointed to from most of my
> pages:
> http://www.anu.edu.au/people/Roger.Clarke/CNotice.html
>
>
> -- 
> Roger Clarke                  http://www.anu.edu.au/people/Roger.Clarke/
>
> Xamax Consultancy Pty Ltd      78 Sidaway St, Chapman ACT 2611  
> AUSTRALIA
>                    Tel: +61 2 6288 1472, and 6288 6916
> mailto:Roger.Clarke at xamax.com.au                http://www.xamax.com.au/
>
> Visiting Professor in Info Science & Eng  Australian National  
> University
> Visiting Professor in the eCommerce Program      University of Hong  
> Kong
> Visiting Professor in the Cyberspace Law & Policy Centre      Uni of  
> NSW
> _______________________________________________
> Link mailing list
> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

--
Kim Holburn
IT Network & Security Consultant
Ph: +39 06 855 4294  M: +39 3494957443
mailto:kim at holburn.net  aim://kimholburn
skype://kholburn - PGP Public Key on request

Democracy imposed from without is the severest form of tyranny.
                           -- Lloyd Biggle, Jr. Analog, Apr 1961