[LINK] Pointless email disclaimers

[Stilgherrian]

There was a discussion the other day about email disclaimers, which I  
blogged about at http://stilgherrian.com/internet/stupid-email-disclaimers-dont-use-them/ 
  ... a lawyer [American] has added this comment at http://stilgherrian.com/internet/stupid-email-disclaimers-dont-use-them/#comment-13927 
  ...

     You're absolutely right that email disclaimers do not reduce  
anybody's
     duty of care, which is based upon things wholly outside of self- 
serving
     communications.

     There are legitimate reasons for email disclaimers, although  
easily 95%
     of the disclaimers that people use do not fall within the  
legitimate
     reasons. They can be used to signal that a claim of privilege is  
not
     available, as in:

     "I am not your freakin' lawyer so don't even think that this auto- 
reply
     to your website inquiry constitutes legal advice."

     They can also be used in cases where a contract requires parties to
     exchange confidential communications, where the communications have
     to be marked 'confidential' in order for a claim of trade secrecy  
or
     proprietary rights to apply.  (In other words, if you send us your
     stuff and you don't mark it properly, we can apply for a patent  
on it.)

     I have a blog post on this.
     (http://arborlaw.biz/blog/2007/07/19/legal-issues-in-email-disclaimers/ 
)
     My Fortune 500 clients always ask me about these things; they're  
always
     using them.

     I'm thinking about opening an annual award for the longest and most
     ridiculous email disclaimers.

     Carol Shepherd, Attorney
     Arborlaw PLC

Hear hear.

Stil


-- 
Stilgherrian http://stilgherrian.com/
Internet, IT and Media Consulting, Sydney, Australia
mobile +61 407 623 600
fax +61 2 9516 5630
Twitter: stilgherrian
Skype: stilgherrian
ABN 25 231 641 421