At 2007-10-11 08:52 +1000, Kelly Robinson <caliana1989@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > It is common these days for email messages to contain a disclosure notice, > which may include statements such as: You forgot the most absurd: "the content of this message [sent often, on purpose, to publicly visible and archived mailing lists] is intended 'only for the adressee'". > Do these notices carry any *legal* force? Why or Why not? I am not a lawyer, but my understanding is the same as Geoff's (gjgowey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx): because the warning, such as it is, appears after the recipient has already read the content with no way (and not even tacking it on the top would really be enough, I don't think) for the recipient to opt-out and simply not read that content. They should be contrasted with warnings of potential legal culpability if a connecting user continues to use a system in /etc/issue or similar: those are a Good Idea, and help one's case against attackers, because they go a long way to nullify "I didn't know it wasn't okay" sorts of defenses. -- gabriel rosenkoetter gr@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
pgpz6s3uap0wj.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/