he.net down/slow?

Sun Jan 10 01:58:00 UTC 2010

Martin Hannigan wrote:
> Some NDA's require that you must state your intent for each
> communication that should be covered by the NDA.  As much as everyone
> would like to believe these are wothless, they are not. Applying them
> globally to your email  protects your legal rights. It is also
> innocous.

Your attorney will likely advise you that boiler plate language between
two people who have not previously agreed to honor it is unlikely to be
interpreted as conferring benefit on the sender, and then invoice you
for their time.

Asserting privilege one does not in fact have is far from innocuous...

but neither of us are lawyer's so this isn't advice.

> Don't them it if you don't want to or perhaps a filter on keywords?
> 
> Best,
> 
> -M<
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 1/7/10, Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu <Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu> wrote:
>> On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 13:51:41 CST, Brian Johnson said:
>>>> On 7 Jan 2010, at 18:18, William Pitcock wrote:
>>>>> ...why would you have that on a mailing list post?
>>>> because the mail server that adds it is too dumb to differentiate
>>>> between list and direct mail?
>>> Bingo! ;)
>> That sort of gratuitous "add it to everything because our software is too
>> stupid to sort it out" is *this* close to what the legal eagles call
>> "overwarning".  Just sayin'.
>>
>> (Basically, your site and everybody else's site sticks it on everything,
>> all the recipients just ignore it the same way we almost always ignore
>> Received: headers because they're on every message and very rarely have
>> any useful content - with the end result that if you stick it on a message
>> that *matters*, it will still get ignored....)
>>
>> Oh, and is your company ready to indemnify my employer for the costs of
>> "destroy all copies of the original message" sufficiently thoroughly to
>> prevent recovery by a competent forensics expert? This may include, but
>> not be limited to, the main mail store for 70,000 people, backup tapes,
>> and other mail systems where the data may have been logically deleted but
>> as yet not overwritten.  Just sayin'. ;)
>>
> 
> 