Telus mail server admin

Fri Oct 7 17:00:29 UTC 2011

On Fri, 07 Oct 2011 05:40:39 -1000, Paul Graydon said:

> Which I do.  But note the original complaint was not about using 
> ridiculously long disclaimers on a mailing list, it was about the 
> ridiculously long disclaimer, full stop.

If your corporate policy insists on huge disclaimers regarding confidential
information on e-mails sent to public maling lists, it's busticated, pure and
simple.

And unless somebody can cite actual statute or case law where such a blanket
disclaimer made an *actual difference*, the policy *in general* is busticated.
Yes, I know that it *does* matter for *some specific* content.  But the only
case law I know of was one judge who (in an unfortunately non-precidential way)
said the fact that a company felt the need to put a blanket disclaimer on all
the e-mail was doing itself a dis-favor, because it tended to indicate that the
company had no clue or control over what content was in fact privileged or
confidential.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 227 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20111007/c9eb6191/attachment.sig>