[59014] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: FW: Minimum prefix length?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mike)
Wed Jun 11 17:16:30 2003
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 15:14:49 -0600
From: Mike <mike@rockynet.com>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306112147070.24043-100000@MrServer>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
> Howevers its curious that signatures such as this claiming to be confidential
> are posted to a list which is very much public and archived in several public
> websites.. not sure how right it is to autoappend them to all your mails as well
> as the private ones!
There is a current belief (IANAL) that once you publicly post messages
with such a disclaimer, the disclaimer will be unenforceable in court
thereafter.
I.E. John Doe posts something to public mailing list with the usual
legalese disclaimer. I read John's posts, and realize that his
disclaimer has no meaning- he has intended for the general public to see
his communication and has authorized everyone explicitly. How can John
later claim, if I inadvertantly received a misdirected private
communication, that I was not authorized, since he has previously given
blanket authorization to the public at large to read (some) communications?
This might seem like splitting hairs, but I bet a good lawyer can make a
whole case out of it.
