On Tue, 1 May 2001, David Honig wrote: >Is it in fact a crime of fraud to advertise that you don't keep logs >when in fact you do? If someone winds up losing money (or suffering other damages) because of it, it is at least a tort. If you were planning some kind of money-making scam that hinged on the deception, I'm pretty sure it would be fraud as well. I wonder whether evidence from logfiles could be excluded in a court case on the grounds that the logfiles were collected under false pretenses? *That* would be a laugh riot... (I am not a lawyer, nor studying to become one - these are just my opinions.) Bear
- Re: layered deception Declan McCullagh
- Re: layered deception Steve Schear
- Re: layered deception Declan McCullagh
- RE: layered deception David Honig
- RE: layered deception Aimee Farr
- Re: layered deception Tim May
- RE: layered deception Aimee Farr
- RE: layered deception David Honig
- Re: layered deception Tim May
- RE: layered deception Bill Stewart
- Re: layered deception Ray Dillinger
- Re: layered deception Harmon Seaver
- Re: layered deception Greg Broiles
- Re: layered deception Harmon Seaver
- Plausible deniability of e-mail... Tim May
- Re: layered deception Greg Broiles
- Re: layered deception Bill Stewart
- Re: layered deception Jon Beets
- RE: layered deception David Honig
- RE: layered deception Sandy Sandfort
- Re: layered deception Eric Murray