There is a good reason. There are two types of copyrights in the US: implicit
and registered. For a long time now, a work receives an implicit copyright at
the instant it is created. If someone violates an implicit copyright, the
owner's only legal recourse is to go to court and get an order to stop the
infringing use. Zero dollar damages.
If the work is registered by filing a copy with government on the appropriate
form (TX?) and a fee, then the legal recourse includes the ability to get money
in damages.
The copyright fee used to be $20 per. Imagine if you couldn't send an email
until the contents had been filed, fee paid and a registration document
received. Not only would email get really expensive, it wouldn't be very
timely. :-)
Ray
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 22:44:08 -0700
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: full-disclosure@lists.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Email Disclaimers...Legally Liable if
breached?
On 10/10/07, Ray P <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Would the _intended_ recipient have a case against the sender for contractual
failure to protect confidential information (or whatever) if the _un_intended
recipient posts it somewhere or otherwise discloses its contents?
I'm surprised we don't see more disclaimers with a copyright statement in them.
I would think that using copyright law as an argument against unauthorized
distribution of an email would stand a better chance in court than a
non-binding disclaimer at the bottom of the message.
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live Hotmail and Microsoft Office Outlook – together at last. Get it
now.
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/outlook/HA102225181033.aspx?pid=CL100626971033
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
