They are trying the old fashioned trick of "CYA". Long ago, people used the mail (gasp) and sent stuff to a person, with "PERSONAL & CONFIDENTIAL" on the envelope, to ensure that the addressee (and only the addressee) actually received it. In fact, under US Law, it's illegal to open somebody else's mail (unless acting as their agent, i.e. administrative assistant).
When law and cpa firms started using faxes (and, I worked for one of them at that time), we found out that fax machines aren't always private, and that when you fat-finger the dialing, who knows where it went to. So, in the grand tradition of "CYA", there were standard cover pages created with some form of legalistic mumbo-jumbo about "for the attention of the addressee". This was in the - forlorn - hope that if you mistakenly faxed the takeover bid to the NY Times, it wouldn't print it. These email warnings are a continuation of that trend. They use the server to automatically put the notice on every outgoing message, in the forlorn hope that if you mistakenly receive it, you won't do anything with it. Personally - the concept of putting these on emails sent to public mailing lists alternately amuses and enrages me. AFAIK (and IANAL), these have never been tested in court. After all, if it blew out the window and you found it on the street, how could they impose a duty of confidentiality on you? How can an unsolicited email be any different? I can't imagine that these disclaimers would hold up. At best, these disclaimers seem to be an offer, in the contract law sense. But the essence of contract law is two (or more) parties of reasonably equal ability to contract and an agreement (with evidence, such as action according to the contract or signatures). Sometimes mutual consideration (exchange of value) is required too - that's why you will often see the phrase "for one dollar in hand and other value received, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged". If you choose not to accept their offer, well, where is the contract? The US Securities & Exchange commission might - just might - be able to make it "trading on inside information" if you already had some duty of confidentiality (say you were a Wall St. Analyst), but I doubt it would hold up for anyone else, nor for any other legal purpose. But again, I Am Not A Lawyer - and, in truth, my knowledge of the laws of other countries is pretty limited. Enough to stay out of jail as a tourist... -----Burton -----Original Message----- From: Cameron Turner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 2:33 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: OT: Auto Complete Password Caching Sorry, I can't answer this question, but in reading your post I have another question: I've seen a recent increase in the number of emails I receive (either via lists or directly) that have the kinds of disclaimers that are shown here. Did I miss something? Did a new law get passed? Why have the big guys started doing this now? I understand that it's a common practice to try and protect yourself from litigation, but is that all that this is? Or am I missing the bigger picture. Just curious why the big guys are doing this all of a sudden (in my view). I ask because I think knowing about this sort of thing would fall within my duties as a System Admin (at least enough to notify the legal guys). Thanks, Cam PS: Nicholas, sorry I couldn't answer your question. At 06:31 PM 6/18/2002 +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >This email is to be read subject to the disclaimer below. > >Does anyone know where the the "Auto Complete" (in IExplorer) passwords are >cached locally for web based forms eg. hotmail ? > >IE > Internet Tools > Content > Auto Complete > >Regards, > >Nicholas McKenzie > >--------------------NOTICE - This communication contains information which >is confidential and the copyright of Ernst & Young or a third party. > >If you are not the intended recipient of this communication please delete >and destroy all copies and telephone Ernst & Young on 1800 655 717 >immediately. If you are the intended recipient of this communication you >should not copy, disclose or distribute this communication without the >authority of Ernst & Young. > >Any views expressed in this Communication are those of the individual >sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of >Ernst & Young. > >Except as required at law, Ernst & Young does not represent, warrant and/or >guarantee that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor >that the communication is free of errors, virus, interception or >interference. > >Liability limited by the Accountants Scheme, approved under the >Professional Standards Act 1994 (NSW) >--------------------
