On Fri, 2005-01-21 at 12:28 -0500, Deron Meranda wrote: > On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 11:20:01 -0600, Aleksandar Milivojevic > <amilivojevic@xxxxxx> wrote: > > Lelegard Thierry wrote: > > > This message and any attachments (the "message") is intended solely for the > > > addressees and is confidential. If you receive this message in error, please > > > delete it and immediately notify the sender. > > > Any use not in accordance with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, > > > either whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval. > > > The E-Mail transmission can not guarantee the integrity of this message. > > > NAGRA FRANCE will not therefore be liable for the message if modified. > > > Yes, email "legal" disclaimers are usually pretty stupid and > mostly non-legally binding. You might want to see > > http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/ > > I suppose there could be some legitimate ones, perhaps for > Government stuff. But for the most part they are nothing more > than an expression of some lawyer trying to show how powerful > he is without regarding any common sense. ---- There are only 2 ways that disclaimers are put at the bottom of an email message. 1 - Either the end user has it put in as his signature - whereby he can have another signature for mail lists without this disclaimer and is rude for not doing so to mailing lists or 2 - The 'company mail server' appends the signature to each outgoing mail (often claimed by the transgressors) which constitutes an adulteration of the original message and thus is of suspect validity anyway. In reality, regardless of how stupid, how worthless, how ineffective, how unsupportable it may be in litigation, they will endure and I have little power to stop them so I will waste no more time ranting about them. Craig
