nanog mailing list archives
Re: more inane confidentiality notices, was he.net down/slow?
From: John Levine <johnl () iecc com>
Date: 10 Jan 2010 01:07:06 -0000
Some NDA's require that you must state your intent for each communication that should be covered by the NDA.
I can believe that such NDAs may exist, but I'm pretty sure I didn't sign one as a condition of subscribing to nanog. In reality, boilerplate confidentiality notices merely document the fact that a mail system is in the grip of the clueless and/or confused. R's, John
As much as everyone would like to believe these are wothless, they are not. Applying them globally to your email protects your legal rights.
I would be most interested in any case or statute law supporting this utterly implausible assertion. I'm aware that there is a rule among attorneys that they're not allowed to use material faxed from one to another by mistake, but since this isn't fax and we're not lawyers, it doesn't apply.
Current thread:
- he.net down/slow? Brian Johnson (Jan 07)
- Re: he.net down/slow? Brad Fleming (Jan 07)
- Re: he.net down/slow? William Pitcock (Jan 07)
- Re: he.net down/slow? Fearghas McKay (Jan 07)
- RE: he.net down/slow? Brian Johnson (Jan 07)
- Re: he.net down/slow? Valdis . Kletnieks (Jan 07)
- Re: he.net down/slow? Dave Martin (Jan 08)
- Re: he.net down/slow? Martin Hannigan (Jan 09)
- Re: more inane confidentiality notices, was he.net down/slow? John Levine (Jan 09)
- Re: more inane confidentiality notices, was he.net down/slow? Martin Hannigan (Jan 09)
- Re: more inane confidentiality notices, was he.net down/slow? John R. Levine (Jan 09)
- Re: he.net down/slow? Fearghas McKay (Jan 07)
- Re: he.net down/slow? joel jaeggli (Jan 09)
- Re: he.net down/slow? Martin Hannigan (Jan 09)
- Re: he.net down/slow? James Hess (Jan 09)
- Re: he.net down/slow? goemon (Jan 09)
- Re: he.net down/slow? Joe Greco (Jan 10)
- Re: he.net down/slow? JC Dill (Jan 10)
- Re: he.net down/slow? William Herrin (Jan 09)
- Re: he.net down/slow? Joe Greco (Jan 10)