Re: he.net down/slow?

[Martin Hannigan <martin () theicelandguy com>]

I never said otherwise. I did say that from a liability standpoint it
is reasonable to inject it and everyone who can ignore it should
simply ignore it.

Best,

-M<



On 1/9/10, joel jaeggli <joelja () bogus com> wrote:
> Martin Hannigan wrote:
> > Some NDA's require that you must state your intent for each
> > communication that should be covered by the NDA.  As much as everyone
> > would like to believe these are wothless, they are not. Applying them
> > globally to your email  protects your legal rights. It is also
> > innocous.
>
> Your attorney will likely advise you that boiler plate language between
> two people who have not previously agreed to honor it is unlikely to be
> interpreted as conferring benefit on the sender, and then invoice you
> for their time.
>
> Asserting privilege one does not in fact have is far from innocuous...
>
> but neither of us are lawyer's so this isn't advice.
>
> > Don't them it if you don't want to or perhaps a filter on keywords?
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > -M<
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 1/7/10, Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 13:51:41 CST, Brian Johnson said:
> > > > > On 7 Jan 2010, at 18:18, William Pitcock wrote:
> > > > > > ...why would you have that on a mailing list post?
> > > > > because the mail server that adds it is too dumb to differentiate
> > > > > between list and direct mail?
> > > > Bingo! ;)
> > > That sort of gratuitous "add it to everything because our software is too
> > > stupid to sort it out" is *this* close to what the legal eagles call
> > > "overwarning".  Just sayin'.
> > >
> > > (Basically, your site and everybody else's site sticks it on everything,
> > > all the recipients just ignore it the same way we almost always ignore
> > > Received: headers because they're on every message and very rarely have
> > > any useful content - with the end result that if you stick it on a
> > > message
> > > that *matters*, it will still get ignored....)
> > >
> > > Oh, and is your company ready to indemnify my employer for the costs of
> > > "destroy all copies of the original message" sufficiently thoroughly to
> > > prevent recovery by a competent forensics expert? This may include, but
> > > not be limited to, the main mail store for 70,000 people, backup tapes,
> > > and other mail systems where the data may have been logically deleted but
> > > as yet not overwritten.  Just sayin'. ;)


-- 
Martin Hannigan                               martin () theicelandguy com
p: +16178216079
Power, Network, and Costs Consulting for Iceland Datacenters and Occupants