From: James Edward Gray II <james@...>
Date: 2006-09-22T02:52:02+09:00
Subject: Re: [OT] Company email disclaimers (was: [OT] Rejected Ruby book ideas by O'Reilly)

On Sep 21, 2006, at 12:31 PM, Berger, Daniel wrote:

> IANAL, but I highly doubt that the demands apply outside of Qwest, and
> it's very likely for defensive purposes only.  I wish they wouldn't
> attach this disclaimer to email sent outside of our domain, but  
> it's out
> of my control.  BTW, I'm not the only one suffering from this on the
> list.
>
> I'm curious to hear comments from others on the subject.

This is commonly discussed online these days.  I believe the general  
consensus is:

1.  Statements like these are very fragile to be hanging any kind of  
legal defense on.  There are just too many problems with them.

2.  It's good etiquette to use an address free of these added blurbs  
when on mailing lists.  The reason is pretty straightforward:  it's a  
fair amount of off-topic bandwidth added to each and every post.

I'm not trying to tell you how to post, just giving you some points  
of the discussion I have seen before.

James Edward Gray II