From: Patrick Hurley <phurley@...>
Date: 2006-09-22T03:13:42+09:00
Subject: Re: [OT] Company email disclaimers (was: [OT] Rejected Ruby book ideas by O'Reilly)

On 9/21/06, James Edward Gray II <james@grayproductions.net> wrote:
> 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
>
>

IMHO gmail is a great way to manage (and search) mailing lists...