Email disclaimer: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{g}}A window into the soul of your correspondent (or, where harnessed to the [[great steampunk machine]] of a multinational corporation, that entity’s blackened soul). It can be long, or short; sombre or witty; comprehensive or general, but it will be there: the [[email disclaimer]]: an extract of text, appended to every outbound communication, canvassing any [[one or more]] of the following subjects:
{{a|glossary|}}A window into your correspondent’s soul. It can be long or short; sombre or witty; comprehensive or general; but it ''will'' be there: an extract of text, appended to every outbound communication, canvassing any [[one or more]] of the following subjects:
===What it is===
===What it ''is''===
*Its [[confidentiality]] it won’t be: you don’t protect confidences by randomly emailing them to people;
The disclaimer will disingenuously catalogue the email’s [[confidentiality]] (though it ''won’t'' be: you don’t protect confidences by randomly emailing them to people); its [[copyright]] (and it ''might'' be, but the commercial value of an electronic message in a world awash with the buggers is nil, so good luck suing on it); its [[privilege]] (and unless in her headlong rush to obtain legal advice having been sued, the sender mistook you for her attorney, or was one herself and mistook you for her client, it won’t be); its potential inaccuracy (this is certainly possible, and a cute counterpoint to its ostensible value as [[intellectual property]]: “look, it is copyright, but probably bullshit”); it presents existential epidemiological danger to your computer systems if opened (in which case wghat were you doing sending it to someone else, and had its intended addressee safely received this cyber-trojan-laden hell-bomb, would that have been okay?); and all that said  it will impress upon the mistaken receiver a moral — but (Law of Contracts 101 check: ''not'' legal) duty to destroy it if it was, in fact, sent in error.
*Its [[copyright]] it might be, but the value is likely nil: the world is awash with emails just like yours;
*Its [[privilege]] (despite its protestations, misdirected emails will rarely be legally privileged)
*Its potential inaccuracy a cute counterpoint to its value as intellectual property: “it is copyright, but probably bullshit anyway”;
*Its epidemiological virulence;
*The receiver’s moral — but (Law of Contracts 101 check: ''not'' legal) duty to destroy it if sent in error.
===What it is not===
===What it is not===
A fulsome [[email disclaimer]] will also wax lengthily about what it is ''not'': a subject, of course, on which any [[lawyer]] can joyfully extemporise for as long as there are cattle still out on manoeuvres:
It may also wax lengthily about what it is ''not'': a subject, of course, on which any [[lawyer]] can joyfully extemporise for as long as there are cattle still out on manoeuvres. It is not professional advice (as if that won’t be dolefully apparent on its face), nor an [[offer]] or a [[solicitation]] of an offer, nor a recommendation to ''do'' anything or ''not'' do anything (this is quite the juicy [[double negative]]: “we are ''not'' telling you ''not'' to do anything”.) And what kind of person acts instinctively on as recommendation from an email anyway? (Don’t answer that: it is most of you.)
*It is not professional advice (as if that won’t be dolefully apparent on its face)
*Nor is it an offer or solicitation of an offer — and IN ANY CASE NOT TO [[RESIDENTS OF NEW HAMPSHIRE]];
*Nor a recommendation to do anything or not do anything (Stop and think about this juicy [[double negative]] for a while: “We are ''not'' telling you ''not'' to do anything”.) And what kind of person acts instinctively on as recommendation from an email anyway? (Don’t answer that: it is most of you.)


All of this served up in the certain knowledge no person having enough adult literacy to comprehend an [[email disclaimer]] would — or even ''could'' — be dim-witted or bored enough to read it, much less care about what it says.  
All of this served up in the certain knowledge no person having enough adult literacy to comprehend an [[email disclaimer]] would — or even ''could'' — be dim-witted or bored enough to read it, much less care about what it says. Which begs the question: what do we think we are achieving with an [[email disclaimer]]? Which part of [[Chicken-licken|the sky would fall upon our heads]] were it not there?
 
Which begs the question: what do we think we are achieving with an [[email disclaimer]]? Which part of [[Chicken-licken|the sky would fall upon our heads]] were it not there?


{{sa}}
{{sa}}

Navigation menu