Subject: RE: A page 4 U

From: Randy Presuhn <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 11:52:37 -0700 (PDT)

Hi -

> Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 14:15:54 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
> From: Steve Coya <[email-masked]>
> To: Bill Strahm <[email-masked]>
> Cc: "Presuhn, Randy" <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
> Subject: RE: A page 4 U
> In-Reply-To: <[email-masked]>
> Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
...
> But if a message containing such a disclaimer does arrive, consider the
> following:
> 
> 1. If such a message is addressed to the WG, the "if you are not the
>    designated recipient" does NOT apply
> 
> 2. If the message is addressed to the WG, the note well text states that
>    the assumption is that the content is a contribution to the IETF.
...

That seems reasonable.  When we get these turkeys, should
we post a statement to this effect to the WG mailing list?

What are the implications for the archives?  Presumably the
archives maintained by the secretariat are open to more than
just WG members and the IETF at large.  A typical example
looks like this:

| Information transmitted by this E-MAIL is proprietary to ************* and
| is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is
| addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or
| exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended
| recipient or it appears that this mail has been forwarded to you without
| proper authority, you are notified that any use or dissemination of this
| information in any manner is strictly prohibited. In such cases, please
| notify us immediately at mailto:mailadmin@*****.com and delete this mail
| from your records.

Bill is 100% right about the impracticality of the last sentence.

 ------------------------------------------------------
 Randy Presuhn          BMC Software, Inc.  1-3141
 [email-masked]  2141 North First Street
 Tel: +1 408 546-1006   San José, California 95131  USA
 ------------------------------------------------------
 My opinions and BMC's are independent variables.
 ------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Randall Gellens <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 12:45:44 -0700

At 11:52 AM -0700 10/12/01, Randy Presuhn wrote:
>Information transmitted by this E-MAIL is proprietary to *************

Interesting.  I'm no lawyer, but if I recall correctly from various 
presentations on protecting IP, if a company slaps a "proprietary 
information" label on everything, including stuff that clearly isn't, 
it is failing to take reasonable steps to protect its information, 
and thus is likely to lose any court case.
--

---

From: "Andrew G. Malis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 17:23:03 -0400

I just treat statements like that as random noise and ignore them, since a 
sender can't enter the recipient into a contract just by sending them an 
email without prior agreement.  It's like receiving a phone call and being 
told information, and then after receiving the information, being told that 
it's proprietary and it can't be repeated.  Or me sending you an email 
informing you that you owe me $100 as a consequence of reading the 
email.  Yeah, right.

Cheers,
Andy

-----

At 10/12/2001 12:45 PM -0700, Randall Gellens wrote:
>information" label on everything, including stuff that clearly isn't, it 
>is failing to take reasonable steps to protect its information, and thus 
>is likely to lose any court case.
>--