[Mimedefang] Re: Disclaimers

[Scott Silva]

Graham Murray spake the following on 4/5/2007 2:09 AM:
> "Kevin A. McGrail" <kmcgrail at pccc.com> writes:
> 
>> Seriously people, the guy isn't lying. It's been quite an issue for
>> ISPs lately.  For a good overview, see
>> http://www.out-law.com/page-5536
>>
>> A header probably would not hold up in court as "legible" which is
>> what I believe the law in UK requires.
> 
> Why not? On a paper document the information is often in the
> (pre-printed) letterhead which is part of the 'header' of the document
> not the 'body'. So the same should apply to email. If you examine the
> 'raw' data as sent it is perfectly legible, it is up to the user (by
> choice and/or configuration of email program) whether or not to view
> it. 
But on a pre-printed letterhead, the receiver doesn't have to do anything to
see the info, and other than using scissors or white-out, can't hide it.

I don't have a problem with a footer looking like anybody else's sig line with
a company name and contact info. What bothers me are these 3 page legalese
filled pseudo-contracts attached to a ten word message. And they don't even
have the decency to prefix it with the obligatory "-- " so it can be stripped
when or if you forward or reply.

-- 

MailScanner is like deodorant...
You hope everybody uses it, and
you notice quickly if they don't!!!!