One of the things that really bugs me about email is when I get an email from an individual and at the bottom of the email is some threatening-sounding message like this one:NOTICE: The contents of this email are the property of SOME BIG COMPANY and are only intended for the intended recipient. If you are that end user, you are hereby forbidden from forwarding this email. If you are not the intended recipient, you should notify the sender and delete this message immediately. Reading, printing, saving, or forwarding of this message for any reason is prohibited.
What bugs me about this message is a couple of things. First of all, it's always at the END of the message, and if the "end user" has bothered scrolling down to that point and reads the warning, chances are he's ALREADY read the message, so the warning not to read the message is nonsense!
Second, and more importantly, these messages tick me off because of the semi-legal language used in them. Words in them like "hereby" and "prohibited" sound a lot like contract language, and they can lead a reader to the conclusion that if they read the email or forward it to someone that they are somehow going to be sued. Some even state that the notice is legally binding under federal contract law.
But understand this, all you who put this message at the end of your emails: You and I are not parties to a contract unless we BOTH agree to the terms of that contract. In the same way that you couldn't create a contract giving yourself a two million dollar salary, sign it, and take it to your employer and demand to be paid the money, you also cannot dictate to me how I am to use an email that you've already sent me and that I never agreed to receive under your terms. Your little legal sounding language means NOTHING. If you're the Coca-Cola Company and you accidentally email me the secret formula to Coca-Cola, I can email that formula to the entire world if I want, no matter what you've put at the bottom of your email.
And no, I'm not a lawyer, so don't take my word for it regarding this. Take the words of this person and this person and especially this person.
So quit trying to scare me with your stupid little autosignature.
1 comment:
Darn and I thought I was "this person" But as that un-named "this person" I thought I would add the Jack Miller definition.
At common law, a contract requires three elements:
1. A meeting of the minds (also known as consensus ad idem or an offer coupled with an acceptance) on fundamental or substantial terms;
2. In common law jurisdictions, that elusive concept of consideration (something must flow from each party); and
3. Compliance with common law or statute law such as the subject matter of the contract must not be illegal and the parties must “competent to contract” (corporations or adults but not the mentally disabled).
Post a Comment