[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Mail Servers



> On Tue, 19 Mar 2002 14:46, Jason Lim wrote:
> > Mmm... but then, what if you ARE speaking for your company, but don't
want
> > that person to then send it off to their internal mailing list or
> > something like that?
>
> Tough luck.
>
> If a representative of vendor for a project I'm working on sends me an
email
> then I will forward it to my colleagues if it is appropriate.  When at a
> meeting with a vendor I'll read their notes (I'm reasonably good at
reading
> upside down).

Unfortunately that is one skill I have not yet perfected ;-)

> Some of my friends even take hidden tape recorders into meetings.

I thought that, legally, one would have to actually warn the person being
recorded that a recording was taking place. I know that when I phone a
number of large companies, they say specifically "this call is being
monitored for quality assurance purposes" or "for training purposes" or
something. I don't think it is legal for them to secretly record messages.
But again, if it isn't done for malicious purposes... well... hum... its
still debatable ;-)

>
> These things only become an issue when you have a rival consulting
company on
> site and they get a copy of the info.  But the usual laws and contracts
about
> non-disclosure are good enough to deal with such situations.  A sig line
> really won't help.
>

But laws regarding email are still pretty shady at the moment... i
would've thought a short statement like "This message is private and
confidential" would at least help to clarify and make obvious the fact
that you don't want people giving this information out to third parties
(make that competitors and such), and allow a company to "more easily"
enact any applicable non-disclosure laws.

We certainly wouldn't want a client to sending the details of our private
deal with them to a competitor or other clients. Imagine what would happen
then! "Hey, you gave him 2U more space than us for the same price!" hehe



Reply to: