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

Re: Java in Debian advice result



On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 01:10:33PM +0000, Andrew Saunders wrote:
> On 2/28/07, John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> wrote:
> 
> >to summarize the situation here.  SPI's attorney has asked that his
> >messages not be posted to public mailing lists for reasons of
> >attorney-client privilege.
> 
> Please could you elaborate on whom this secrecy is intended to
> protect, and in what way?
> 
> I thought attorney-client privilege was a mechanism intended to
> protect sensitive information disclosed by the client to the attorney
> (facilitating honest and open communication without the client having
> to worry about information being leaked to enemies, competitors or the
> authorities). Assuming this is the case, it seems a bit strange that
> the request for secrecy should be coming from the *attorney*'s side...
> 
> I could well be talking bollocks here, and I apologise in advance if
> that's the case, but I have to say that that's the inference I got.
> Clarification welcome.
> 
(Standard IANAL lawyer disclaimers apply)

I thought that attorney-client privilege was something invoked (is that
the right word?) by the client.  The attorney can only invoke it if the
information he is being asked to reveal somehow reveals some protected
information of the client.  I would think that since SPI is the client,
they can unilaterally decide to make the information public.

Regards,

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: