Re: sprank

[Ulrich Staudinger]

Hi, 

I think the footer has a lot place in an open world. Just compare it with the GPL, which explicitly forbids distribution open source software without including THE open source disclaimer: the GPL !

The displaimer states: 
" You are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, dissemination, 
distribution or forwarding of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly 
prohibited." 

Ok, so he has sent it to a mailing list where he knew that his email is going to reach several hundred people. This particular aspect is not forbidden by the disclaimer, as the email has reached the intended participiants: the public. Nonetheless, no one is allowed to forward the email to, say, a hacker group to attack Rafael. Well, that isn't necessary, the email is public anway. However, the taking of action is forbidden. By the term action, we understand legal action or some action with serious effort - something that makes a court case a doable thing - we don't speak about action that cost you nothing and me nothing. Do someone want to sue someone or want to make a development project that costs 100k out of such an email or why do you react like this ? Please explain, I cannot understand these thoughts. 


Best regards, 
Ulrich

On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Mic Miller <address@hidden> wrote:

Quite the contrary.  That footer has no place in an open source world.  We are free to ignore it only at the pleasure of the corporate lawyers on the other end of the email.

 

As JWE pointed out there are other, unencumbered email services available at no cost that would fit better on public mailing lists.

 

I appreciate the discussion…even though it is off the subject of the list.

 

Mic Miller

 

---

From: Ulrich Staudinger [mailto:address@hidden]
Sent: Sunday, April 11, 2010 4:58 AM
To: address@hidden
Subject: Re: sprank

 

Guys (and especially Judd), what's your problem ... Just accept the footer and continue with business as usual. Giving advice is for sure not ment by "taking action".
If you don't like it, ignore it and don't take action or whatever, but please don't start a political discussion.

We are in a free world.

On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 11:03 PM, Judd Storrs <address@hidden> wrote:

On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 4:41 PM, David Bateman <address@hidden> wrote:
> be respected. The language in this boilerplate seems to be a cut and paste
> from a standard template NDA, and dissemination would mean to someone else
> than those that already had access to the information.

It's not the dissemination part I had a question about, the message
was addressed to the list so no problem there. The part that confused
me was:

>> You are hereby notified that ... the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited

The plain meaning of those words seems ridiculous in any context--i.e.
"don't do anything related to this message", so in my mind it must
have some sort legal meaning different than the plain English meanings
of the words when placed in that order. It could have been some sort
of bizarre Mossad entrapment scheme for all I know. I wanted that part
clarified, that's all. Personally, I don't care that he's leaking
system configuration information about computers installed at a
defense contractor--that's his problem not mine. If he hadn't
plastered his company name all over the place no-one would be the
wiser.


--judd

_______________________________________________
Help-octave mailing list
address@hidden
https://www-old.cae.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/help-octave

--
Kind regards,
Ulrich B. Staudinger

_______________________________________________
Help-octave mailing list
address@hidden
https://www-old.cae.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/help-octave

-- 
Kind regards, 
Ulrich B. Staudinger