Beware that companies use a legal note in their signature as advised by their lawyers, and many individuals do the same, to inform the reader about laws that apply regardless of where or when you are reading their note.
A mail from Europe is subject to data protection. It does not matter if you disagree. R On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 00:01, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net> wrote: > bullshit any disclaimer at the end of the message you already read is useless > to start with - and send a message to the public with a disclaimer you can > only read after the other content you already have read is nothing but > idiotic as well as using accounts which add such disclaimers for mailing > lists period Am 20.02.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Rupert Gallagher: > The matter is > controversial. Lists have own defaults, who often > abuse their original aim > of mere forwarding, especially when they > redistribute from a long-term > archive. On the other hand, people have > own default banners for all > outgoing correspondence, some with explicit > reference to the applicable law > and company policy. Sparks happen when > they meet. A list's standpoint may > be: if you do not want to be > archived, then do not post. A person's > standpoint may be > that a mailing list standing as official publication is > ludicrous, > while individuals have a well established human right to freedom > of > speach. There are so many twists here that only a seasoned lawyer may > > have tell right from wrong. > > On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 14:55, Reindl Harald > > wrote: >> Am 20.02.2018 um 14:02 schrieb Rupert Gallagher: > Do you have >> > the legal right to do so? does the fool with the disclaimer have any >> legal > right to define whatever terms when sending to a public >> mailing-list? > On > Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 00:23, @lbutlr > wrote: >> On >> 2018-02-19 (09:57 MST), > Paul Stead wrote: > ... >> I reject your terms @thelounge.net> > @thelounge.net>
