Re: Confidentiality notices on email messages

Martin Rex <mrex@sap.com> Wed, 13 July 2011 22:51 UTC

Return-Path: <mrex@sap.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EA9C21F8BB0 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 15:51:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.878
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.878 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.371, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RodlcusTP0om for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 15:51:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpde01.sap-ag.de (smtpde01.sap-ag.de [155.56.68.170]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E29F421F8BA7 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 15:51:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sap.corp by smtpde01.sap-ag.de (26) with ESMTP id p6DMp9Yl028237 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 14 Jul 2011 00:51:09 +0200 (MEST)
From: Martin Rex <mrex@sap.com>
Message-Id: <201107132251.p6DMp8gK023481@fs4113.wdf.sap.corp>
Subject: Re: Confidentiality notices on email messages
To: randy@qualcomm.com
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 00:51:08 +0200
In-Reply-To: <p0624064fca428419c7be@loud.pensive.org> from "Randall Gellens" at Jul 12, 11 04:12:12 pm
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-SAP: out
Cc: barryleiba@computer.org, ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: mrex@sap.com
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 22:51:14 -0000

Randall Gellens wrote:
> 
> I'm not a lawyer and I don't play one on TV or the net, so I likely 
> don't understand the situation.  As a point of possibly interesting 
> information, once upon a time, at a training session held by a lawyer 
> regarding how to protect confidential information, we were admonished 
> not to slap a "confidential" label on anything automatically or 
> without consideration, because, we were warned, doing so can cause 
> the label to lose meaning for everything.  In other words, if we 
> labelled everything "confidential," then we were really saying 
> nothing was confidential.

Congratulation for having met a lawyer with a clue in law.
This assessment is definitely valid for Germany.


> 
> Ever since, I've wondered if these notices were set up by someone who 
> is a lawyer and does understand the situation, or if they were set up 
> by someone who saw others do it, or heard that this sort of thing was 
> needed.

These notices are often suggested by real lawyers.

But it is hard to determine whether they are from the simple
clueless type, or whether they know that this notice is bogus, but
also know that there are many clueless folks, clueless other lawyers
and clueless judges out there that will fall for it, therefore
providing some small value in probabilistic terms. 


-Martin