It’s a trend I’ve seen become more and more integrated into my business world . . . someone’s signature block contains a long-winded legal disclaimer. Is this truly necessary? I find it annoying, especially when printing an e-mail chain containing 10 of these things. Has anyone on these boards actually had to litigate over an e-mail transmission such that the disclaimer was or could have been useful?
IANA lawyer and I have no idea whether these kinds of disclaimers hold up legally, but IME, a lot of what goes on in the business world is essentially bluffing. In other words, if the person you’re talking to believes it could be legally binding, it might as well be. Plus, if something bad does happen, at least you can say after the fact that you tried.
I think they’re asinine. My employer mandates the use of a disclaimer for their employees, but there’s no way to actually enforce the rules on accidental recipients.
I’m supposed to use one at work but generally don’t. One co-worker sticks extras into his*; so far (a couple of years now) no one appears to have noticed.
*At one point, the extra line offered a small prize (I don’t remember what) to anyone who replied to let him know they’d read it. I believe it currently reads something like “If you’re reading this, you must not have enough to do”.
It’s doubtful they’re legally enforceable in the US.
In order to have a legal contract, both sides must agree to it (and, I believe, some consideration must be part of it in exchange). It would have no more legal force than putting “If you receive this message in error, you must pay the XXX coporation $5000.”
The boilerplate often makes it impossible to do what the email tells you to do. For example, the boilerplate forbids reading the email at all if you are not the intended recipient.* The email asks you to forward it on to the person it is meant for. What do you do?
*(Ignore for the moment the obvious nonsense of the equivalent of a sign saying “Reading this text is punishable by law.”)