1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Conditions in Spam

Discussion in 'The Lounge' started by PhotoEcosse, Nov 2, 2016.

  1. PhotoEcosse

    PhotoEcosse Well-Known Member

    Daily I receive many totally unsolicited junk spam e-mails, some of which attempt to impose conditions upon me as the unwilling recipient.

    An example is the following condition and disclaimer contained on a piece of spam I received from the publishers of AP this afternoon:

    "The contents and any attachments to it include information that is private and confidential and should only be read by those persons to whom they are addressed. Time Inc. (UK) Ltd accepts no liability for any loss or damage suffered by any person arising form (sic) the use of this e-mail."

    Can the purveyors of spam really impose conditions of confidentiality upon recipients or, not having asked them to send me junk mail, am I entitled to tell them to shove their conditions up their fat corporate arses and to share their "private and confidential" garbage with whomsoever I wish?
     
  2. Malcolm_Stewart

    Malcolm_Stewart Well-Known Member

    I'm sure others will be far better informed than me, but as a regular user of this board, I've never seen anything like your example. My ISP (was waitrose.com, now it's John Lewis, but without changing my details) does appear to filter out rubbish, whilst letting through what I want. Very occasionally, my email server lets me know there's some lawyer/accountant at the other side of the world offering me cash beyond my wildest dreams... Very tempting when I'd like a shiny new EOS 5D Mk IV!
     
  3. Fishboy

    Fishboy Well-Known Member

    Just think though, if there is any legal basis in forbidding you to disclose the contents of the e-mail to third parties then you've just left yourself liable to prosecution!

    Cheers, Jeff
     
    Roger Hicks likes this.
  4. RogerMac

    RogerMac Well-Known Member

    It is quite possible that they can, under copyright law, prevent you sending copies to others. Copyright is very flexible and and there was a case quite a long time ago when a parts manufacture was convicted of copying the blueprints of an exhaust system - which he had never seen.

    Anyway it is always a good idea to keep out of the way of anyone with deep pockets and access to expensive lawyers as there is no doubt that judgments always seem to go to the richest litigants.
     
    steveandthedogs likes this.
  5. RogerMac

    RogerMac Well-Known Member

    Malcolm

    I have just got back from Switzerland and the Dixons in terminal 2 at Heathrow is selling 6Ds at £400 less than the best price I have seen in the UK. I did not check the prices on the 5D series but it might be worth while taking a short beak.
     
  6. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    That principle didn't quite have the planned effect for McDonalds between 1997 and 2005 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McLibel_case ) What's more, the Labour government caught a shower of sh*t from the fallout. :D
     
  7. PhotoEcosse

    PhotoEcosse Well-Known Member

    That sounds incredibly efficient, Malcolm.

    My own spam filter in Thunderbird on my PC filters out about (on average) 40 of the 60 or so e-mails I receive each day. But the 60 have all got past whatever my ISP (1&1 Internet) has in place. Of the 20 that do survive, most are from "genuine" senders with whom I might willfully correspond, but probably only half a dozen are of immediate interest or importance. I can't really "blacklist" Time Inc - just in case they try to send me an e-mail telling me I have won a prize in APOY!

    :rolleyes:
     
  8. Roger Hicks

    Roger Hicks Well-Known Member

    Read it again. This cannot and does not impose confidentiality, or even attempt to do so: "should" is the magic word. There's nothing they can do if you ignore it. All they're saying is that if you share it, they accept no responsibility. Seems reasonable.

    Cheers,

    R.
     
  9. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    It's a fairly standard corporate email thingy designed to make anyone who receives what should be a genuinely confidential email know that they shouldn't feel they can profit from any info inside it. I know there have been cases around it.

    Why they include it in marketing emails I really don't know; I assume it's because nobody's thought to ask the corporate legal department if they can remove it for such mails.
    I won't call it "spam", Eric, because I suspect you will have inadvertently agreed to receive it at some point, possibly by signing up here.
     
  10. El_Sid

    El_Sid Well-Known Member

    If it's anything like the disclaimers and legal stuff that gets attached to our e-mails at work it's added automatically by the IT department's mail server and it's probably too difficult, time consuming or impossible to filter it to specific accounts or purposes...:rolleyes:
     
  11. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Indeed. But I believe companies should take the time on this sort of email, because as Eric has shown, it damages their public image if they don't.
     
  12. Roger Hicks

    Roger Hicks Well-Known Member

    Dear Nick,

    Does it really? Or do most people simply ignore it?

    Cheers,

    R.
     
  13. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Well speaking purely for myself, it does make me mark the company down somewhat - sending out a publicity email but claiming it's confidential just doesn't show the attention to detail I would like.
     
  14. Roger Hicks

    Roger Hicks Well-Known Member

    Dear Nick,

    Nah... I just regard it as standard IT flim-flam. A lot of people think that if they use certain "legalistic" words, others will imagine that their words have more value than if they simply said, as for example in this case, "Please don't forward this."

    There's also the point that an inequitable contract (which this isn't -- it's not even a contract) will rarely if ever be enforced in English law.

    The disclaimer may be different. The leading case -- I'm afraid I've forgotten the name, but as far I recall it dealt with a parking ticket -- says that the contract cannot be made until the other party has had a chance to read and agree to the terms and conditions. Note "chance": they don't necessarily have to read them, which is what software companies tend to rely on. In other words you can't say, on a note wrapped around a brick, "By picking up this brick you agree that I have the right to throw it through your window." You can however say, "If you throw this brick through someone else's window we accept no responsibility."

    Cheers,

    R.
     
  15. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Yes, I know you're right on the legal points - I got quite a bit of legal briefing in a previous existence all to do with contract law. Can't say I get over worked-up about the issue, but I do think it's counter-productive for the organisation concerned, however mildly.
     
  16. Roger Hicks

    Roger Hicks Well-Known Member

    Dear Nick,

    Sure, but given how widespread it it, ir just disappears into background noise as far as I am concerned.

    Cheers,

    R.
     

Share This Page