Touro professor "very upset" with John Bear

Now that we're completely off-topic... I really like the Fourbucks Chai Tea Latte. As Mr. Burns would say "Eggggccceellennnt!"

 

LOL -- true!!!!

Bill Cosby was sued by a citizen because Cosby grabbed the citizen's arm and pushed him out of his way so he could leave the building because the citizen was blocking his exit path (or something like that). Due to the technicality of the law, the jury had to find in favor of the citizen. However, they only awarded the citizen one dollar in damages and, consequently, the citizen had to pay his attorney with his own money. Attorneys in my area cost about $250 an hour and that kind of a frivolous lawsuit could easily gobble up 250 hours or more. You do the math and then tell me who won.

In reference to someone being sued for a copyright violation for publicly discussing a personal email (such as was posted in this thread) -- I know of no such civil lawsuits that have been brought forward or litigated. And if such a lawsuit were brought forward to be litigated, it would be tossed out of court as a frivolous lawsuit or, at best, please refer to the aforementioned Bill Cosby case.

 

There has to be a first for everything. Just because something is frivolous doesn't mean it will be automatically dismissed. Defending a lawsuit can be VERY expensive even if you win.

I don't know if publicly posting a private e-mail violates any laws. However, when I send an e-mail to a specific person, I have an expectation of privacy. When I send a paper & pencil letter to someone, I would never expect to see it on a billboard on the highway.

I believe most people have the same reasonable expectation of privacy. Just because correspondance is sent electronically from one person to another doesn't mean it should become public.

 

When corresponding electronically with someone who is not a family member or a business partner, the sender should not send anything that can't be printed on the front page of the newspaper. And if it is disclosed, such as in this particular thread, nothing will happen. Period. Threats of copyright violations and litigation are all hyperbole, for reasons previously discussed. It's a dead issue; it always has been and always will be hot air: and nothing more! A copyright-violation lawsuit for disclosing an email? Nuts! LOL

 

My company posts the following notice with our emails.

This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.

Do you think this would hold up in court if the email was posted to the internet? What law could we be referring to?

 

It would depend on the content of the message. Does the email result in the loss of past, present or future earnings? If the answer is "no," then there is nothing to litigate. Since no malice is involved, trying to litigate for pain and suffering is even more laughable.

For the sake of discussion, let's say that it was included in this particular email: issues arise. Was the sender speaking on behalf of the university? Was the sender simply sharing his own opinion? Is the school the copyright owner of all opinions of the sender, even if the sender was not writing on behalf of the school? Who is liable in this latter case: the sender or the receiver who disclosed the email at DegreeInfo.com? Regardless of these issues, it will not be litigated. I've dealt with lawyers who charge $250 an hour and when litigation is sought, it is because money is available (or was lost and there is an effort to recoup it). I stand by my original assertion that it's asinine to think that this thread could result in litigation over a personal email that was shared here. Anyone who would suggest that litigation could arise is either full of themselves or is blowing hot air or hasn't had any experience in the real world and clearly hasn't learned how to apply academic and legal theory into the real world. It's all hyperbole.

 

Thanks for the insults I'm still curious what law my employer is referring to?

 

Insults? What insults?

 

"I stand by my original assertion that it's asinine to think that this thread could result in litigation over a personal email that was shared here. Anyone who would suggest that litigation could arise is either full of themselves or is blowing hot air or hasn't had any experience in the real world and clearly hasn't learned how to apply academic and legal theory into the real world. It's all hyperbole."

I was not asking about the email posted in this thread. I was asking about an email sent from my employer with the particular verbiage at the bottom of the email. Since my employer states that this is protected by law, I became curious what law they are talking about. If no one knows, fine. No big deal, I'll move on.

Peace.

 

Ah, please accept my apology for the misunderstanding. No harm was intended.

 

Gentlemen:

ludicrous = a word
ludacris = a rapper

 

John,

ROFLMAO - I had no idea you were so hip! You always manage to surprise. Really enjoying this thread for a variety of reasons.

 

Good point. I did a google search (prior to using the word) and it came up in google, so I incorrectly assumed it was the correct spelling. Well, it was indeed the correct spelling for the rap group, but not for the context of my usage.

 

Learning the Google

Actually if you Google "Define: ludacris" you get one (and only one) hit:
Christopher Bridges (born September 11, 1977 in Champaign, Illinois), better known as Ludacris, is an African-American rapper and actor. He eventually moved to Atlanta, where he would go on to make a name for himself as one of the most prominent Dirty South rappers of the new millennium.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludacris

 

If you work in a healthcare setting this could be HIPAA law that they are referring to.

 

Nope, Bank (BIG).

 

From my days as owner of an online service, this is basically my understanding as well. The sender or recipient can legally make an email public without any recourse. Perhaps there are some exceptions if an explicit call for privacy is made within the email - I don't know. Absent that, any copyright the sender has to the email doesn't prevent republishing the email by the receiver. The receiver "owns" the email as much as the sender.

 

me again...

if you work for a BIG bank, it could very well be HIPAA as most banks of regional size or larger have BOLI on creditors - (Bank Owned Life Insurance) - which are, in fact, folded into the HIPAA regs.

I love BOLI and I adore the fact that many organizations and small governments (particularly regarding law enforcement/fire departments) have life insurance on employees *that* the employee has no clue is there and never will. BOLI is the same thing. Clever beasts!

 

Garden snails reproduce by having sex with another sexless (or double sexed depending on view) snail. Both snails then bury their eggs a few centimeters into a little hole dug with their single foot. The eggs are then covered with some dirt, snail foam, and possibly snail excrement. After hatching, the little babies eat their shells and possibly their unhatched siblings to get calcium.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snails#Reproduction

So my question is if the dirt is too hard to dig a hole, where will they lay their eggs?

 

I agree with "bad92lx." No email is truly secure. Once the send button is hit, it's open to almost anyone who has the right technology.