Perhaps in some jurisdictions it would later make it easier to take civil legal action against you?

Civil action for what, though? If someone voluntarily sends me information with my having any foreknowledge of receiving it, not asking for it, anything - completely unsolicited information -- I'm not certain they can therefore have the legal authority to tell me I can't use that information any way I feel.

I find it creepy and disturbing to think that I can be forced to be given information that I must keep secret.

krellin, I think it's more of a "covering ones ass" type thing. When dealing with personal health information, a lot of the Docs where I work have a very similar line in every email they send. I think it may be required by HIPAA that they have that line.

I've never seen it on spam though, so I don't know whats up with that.

Spam or messages sent in error? Clearly it will depend heavily on jurisdictions but where i am from, even if the message was sent in error you are still not free to disseminate wildly. That notice is an acknowledged step in legal recovery. Skip it and everything else becomes harder.

Basically its supposed to be for in case someone accidentally emails someone they shouldn't have. Example I stupidly send technical data or your personal data via email and cc my univeristy alumni group who is not authorized to know you have herpes. The recipients are not the intended recipients so they are obligated (by what I don't know) to delete it without reading it.

@YJ - but presumably if a doc is sending you confidential info, it's because you have met with the doc, etc.

This was an email from a recruiter trying to recruit me to hire me in to his company - totally unsolicited, other than he has my email from prior contact when he was actually at a different company. I wouldn't ever widely disseminate his info or whatever, but the notion that I legally could be prevented, to me, is ludicrous.

My understanding, since my company has one of them, is that it takes the blame of confidential information getting out off the company. It's basically saying, well even if one of our employees did send this info they were not representing us when they did so, so go talk to that specific person.

Basically it's retarded lawyer crap because some dumb judge somewhere ruled that words like that can protect a company.

@jmo - well I guess that makes sense, sort of...not really.

I just hate lawyers. I hate them to death. I hate them more than I'd like to literally poop on Putin's head. (and I do...)

MY kid is in marching band, and we are told their marching band competition show is copyrighted, so I can't video tape MY OWN DAUGHTER and put it on Facebook or I can be sued. I paid f*ing $1250 for my kid to be in marching band, and these (fucktards) delightful people tell me I can't video tape her. Good lord...

*I* didn't sign anything when she signed up agreeing to any such B.S., by the way...it just get's thrown in your face as a vague threat after the fact...

That's idiotic. Their concern has to be filming the other kids w/o permission, but still, that's just stupid since the point of those extra curricular activities is supposed to be for the kids and family.

Nope....the band apparently spends like $10,000 or something to purchase the services of the dude that puts together their show, and he copyrights the show.

For the record, this isn't the band spelling out the schools letters AHS (Ajax High School or whatever) at half time. These are very serious, complex competition shows and we have an very highly rated band....but still, *I* paid for that f*ing copyright...shouldn't I own a piece of it?

Does the school try and get you to buy a CD/DVD of the events?

lol....the school? Hell no...we have to go the Bands of America or whatever it is called, who charge us an *insanely* high price *per view* of the band (overhead camera or facing camera) *per event*....but of course they only film a couple events per year.

Now mind you, I can film them and keep it secret and not show anyone, but if it goes on Facebook or whatever, the lawsuits cometh.

The irony, of course, is that The Ohio State University marching band puts there show on line every week...(and, byu theway, the OSU marching band is *freaking awesome*....and as a Michigander I freaking *despise* Ohio State...)

Oh How I Hate Ohio State

" I just hate lawyers. I hate them to death."

Oh if only that were possible (hating them to death) The world would be a better place

@krellin,

"This was an email from a recruiter trying to recruit me to hire me in to his company - totally unsolicited, other than he has my email from prior contact when he was actually at a different company. I wouldn't ever widely disseminate his info or whatever, but the notion that I legally could be prevented, to me, is ludicrous."

You're misinterpreting here. The message isn't telling YOU you can't read or distribute. It's telling somebody who isn't you who accidentally gets the message that they can't do so.

"I just hate lawyers. I hate them to death. I hate them more than I'd like to literally poop on Putin's head. (and I do...)"

Hate them if you wish, but it's not fair to hate *them* for the marching band thing. They just tell people their options and help them accomplish what they want to do. You can't film your daughter's marching band because the rights-holders -- the school in this case -- won't let you. Hate them, or hate the legislature that passed the stupid copyright law that lets them. The lawyers are just the messengers.

@semck - Oh, I understand. That's all a very rational explanation, etc.

I'm not sure how old you are, but in the short span of my life time we have become a society that has to have disclaimers on everything, and every time to play a record you wonder if someone is going to sue you for improper use.

Trust me, it's the lawyers that are in large part making this an unpleasant society at times.

And actually you are wrong - it isnt' the school preventing us from doing anything, it's the lawyers behind the guy that sells them the show. Yes, I know, the band choose to go with him yadda yadda yadda....there was a day an age when somebody sold his labor to the school and they owned it and could do with it as they pleased. And then the lawyers came along and whispered in the ears of these guys and said "copyright that....sue the pants of the school if they even dare film it and post it on the web..." and suddenly....here we are.

The notion that somebody out there is just dying to watch my kid's high school marching band and steal their act for profit is just ridiculous. the guy writing the show isn't suffering....but the 178 parents that paid through the nose so their kid could be in marching band, who are then threatened with a lawsuit if they dare film the show - the parents who sacrifice and scrape and save so their kids can do these things, they suffer. and more to the point, the kids who work theis *asses* off to do these things, who want to post the show on the internet so their family across the country can watch what they worked so hard to do, *they* suffer.

Crap, we even get the whole threatening "You can't film this" warning before the stinking high school football games -- can't film the football game because somebody somewhere now "owns" high school athletics!!!

Sorry...that's just out of control lawyers.

"And actually you are wrong - it isnt' the school preventing us from doing anything, it's the lawyers behind the guy that sells them the show. "

No, it's the guy behind the show.

Tell me this. If you were a principal, and your lawyers came to you and said, "Let's put this thing in about how nobody can film the football game," would you say yes? If so, then you're the idiot and it's your fault. If no, then it wouldn't go in the program.

"I'm not sure how old you are, but in the short span of my life time we have become a society that has to have disclaimers on everything, and every time to play a record you wonder if someone is going to sue you for improper use."

Yes, it sucks. It has ruined a lot of good things.

"Trust me, it's the lawyers that are in large part making this an unpleasant society at times. "

Not really. It's the people who decide to sue. If anything, we need more lawyers -- if they couldn't charge as much, then lawsuits wouldn't be so prohibitively expensive, and people would be more inclined to fight and win instead of settle and shut down everything fun.

semck - you must be under the delusion that this is some local decision by the *principle*. It's not - it's ubiquitous through high school sports and performance competitions.

As for who decides to sue, etc...sorry, again, you can say it's the people's fault...year ago it wasn't this way. It's the fact that this country is dirty rotten crawling with lawyers whispering in everybody's ear. Sure....I get it, I really do, if people didn't decide to sue, there wouldn't be lawsuits. and if there weren't lawyers out there telling everybody they found a way they can sue everybody and their brother and begging people to file lawsuits, nobody would be looking for a lawyer.

I understand, krellin. Blaming lawyers is easy and popular, and not holding people like plaintiffs and juries responsible for their own actions comes natural to a libtard like you.

So what's the prevailing opinion here on National Security Letters? You know, the ones issues by the US Government that contain a gag order preventing from ever telling they were sent, AND excluding the right to appeal.

They sure as hell creep me out.

I guess nobody is allowed to talk on the topic.

I've never seen one of those... Who do they get sent to?