E-Mail Signature Disclaimer

[DaveMurphy]

Hi All.

 

Currently setting up our new email and just wondering what to put for Disclaimers at the bottom, at the moment ive got (below) what can or could I put to make it more interesting? what do you have?

 

Also on another subject but in the same area as copyright, an email discussion accidentally got forwarded to a parent by a member of staff which was talking about another school, the parent then forwarded it to the school and then the riots started, their chair of govs then started to question me and create problems for us, if it's been circulated without permission which then caused issues is there anything that, as i quote 'our crap unknowledgeable department' can do about it? Just want to stick up for this member of staff, as the saying goes, ill scratch your back if you scratch mine.

 

 

 

Any better signatures than this one?

--

Dave Murphy

IT Technician

 

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be illegal.

[mb2k01]

We use:

 

*** Disclaimer ***

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the recipient named above.

If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and might not represent those of abc School.

Warning: Although abc School has taken reasonable precautions to ensure no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage arising from the use of this email or attachments.

[john]

I use the following as an auto disclaimer on mail systems I've setup:

 

----------

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you must take no action based on them, nor must you copy or show them to anyone; please forward to [email protected] and highlight the error

----------

Every effort has been made to ensure that this message (and any attachment) does not contain a virus or Trojan Horse, but you are advised to virus check any attachment before opening it. The Staff and Governors of Your School cannot accept any liability for damage as a result of a virus being passed on, or arising from alteration of the contents of this message by a third party.

----------

Your School is a registered Charity No: 1234567890

----------

Registered Office: Your School, Your Street, Your Town, Postcode

Tel: Your Tel | Fax: Your Fax

----------

 

I also ensure that people are told that, as its LEA Policy from our guidebooks from them, that all E-mails should state the name and postion within the School, thus should have something like this:

 

Your Name BSC, MA, NPHQ, EDUGOD

Your Position

Your Direct Contact Details

[localzuk]

This site may provide some guidance on email disclaimers and their worth: Legal Position of email disclaimers: Internet Law

[srochford]

Unless you're really being pressured by management to add a disclaimer, please don't do it!

 

They have pretty much no value in law and just upset anyone with a modicum of common sense :-)

[GrumbleDook]

And if you are going to stick something at the bottom it should be your .sig ...

- followed by - and then a space and then carriage return

Then 4 lines of text no more the 80 characters (fixed width) wide.

 

Outlook is not the only client out there!

 

And for the non-pedants ... I get bored of receiving emails that have more in the disclaimer than in the email. A one line response comes in at 82 lines from one LA! C'mon ... seriously now!

[Nick_Parker]

We have this whole long who-ha written in size 8 font in gray at the bottom of any external emails - I personally don't like it, but management even went so far as to have it written up by one of the lawyer parents:

 

________________________________________

Our electronic mail system is intended only for communications by and to the employees, academic staff and trustees or directors of Dainfern College, and then on College business only. This e-mail and the information in it is confidential, protected by law and may be legally privileged. Other communications on this system are not authorised by the College. If you are not the intended recipient hereof please notify the sender/forwarder immediately, delete the same and do not disclose the contents to any other person nor peruse, store, copy or distribute the same. The views and opinions expressed in this e-mail are not necessarily those of Dainfern College. NOTE: Dainfern College disavows liability for any loss, liability, damage or expense which may result from this e-mail being transmitted and/or received by any person, and whether such loss, liability, damage or expense arises by reason of neglect by or on behalf of Dainfern College or otherwise.

[pete]

If you're not putting the disclaimer at the start of the message ("before "hello Fred"), there's no point. You can't ask someone accept a confidentiality notice after you've told them something - they have no compelling reason to agree. There's also the argument that a "confidential" notice automatically added to every outgoing email (Including "Do you fancy fish and chips?"-type mails) dilutes any minimal weight it may have.

 

Maybe teach your employees not to be tards when forwarding emails around? "Don't say anything in email you wouldn't be happy saying in court".

 

http://www.out-law.com/page-5536

Edited October 8, 2009 by pete

[localzuk]

@scrochford and pete - that is not really true, as the site I linked to says. If your email declares that the information within it is confidential, then it is confidential - and breaching that would have some form of weight in court. It isn't 'binding', but it has weight, which is the reason why disclaimers are used.

[OutToLunch]

@scrochford and pete - that is not really true, as the site I linked to says. If your email declares that the information within it is confidential, then it is confidential - and breaching that would have some form of weight in court. It isn't 'binding', but it has weight, which is the reason why disclaimers are used.

 

Nice link you had. I'm still often tempted to change our disclaimer to random things each week and see if anyone notices...

 

"Warning, this disclaimer is not worth the space it is written in. Please do not run with scissors. School cannot accept any responsibility if after reading this email you fall off a ladder."

[pete]

@scrochford and pete - that is not really true, as the site I linked to says. If your email declares that the information within it is confidential, then it is confidential - and breaching that would have some form of weight in court. It isn't 'binding', but it has weight, which is the reason why disclaimers are used.

 

The weight is determined by the court and they are free to ignore it. When was the last time you read an email disclaimer?

 

If $company_employee emails $customer and calls them a complete nobber, having a disclaimer tacked onto the end by the mailserver won't help them. A reasonable person would argue that the employee should have received instruction that such is never acceptable and the company is liable for the actions of it's agents.

 

Overuse of disclaimers dilutes any effectiveness.

 

If my mailserver attaches a disclaimer to each and every email I send, few people will read it. The more I correspond with this person, the less likely they are to read the disclaimer (for changes or references to hippos).

 

If, however, I normally sign off with:

 

--

My Name

Schoolname | Contact Phone + Extension

 

But occasionally (when appropriate - i.e Serious Business) I do use a Big Obvious Disclaimer that says:

 

"Confidential, please do not disclose" (or whatever)

 

The very fact that my use is selective and appropriate means the recipient is more likely to notice it, and it could be argued in court that they should have noticed it, since it's out of tune with my usual correspondance.

[localzuk]

The weight is determined by the court and they are free to ignore it. When was the last time you read an email disclaimer?

 

If $company_employee emails $customer and calls them a complete nobber, having a disclaimer tacked onto the end by the mailserver won't help them. A reasonable person would argue that the employee should have received instruction that such is never acceptable and the company is liable for the actions of it's agents.

 

Overuse of disclaimers dilutes any effectiveness.

 

If my mailserver attaches a disclaimer to each and every email I send, few people will read it. The more I correspond with this person, the less likely they are to read the disclaimer (for changes or references to hippos).

 

If, however, I normally sign off with:

 

--

My Name

Schoolname | Contact Phone + Extension

 

But occasionally (when appropriate - i.e Serious Business) I do use a Big Obvious Disclaimer that says:

 

"Confidential, please do not disclose" (or whatever)

 

The very fact that my use is selective and appropriate means the recipient is more likely to notice it, and it could be argued in court that they should have noticed it, since it's out of tune with my usual correspondance.

 

Remember, civil court has a much lower standard required for a ruling against you. If someone had a 'the information in this email is confidential' message, that reaffirms the normal expectation that information sent between people is confidential (which, if you look at law regarding opening someone else's mail (without reasonable excuse, even if misdelivered), you will find is a criminal offense). The same law could be presented as support in a civil case due to the intent of the law (it wouldn't be used in a criminal case though).

 

Publishing, or similar, an email which you got in error is breaching that person's copyright. Copyright requires an explicit license. If an email contains a line stating that if the email is received in error it must be deleted, then doing anything else with it is a breach of copyright.

[GrumbleDook]

Apart from the fact that email is an open text carrier and can be intercepted at multiple times and multiple way. Civil court rulings are commonly found only to rule where there is malicious intent, it has been done for personal and financial gain or to support cases of slander / libel.

 

The most common usage of email disclaimers is to support internal disciplinary matters as another way of hammering staff that send stuff to people they shouldn't. If you send an email to someone outside your establishment with details that you shouldn't have then it is *you* the disclaimers tend to be aimed at ... and add to the disciplinary!

 

Disclaimers are another part of blame management and should be covered by your contract and the AUP anyway.

[pete]

If someone had a 'the information in this email is confidential' message, that reaffirms the normal expectation that information sent between people is confidential (which, if you look at law regarding opening someone else's mail (without reasonable excuse, even if misdelivered), you will find is a criminal offense). The same law could be presented as support in a civil case due to the intent of the law (it wouldn't be used in a criminal case though).

 

Publishing, or similar, an email which you got in error is breaching that person's copyright. Copyright requires an explicit license. If an email contains a line stating that if the email is received in error it must be deleted, then doing anything else with it is a breach of copyright.

 

1) You're basing your argument on the assumption that people actually read email disclaimers - most don't. If a reasonable person is unlikely to read a disclaimer, "but we had a disclaimer" won't stand up against a decent solicitor.

 

2) It's significantly harder to open someone else's physical postal mail than it is to open a misdelivered email. It's reasonable for me to assume that anything sent to my email account is intended for me, unless it's explicitly clear that it's not. Even were the information obviously highly confidential, there are still cases (evidence of criminal activity, whistleblowing, breach of regulation) where I would be justified in acting upon and passing that information on to the relevant authorities.

 

3) How copyrightable an email is is open to debate:

 

"Not every letter or email will enjoy copyright protection, which is reserved for works which involve original skill or labour and which do not involve copying the work of another person. Originality in this context does not require the work to be an original or inventive thought; it only requires originality in the execution or expression of the thought. However, where existing subject matter is used by an author, independent skill must be applied to justify copyright protection for a resulting work."

 

"If nothing else, even if it is established that a particular business email qualifies for copyright protection, it may be difficult or impossible to quantify any financial loss, meaning that somebody could sue, win a finding of copyright infringement and receive zero damages."

 

From here, regarding the UK High Court ruling: Forwarding an email can infringe copyright | Pinsent Masons LLP

 

But I think we've skewed the OPs thread enough.

[enjay]

1) You're basing your argument on the assumption that people actually read email disclaimers - most don't. If a reasonable person is unlikely to read a disclaimer, "but we had a disclaimer" won't stand up against a decent solicitor.

 

Piffle, surely! The fact that someone hasn't read something doesn't mean it isn't true and applicable. I've not read every law of this country - and to be honest have only got other people's word for it that murder is wrong, for example - but if I killed someone, I wouldn't go to court relying on "I didn't read the statutes, therefore they don't apply". Ignorance is no excuse, and ignorance of the law doesn't negate the law's relevance.

[GrumbleDook]

Ignorance is not a defence in criminal courts but can be considered a mitigating factor.

Ignorance *can* be a defence in the civil courts.

 

That is one of the largest differences between criminal and civil law.

[pete]

Piffle, surely! The fact that someone hasn't read something doesn't mean it isn't true and applicable. I've not read every law of this country - and to be honest have only got other people's word for it that murder is wrong, for example - but if I killed someone, I wouldn't go to court relying on "I didn't read the statutes, therefore they don't apply". Ignorance is no excuse, and ignorance of the law doesn't negate the law's relevance.

 

Leaving aside the hyperbole.... Email disclaimers aren't legally binding - they only _may_ have a small influence on a court decision. You're right that a person of adult age should keep abreast of the major laws that affect them, since they will be held accountable to them.

 

But they should not have to ensure they comply with the random whim of every private company or individual who chooses to email them. Using the "reasonable person" test, which is often used in law......

 

• Murder - most reasonable people would agree it was wrong.
  
• Not reading an explicit request for confidentiality in an email - not quite as black and white here, but could be argued the person should have understood the intent of the sender.
  
• Not reading all/any of the 50+ email disclaimers that turn up in my inbox that are applied automatically without conscious decision from the sender - would you convict that person?
  

 

It's unreasonable to send a disclaimer attached to every mail and expect the recipient to treat it seriously and give it due consideration if it gets slapped equally on "do you fancy a pint?" and actually confidential emails. It dilutes any effectiveness and just screws up the signal-to-noise ratio.

 

(We'll leave aside the whole "If you stand up in court and try to claim confidentiality when emailling over a plain-text medium on a public internet which could be intercepted and read at any point between the sender and the recipient's computer, you deserve to be laughed at".)

[localzuk]

1) You're basing your argument on the assumption that people actually read email disclaimers - most don't. If a reasonable person is unlikely to read a disclaimer, "but we had a disclaimer" won't stand up against a decent solicitor.

 

What? Just because people don't read them doesn't remove their worth. I don't read EULAs, doesn't mean I'm not bound by them. It is the recipients decision to not read something. The point is, if something is sent to you, and you consider doing something with it other than the intended purpose (with the normal 'intended purpose' being your reading it and that's it), without explicit permission, and in emails with dislclaimers' case, with explicit permission refused, then that is not a defence.

 

 

2) It's significantly harder to open someone else's physical postal mail than it is to open a misdelivered email. It's reasonable for me to assume that anything sent to my email account is intended for me, unless it's explicitly clear that it's not. Even were the information obviously highly confidential, there are still cases (evidence of criminal activity, whistleblowing, breach of regulation) where I would be justified in acting upon and passing that information on to the relevant authorities.

 

So an email, starting with 'Hi Jim' when your name is Fred, is difficult to understand that it wasn't intended for you? It is *very* easy to find out an email is not intended for you. Just like seeing the wrong name on a postal letter.

 

3) How copyrightable an email is is open to debate:

 

"Not every letter or email will enjoy copyright protection, which is reserved for works which involve original skill or labour and which do not involve copying the work of another person. Originality in this context does not require the work to be an original or inventive thought; it only requires originality in the execution or expression of the thought. However, where existing subject matter is used by an author, independent skill must be applied to justify copyright protection for a resulting work."

 

"If nothing else, even if it is established that a particular business email qualifies for copyright protection, it may be difficult or impossible to quantify any financial loss, meaning that somebody could sue, win a finding of copyright infringement and receive zero damages."

 

From here, regarding the UK High Court ruling: Forwarding an email can infringe copyright | Pinsent Masons LLP

 

But I think we've skewed the OPs thread enough.

 

Didn't say anything about being rewarded damages - I simply said it would be infringement.

[PiqueABoo]

What? Just because people don't read them doesn't remove their worth.

 

But we do NOT know whether they are worth anything because there is, AFAIK, no case law to guide us, just a bunch of untested if/but/maybes from lawyers.

 

That this is true when people have been appending these things to the bottom of e-mails for over a decade suggests to me that they are mostly useless i.e. if they were useful then surely we'd have that case law by now.

 

[businesses are obliged to put their company reg info on mails though]

Edited October 8, 2009 by PiqueABoo

[pete]

What? Just because people don't read them doesn't remove their worth. I don't read EULAs, doesn't mean I'm not bound by them. It is the recipients decision to not read something. The point is, if something is sent to you, and you consider doing something with it other than the intended purpose (with the normal 'intended purpose' being your reading it and that's it), without explicit permission, and in emails with dislclaimers' case, with explicit permission refused, then that is not a defence.

 

They have no worth because people attribute no worth to them. All the legal arguments attributing "x" amount of weight to disclaimers are clinging onto "maybes" and might-bes. If you are sending information to someone that is confidential, then you the sender have an equal (if not greater, since you have the vested interest) duty to ensure said confidentiality is protected. You should be making clear to the recipient that need for confidentiality in a way they can't ignore. That's why NDAs and encryption are used:

 

"Your Honour, my client did indeed email the details of an upcoming feature-list on $product all over the place, but he protected it through the cunning use of an email disclaimer and was most surprised when it got ripped off by various elbonian manufacturers."

 

Re: EULAs - they're up-front and obvious because it confronts you before you're able to use the product or service. Email disclaimers are traditionally tacked onto the end - you've already read the email by then. If the disclaimer was at the start, it might have some weight.

 

So an email, starting with 'Hi Jim' when your name is Fred, is difficult to understand that it wasn't intended for you? It is *very* easy to find out an email is not intended for you. Just like seeing the wrong name on a postal letter.

 

No, but by the time I've registered "Hi Jim" I've already scanned the first paragraph to see if it's junk or not. The name on an envelope gives it away whereas an email turns up in your inbox and you have to open it before you know it wasn't for you.

 

Didn't say anything about being rewarded damages - I simply said it would be infringement.

 

I meant "It _might_ be infringement, but you'd have to prove it and you'd probably lose". If you were describing your latest robotic beer-fridge design in an email, great. If you were a reseller giving me pricing that you've asked HP for, the chances of being taken seriously are a lot less.

[button_ripple]

Our LEA provide this at the bottom of the office, finance and head's e-mail address:

 

IMPORTANT: ***** Borough Council routinely monitors the content of e-mail sent

and received by its e-mail systems, to ensure compliance with its policies and procedures.

 

E-mails that contain encrypted material, program files, are obscene, inflammatory,

criminal, offensive, in breach of copyright or contain a virus or threat to Council`s

computer systems may be intercepted and/or deleted.

 

Internet communications are not secure.

The Council is not responsible for any changes made to the message after it has

been sent.

 

This message is intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorised copying or

distribution may be unlawful.

 

If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender at

***** Borough Council

Town Hall

Postcode.

Tel.

or by using the reply option to this e-mail.

Then delete this message from your system.

 

Website: http://www.*****.gov.uk

[CyberNerd]

Apologies for the hijack, have a technical question to signatures:

 

It;s dead easy to set a signature/disclaimer for all users, but supposed I want a standardised signature:

 

my name

my position

my department

my school

my lea

my post

my number

 

Also suppose I have this info populated into AD, and also suppose I have an exchange 2007 server.

 

How do I pull the info out of AD and into a custom 'standardised' signature for each user ?

[enjay]

It's unreasonable to send a disclaimer attached to every mail and expect the recipient to treat it seriously and give it due consideration if it gets slapped equally on "do you fancy a pint?" and actually confidential emails. It dilutes any effectiveness and just screws up the signal-to-noise ratio.

 

On that point I will agree with you. I remember receiving an email in response to some complaint I raised, and the email said something like "unfortunately XYZ Ltd cannot accept responsibility yadda yadda" which was then followed by a disclaimer telling me that the views expressed in the email were those of the employee and not the company. I replied asking for the company's view on my complaint :-)

 

The problem is, however, that if you relied on people to add disclaimers to emails where appropriate, they might forgot, or not properly understand which emails needed the disclaimer. In all things, you need to remember to add the human element to the equation.

[enjay]

Businesses are obliged to put their company reg info on mails though

 

Does anyone have any information on if/whether/how far that applies to schools? Since some of us are registered businesses, are we required to be doing this?

[enjay]

Here's an interesting solution to the massive footer on emails - I've just received one which ended with "this email is subject to a disclaimer which can be viewed at [link]".