Myreader.co.uk  
uk news, chat and community
   home   |   control panel login   |   archive   |  
 
comp
graphics.flash
homebuilt
home-networking
misc
os.linux
peripherals.misc
sys.laptops
sys.mac
sys.palmtops
sys.sun
training
vendors
  
 
date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 20:53:46 +0100,    group: uk.comp.os.linux        back       
Re: Mail notification   
On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 12:25:29 +0100, Ian Rawlings 
wrote in <487b39e7$0$1345$834e42db@reader.greatnowhere.com>:

>Mind you I don't put my company name or personal name in an email
>signature, there was a case in the UK courts some time ago in which it
>was deemed that a statement sent via company email was not
>contractually binding if the sender did not use the company name in
>the email body, including a signature, and that the From: header with
>the company name was not enough to make it contractually binding.
>Putting the company name in a signature was regarded as making the
>email contractually binding.  I prefer to explicitly state what is and
>isn't binding rather than have thunderbird do it for me ;-)

I found an article about a case <http://www.out-law.com/page-6839> which
may be the one you are thinking of. My reading of it is that it is a
personal name that matters, not the company name and it has to have been
put in the message with the intention of giving authenticity as you
would if you were signing a letter. The name in the headers was
considered 'incidental', nothing was said about a name that might have
been added automatically as in the kind of 'signature' we talk about for
email or news postings. We will have to wait for a case where the
question arises to get an answer to that one.

-- 
Owen Rees
[one of] my preferred email address[es] and more stuff can be
found at <http://www.users.waitrose.com/~owenrees/index.html>
date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 20:53:46 +0100   author:   Owen Rees

Re: Mail notification   
On 2008-07-16, Owen Rees  wrote:

> I found an article about a case <http://www.out-law.com/page-6839> which
> may be the one you are thinking of. My reading of it is that it is a
> personal name that matters, not the company name and it has to have been
> put in the message with the intention of giving authenticity as you
> would if you were signing a letter.

That one doesn't ring a bell, and the one I was thinking about did
have some info about the automated signatures.  I think it might have
been on out-law however.  Sorry I can't be arsed to look it up, as I
might well be chasing a memory artifact ;-)

-- 
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!
http://youtube.com/user/tarcus69
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tarcus/sets/
date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 21:55:55 +0100   author:   Ian Rawlings

Google
 
Web myreader.co.uk


    COPYRIGHT 2007, YARDI TECHNOLOGY LIMITED, ALL RIGHT RESERVE  |   contact us