Alex Sayle alexs at alphacomplex.info
Wed Aug 16 23:19:58 BST 2006

On 16 Aug 2006, at 21:57BDT, Dominic Mitchell wrote:

> Roger Burton West wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 05:36:29PM +0100, Peter Corlett wrote:
>>> Is this the new way to make those tedious and unenforcable  
>>> "disclaimers" even more annoying?
>> I believe there's already been at least one case in which the  
>> disclaimer
>> was held to be invalid _precisely because_ it was blindly attached to
>> every bit of mail without human intervention.
> I seem to recall that the disclaimers aren't necessarily there for  
> any legal purpose so much as being a requirement of the business  
> insurance...  Ah yes, this was it.
>   http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/04/08/BottomHeavy

can't we all just get over it and be a bit honest about it all and have

"If you dare try and abuse me I'll let my attack lawyers loose all over
  your sorry arse"


"bite me and I will bite back"

In all honesty disclaimers attached at the bottom of the email
which you are not forced to read and agree before reading the content
seems like an very inefficient manner to enforce a contract...

  I here by state that your soul belongs to the sender of this email
  and by reading the any of the above text you adhere to the transaction
  of your soul to the sender of this email and will forfeit any claims
  against your soul or any other individual's soul.
  Alex Sayle                                     alexs at alphacomplex.info

More information about the london.pm mailing list