Request for corrections
|
|
Thread rating:  |
chabral - 27 Sep 2005 16:08 GMT Hi, I think this question is a bit different from the others in the group. I'm a native spanish speaker trying to write a corporate disclaimer in english. I ask for your advice on any improvements in the quality of the text that follows:
The information contained in this message, including any attachment, is confidential and intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying is prohibited. If you received it in error, please contact the sender and delete this message immediately. This email is for information purpose only, and shall not be regarded as an official statement of [MyCompany]. In addition, since e-mail transmission is not error-free, [MyCompany] does not ensure this information to be complete or accurate.
I thank in advance to anyone who suggests a better to improve its quality. Sincerely,
-- chabral
John of Aix - 27 Sep 2005 17:22 GMT > Hi, > I think this question is a bit different from the others in the > group. I'm a native spanish speaker trying to write a corporate > disclaimer in english. I ask for your advice on any improvements in > the quality of the text that follows:
> delete this message immediately. This email is for information purpose purposes
> I thank in advance to anyone who suggests a better to improve its > quality. "...who has suggestions for improving its quality", most definitelyt not what you have written.
chabral - 27 Sep 2005 17:53 GMT I received a couple of suggestions from a colleague:
Text: If you received it "in" error Replace with: If you received it "by" error
Text: [MyCompany] does not ensure this information "to be" complete or accurate. Replace with: [MyCompany] does not ensure this information "is" completed or accurate.
What do you think?
-- chabral
Ivan - 27 Sep 2005 19:52 GMT > I received a couple of suggestions from a colleague: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > -- > chabral Your colleague's suggestions are incorrect. You had it right the first time.
I would say, "This e-mail is for information only..." (removing the word "purpose").
Ivan - 27 Sep 2005 20:33 GMT > > I received a couple of suggestions from a colleague: > > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > I would say, "This e-mail is for information only..." (removing the > word "purpose"). That's the only change I would make to your paragraph. It sounds fine.
John of Aix - 27 Sep 2005 20:57 GMT > I received a couple of suggestions from a colleague: > > Text: If you received it "in" error > Replace with: If you received it "by" error I prefer 'in'
> Text: [MyCompany] does not ensure this information "to be" complete or > accurate. > Replace with: [MyCompany] does not ensure this information "is" > completed or accurate. "No. Does not guarantee* that this information is complete or accurate".
*Not "ensure". Any company would do its best to ensure that something was OK
chabral - 27 Sep 2005 21:22 GMT I'm modifying the original disclaimer according to your suggestions. Please don't hesitate in posting your opinions, as they are very valuable for me. Thanks,
-- chabral
Giles Todd - 28 Sep 2005 00:35 GMT > The information contained in this message, including any attachment, is > confidential and intended only for the person or entity to which it is [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > [MyCompany] does not ensure this information to be complete or > accurate. Tell your management that review, dissemination, distribution and copying are all implicit in their having sent the message to an unintended recipient. Oh, you could also ask them why they are sending messages that are potentially incomplete and inaccurate to unintended recipients and maybe suggest that they choose a method of communication which does not bear these hazards.
Then ask the owners of your company why they are employing managers who are wasting their employees time and the owners' money writing such unenforceable and frankly stupid garbage. It only makes the company look bad.
Your draft is fine, except that I would write 'e-mail message' in place of 'email', and 'for the purpose of information' rather than 'for information purpose'. But the whole thing is redundant anyway, for the reasons stated above.
Giles.
{R} - 28 Sep 2005 09:52 GMT In uk.culture.language.english on Wed, 28 Sep 2005 01:35:27 +0200, Giles Todd <g@prullenbak.todd.nu> wrote:
}Tell your management that review, dissemination, distribution and }copying are all implicit in their having sent the message to an }unintended recipient. Oh, you could also ask them why they are }sending messages that are potentially incomplete and inaccurate to }unintended recipients and maybe suggest that they choose a method of }communication which does not bear these hazards.
Good, I was hoping someone would speak up.
}Then ask the owners of your company why they are employing managers }who are wasting their employees time and the owners' money writing }such unenforceable and frankly stupid garbage. It only makes the }company look bad.
Then ask the fuckwits why the disclaimer, is not subject to the terms of the disclaimer ?
}Your draft is fine, except that I would write 'e-mail message' in }place of 'email', and 'for the purpose of information' rather than }'for information purpose'. But the whole thing is redundant anyway, }for the reasons stated above.
It is totally useless unenforceable bullshit, believe me it makes you look very very stupid.
{R}
Nick Wagg - 28 Sep 2005 09:41 GMT > Hi, > I think this question is a bit different from the others in the [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > [MyCompany] does not ensure this information to be complete or > accurate. Why bother?
If it is sent to someone for whom the information is useless, they will just delete it as if it were spam.
If it is sent to someone for whom the information is useful but unintended, how are you going to enforce the prohibition? Just make sure that it doesn't get sent to anyone who is not supposed to receive it.
I am not a lawyer but I very much doubt that the disclaimer would help you in court anyway.
John Briggs - 28 Sep 2005 13:16 GMT >> Hi, >> I think this question is a bit different from the others in the [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > I am not a lawyer but I very much doubt that the disclaimer would > help you in court anyway. Unless you have a contract with the firm (unlikely if you are not the intended recipient!) you are not bound by those conditions, as you have not accepted them.
 Signature John Briggs
chabral - 28 Sep 2005 13:49 GMT Well, could you tell all this to your boss?
Giles, your idea about not having users writing garbage assumes a perfect environment, with all employees having good criteria... Well, after you have more than 1 employee, you know that you can always be surprised.
{R}, funny idea. The disclaimer is also bound to its terms. It can be modified while the message is in transit, so it may not be complete or accurate. It is also intended for the persons to wich the e-mail is addressed. The last part of your email is kind of unpolite.
Nick and John, and all other too: If there is a chance that it "may help" in court it should be included. It's called "prevention". I'd no idea of the importance of this kind of legends, but after a research, the message you get is: "use it".
Here's a link that may enrich your knowlodedge:
http://www.emaildisclaimers.com/Index.htm
Thanks to all for your comments,
-- chabral
Nick Wagg - 28 Sep 2005 15:47 GMT > Here's a link that may enrich your knowlodedge: > > http://www.emaildisclaimers.com/Index.htm Yes, but it doesn't necessarily hold for the whole of cyberspace. I suspect that it is limited solely to areas submitting to US law, and it is still only the opinion of one lawyer...
John Briggs - 28 Sep 2005 16:19 GMT >> Here's a link that may enrich your knowlodedge: >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I suspect that it is limited solely to areas submitting to US law, > and it is still only the opinion of one lawyer... Note what one of the 'experts' says: 'The disclaimers added to the end of emails are not legally binding, but it's always good practice to try and disclaim liability'. I wonder what this says about corporate ethics?
 Signature John Briggs
{R} - 28 Sep 2005 17:35 GMT In uk.culture.language.english on Wed, 28 Sep 2005 15:19:13 GMT, "John Briggs" <john.briggs4@ntlworld.com> wrote:
}Note what one of the 'experts' says: 'The disclaimers added to the end of }emails are not legally binding, but it's always good practice to try and }disclaim liability'.
I regret this is true.
} I wonder what this says about corporate ethics?
That is the rude bit the OP didn't like
"It is totally useless unenforceable bullshit, believe me it makes you look very very stupid."
{R}
Matti Lamprhey - 28 Sep 2005 18:17 GMT "{R}" <nospam@spam.nium.org> wrote...
> }Note what one of the 'experts' says: 'The disclaimers added to the > }end of emails are not legally binding, but it's always good practice > }to try and disclaim liability'. > > I regret this is true. Actually I believe it to be false, although IANAL.
If a court holds that a contract contains elements which are unreasonable, it can strike out not just the unreasonable bits but the entirety of the clause or clauses which contain them -- including the "reasonable" remainder. This means that including unreasonable disclaimers is highly counterproductive!
Matti
Ivan - 28 Sep 2005 20:17 GMT > "{R}" <nospam@spam.nium.org> wrote... > > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Matti No one reads them anyway.
Giles Todd - 29 Sep 2005 01:03 GMT > Giles, your idea about not having users writing garbage assumes a > perfect environment, with all employees having good criteria... Well, > after you have more than 1 employee, you know that you can always be > surprised. Do tell...
Giles
 Signature <*YAWN*>
Giles Todd - 29 Sep 2005 01:09 GMT > Here's a link that may enrich your knowlodedge: > > http://www.emaildisclaimers.com/Index.htm What your marketing department really needs is an e-mail disclaimer that can talk pseudo-legal gibberish while delivering 240v AC to the unfortunate recipients of its important messages.
Just make sure that they get copied on everything they send.
Giles
|
|
|