[Tango-L] secrecy

[Alexis Cousein]

Melanie Eskoff wrote:
> Actually that area of the law seems to be rather debatable.

Wiggle, wiggle, little weasel. If you don't understand the law,
err on the side of caution.

 > Many
> governments are now posting all email,  in an attempt at being 
> "transparent". 

Those mails have a different status, and there are strict rules
for their disclosure. And it's the government itself publishing
business e-mails from employees (in the US, in some cases,
the copyright on those implicitly lies with the government).

Note that in Europe, those employee emails are still copyrighted
by the authors, but they are giving their employer a license to
publish them (under strict rules).

I wasn't under the impression Alberto gave you any such license.

 > Don't think that
> a district attorney or prosecutor can't confiscate your "private" 
> emails  in their search for the truth (sic).  Ask Scooter Libby!

<grin> Subpoenas are quite a different matter - and there are many
cases in which these will remain under seal, and the manner in which
you disclose information obtained under discovery (or under a subpoena)
is also strictly regulated - you'll hear about them in a court of law,
or sometimes see mention of them in a public filing in a court case.

I don't think you'll find a lot of attorneys who'd be foolish enough
to publish information obtained through discovery or subpoenas in
a public forum.

Besides, if you use someone else's server to send you mails (which
you do), you should feel bound by RFC 1855, which says, quite clearly:

#  If you are forwarding or re-posting a message you've received,
do not change the wording. If the message was a personal message
to you and you are re-posting to a group, you should ask permission first.
You may shorten the message and quote only relevant parts,
but be sure you give proper attribution.

 > I suppose I'll have to clean up my emails to my husband at work.

No, you won't (at least not unless someone subpoenas it or asks for
it in discovery and it becomes admissible evidence) . Unless, of course,
you're sending them from you're employer in violation
of a clear policy not to send them, and with a policy that gives the
employer a license to redistribute it.

In short, it's never *YOUR* choice to redistribute mail that someone
else sends you.