[plug] Fwd: Use of Open Source Software in Government

[garry]

Before I forget, Merry Christmas.

I understood that the notice was using the privacy law, not the copywrite 
law. 

I say this because I did not see a copywrite claim on the document... I too 
assumed that until the intended recipient had received it, it could not be 
reproduced. This, as far as I know, was not done. 
If you count the sending on the internet in plain text format "releasing it", 
I think the sender could be regarded to be in breach of their own release 
conditions...

But, as the intended recipient - should I care to share the text in the note, 
I believe the notice frees me to do so.

Not something that need worry the collective thoughts here in that way, IMHO. 
8^)==

Garry


On Mon, 24 Dec 2001 10:55, Christian wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2001 at 09:06:24AM +0800, Steve Grasso wrote:
> > Why do you say that Christian? By my reading, Garry _was_ the intended
> > recipient, thus not precluded from reproducing the email. OTOH, if _I_
> > (not the intended recipient) reproduced it, perhaps I could be taken to
> > task. Of course, IANAL.
>
> You're right, I missed the second "not".  But I wonder what the actual
> law is for situations like this.  If an unintended recipient cannot
> reproduce it, why can the intended recipient?  After all, as soon as the
> intended recipient reproduces and distributes it, doesn't that mean that
> now it has been received by unintended recipients?