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

[Christian]

On Mon, Dec 24, 2001 at 01:24:57PM +0800, garry wrote:
> Before I forget, Merry Christmas.

And a happy new year...

> 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. 

I understood that anything written is automatically the copyright of the
writer (or the organisation for which they are acting).

> 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...

No, because they're sending it to their intended recipient.

(Obviously.)

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

I just remember a big issue that was being made in several newspapers
(notably the Sunday Times) that a new law forbade people from forwarding
emails.  The newspaper was stirring up the issue saying that it mean
people could no longer forward joke emails to their friends.  But the
issue was later clarified and I remember someone official saying
something to the effect that the law only was there to prevent private
and confidential emails from one person to another being forwarded
without the consent of the sender.  I understood that this was one
reason why virtually every company and organisation now has these
annoyingly long legal notices on every email indicating, essentially,
that the email is private.  So, under this law, maybe the notice frees
you to forward the email or maybe it doesn't.  I don't know.  It could
be interpreted as a clear indication that the email is private and thus
is not to be redistributed.

-- 
DSA 0x0EC1D28C: BBCB 0D79 4EBB 078A A066  7267 8BED E9D6 0EC1 D28C