Email Privacy Notice: Not a Good Idea
I find that all these confidentiality notices, which are automatically inserted at the end of the email, are annoying. Even more annoying are the chains of letters sent back and forth, when the parties shake “Reply” several times, and a modest letter turns into a 10-page canvas, with repeated template “confidentiality notices”.
As an attorney, I know that these notifications are valuable when used properly. But I found that most people, and most lawyers, do not know why they should be used and how to use them effectively.
Do these unwelcome preventive measures really protect someone’s privacy, or is it just stupid? Some commentators think this is nonsense. (see goldmark.com, Jeffrey Goldberg, 8/14/03 article “counting the ways”, in which notes that the privacy notice in letters is “stupid”). What are the reasons why adding a privacy notice to a letter can at least be a waste of effort and space , and maybe a serious mistake in the worst case?
(1) it gives an ambiguous directive;
(2) gives out a conflicting intention;
(3) has no legal effect; and
(4) this may make meaningless the legal action that it might have.
')
An ambiguous confidentiality notice directive says that an “unauthorized” recipient is prohibited from reviewing or distributing a letter. At the same time, directing the recipient to take action, contact the author of the letter, and generally destroy the letter. But how do I know that I am not an authorized recipient before I have read the message before? Since the message was actually sent to me (because I received it), am I not the de facto authorized recipient? How do I know that I should not have looked through the message, before reading it yet, I see a privacy notice at the end? And anyway, who are you, the Sender, to tell me what's allowed and what's forbidden? What authority do you tell me what to do with the letter sent to my address?
Almost all of my legal opponents send me emails with a privacy notice at the end of the message. Their problem is that there is no way to keep their messages confidential . I don't have to do this.
Is it confidential or not? Very often, a privacy notice at the end of the letter directly contradicts the sender’s intent. This is the case when, for example, the information contained in the letter is a press release, or a corporate memo, giving instructions about the further distribution of content to other employees. And what does "may contain confidential or preferred materials"? How should I know that part of a message is or is not confidential or privileged?
A few years ago, I took up a lawsuit, where it turned out that my new legal opponent is my old friend. My friend / new adversary sent me a letter, saying that he was glad to see me as his adversary, that we could quickly advance on some protracted problems. And in the same letter, in a friendly way asked about me and my family. In the end there was a privacy notice. Common sense told me that nothing in this particular letter can be considered confidential. Also, there is nothing privileged, regardless of what the letter contains.
So, there are some simple examples of why privacy notices at the end of letters are completely useless .
Now about why they are also a bad idea .
First, they can lull the sender. The harsh tone of the message, and the implied legal consequences of the “prohibition” create a false sense of security.
Secondly, if you regularly use notifications, they can make all your email messages non-confidential . If you mark all your letters as confidential, when it’s really clear that you don’t have “privacy pending” for each message, then in this way you don’t make an effort to protect really important information that needs protection. You must protect certain (necessary) information as confidential.
Only when such notifications are used carefully and infrequently, do they have a chance to actually protect confidential information in a letter . Basic legal norms state the principle of “reasonable expectation of confidentiality”. But this principle does not exist by virtue of the words in the notification. Such an expectation must be accompanied by another reason in general to have such an expectation.
To simplify, if you want to keep information confidential, the author offers you the following.
Common sense tells us that we cannot force anyone to keep your secrets just by simply demanding that they do it.
There must be some external agreements or requirements that your secrets will be kept by a specific recipient. Thus, a privacy notice is a reminder or a kind of reservation indicating that you are acting on the basis of previously established agreements between you (the sender) and the other party (the recipient). This confirms your intention to really keep your secrets.
As an attorney, I know that these notifications are valuable when used properly. But I found that most people, and most lawyers, do not know why they should be used and how to use them effectively.
Do these unwelcome preventive measures really protect someone’s privacy, or is it just stupid? Some commentators think this is nonsense. (see goldmark.com, Jeffrey Goldberg, 8/14/03 article “counting the ways”, in which notes that the privacy notice in letters is “stupid”). What are the reasons why adding a privacy notice to a letter can at least be a waste of effort and space , and maybe a serious mistake in the worst case?
(1) it gives an ambiguous directive;
(2) gives out a conflicting intention;
(3) has no legal effect; and
(4) this may make meaningless the legal action that it might have.
')
An ambiguous confidentiality notice directive says that an “unauthorized” recipient is prohibited from reviewing or distributing a letter. At the same time, directing the recipient to take action, contact the author of the letter, and generally destroy the letter. But how do I know that I am not an authorized recipient before I have read the message before? Since the message was actually sent to me (because I received it), am I not the de facto authorized recipient? How do I know that I should not have looked through the message, before reading it yet, I see a privacy notice at the end? And anyway, who are you, the Sender, to tell me what's allowed and what's forbidden? What authority do you tell me what to do with the letter sent to my address?
Almost all of my legal opponents send me emails with a privacy notice at the end of the message. Their problem is that there is no way to keep their messages confidential . I don't have to do this.
Is it confidential or not? Very often, a privacy notice at the end of the letter directly contradicts the sender’s intent. This is the case when, for example, the information contained in the letter is a press release, or a corporate memo, giving instructions about the further distribution of content to other employees. And what does "may contain confidential or preferred materials"? How should I know that part of a message is or is not confidential or privileged?
A few years ago, I took up a lawsuit, where it turned out that my new legal opponent is my old friend. My friend / new adversary sent me a letter, saying that he was glad to see me as his adversary, that we could quickly advance on some protracted problems. And in the same letter, in a friendly way asked about me and my family. In the end there was a privacy notice. Common sense told me that nothing in this particular letter can be considered confidential. Also, there is nothing privileged, regardless of what the letter contains.
So, there are some simple examples of why privacy notices at the end of letters are completely useless .
Now about why they are also a bad idea .
First, they can lull the sender. The harsh tone of the message, and the implied legal consequences of the “prohibition” create a false sense of security.
Secondly, if you regularly use notifications, they can make all your email messages non-confidential . If you mark all your letters as confidential, when it’s really clear that you don’t have “privacy pending” for each message, then in this way you don’t make an effort to protect really important information that needs protection. You must protect certain (necessary) information as confidential.
Only when such notifications are used carefully and infrequently, do they have a chance to actually protect confidential information in a letter . Basic legal norms state the principle of “reasonable expectation of confidentiality”. But this principle does not exist by virtue of the words in the notification. Such an expectation must be accompanied by another reason in general to have such an expectation.
To simplify, if you want to keep information confidential, the author offers you the following.
Common sense tells us that we cannot force anyone to keep your secrets just by simply demanding that they do it.
There must be some external agreements or requirements that your secrets will be kept by a specific recipient. Thus, a privacy notice is a reminder or a kind of reservation indicating that you are acting on the basis of previously established agreements between you (the sender) and the other party (the recipient). This confirms your intention to really keep your secrets.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/268623/
All Articles