|
|
landmark Inner circle within a triangle 5194 Posts |
1) Person A sends an email to Person B full of nasty invective. Person B, outraged, forwards the email to his friend Person C as evidence of A's bad character
Person A claims that he can sue B for sharing his property in an unauthorized manner. Case or no case? Let's assume, that this all occurs within the United States, and it is A's personal email account, not a work email account because then a whole set of other considerations are at play. Variation 2: Instead of emails they are physical letters sent through the US mail. Variations 3 and 4: rather than nasty words, the email/letter contains the cure for cancer. Who owns the email/letters' contents? What rights do the senders/recipients maintain?
Click here to get Gerald Deutsch's Perverse Magic: The First Sixteen Years
All proceeds to Open Heart Magic charity. |
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
Was there a prohibition on the bottom of the original email that says the contents are intended for only the original recipient?
I don't know if that matters but it does indeed show the intent of the sender.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts |
No case.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
landmark Inner circle within a triangle 5194 Posts |
Quote:
On Aug 7, 2017, tommy wrote: Yes, I believe that it is also pretty well established in US law that the sender retains rights over the contents. I think it was the JD Salinger case that established that. I think that same case gave the recipient the physical ownership of the letter, but not the right to reproduce, publish it or quote from it. But email is an interesting issue--if I forward an email, am I reproducing it, or am I giving away something that was mine? I think there is a strong case logically (though perhaps not legally) that since person B still retains the email, what was forwarded to person C is a reproduction, and hence unauthorized. I don't know that the mere unilateral claim of A's confidentiality is enough to keep B from passing it on, however; wouldn't there have to be some sort of contractual agreement on that basis?
Click here to get Gerald Deutsch's Perverse Magic: The First Sixteen Years
All proceeds to Open Heart Magic charity. |
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
Well, I am not familiar with the commercial law. I do know a bit about forgery and the like. I think the law might regard it as what they call "a thing in action" which covers property that is not physical, virtual things, like money in bank accounts which might move from one place to another but not physically.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
Quote:
On Aug 7, 2017, landmark wrote: So basically copyright law trumps the discovery process?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
danaruns Special user The City of Angels 808 Posts |
It depends. This reads like a law school exam, where facts not given may be determinative of the outcome. By default, the recipient is under no duty to keep the email private, even if the sender demands it. However, a number of things can change that.
*Copyright law, for instance (though not every email is subject to copyright, as copyright protects only literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works). *A contract provision can burden the recipient. *When there is an expectation of privacy it can burden the recipient (although email has been held by courts to not be subject to an expectation of privacy, as a single email may travel through many servers before reaching the recipient). *Re-publishing defamatory content can burden the recipient. *If publishing the email would interfere with the sender's economic advantage it could be trouble for the publishing recipient. *The re-publishing of proprietary information or trade secrets could land the sharing recipient in some hot water. *Knowingly publishing material that is subject to a court protective order can get the sharing recipient a date with a judge. And many other things. As with all legal issues, it's never universal or easy, but depends on a plethora of facts. Plus, it could differ one state to another, or a state from federal. There is no universal answer.
"Dana Douglas is the greatest magician alive. Plus, I'm drunk." -- Foster Brooks
|
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
So basically if a leak of data originally collected by *** happens to go viral ...
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
landmark Inner circle within a triangle 5194 Posts |
If you're talking about data worth leaking, that's already covered by other agreements, presumably. In the case of the OP, we're assuming A sent the email to B willingly, and B forwarded it to C willingly. Is B a leaker, absent other contractual obligations? That, in some sense, is the question asked.
Click here to get Gerald Deutsch's Perverse Magic: The First Sixteen Years
All proceeds to Open Heart Magic charity. |
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts |
Not on the given facts.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
landmark Inner circle within a triangle 5194 Posts |
That, of course, happens by mistake all the time in the digital world. Published, I assume, for anyone who has the software or backups to recover it.
The more interesting question is why is there a time embargo on that information? What or who is supposed to be influenced in a timely manner?
Click here to get Gerald Deutsch's Perverse Magic: The First Sixteen Years
All proceeds to Open Heart Magic charity. |
funsway Inner circle old things in new ways - new things in old ways 9982 Posts |
It may also depend on whether or not the communication is requested, part of a regular dialogue, or some unsolicited message dumped in my inbox.
If the latter, then I owe that person nothing - any more than a coin dropped on the floor by a burglar. If you send me a magazine or Christmas cards with a request that I send money back, I own nothing by way of response, funds, acknowledgement or "ownership consideration." Won't happen to me. None of the folks on my contact list would ever send "nasty invectives."
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst
eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com |
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » A legal conundrum (0 Likes) |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.03 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |