Our email providers give themselves much more convenient access to your data through their terms of service or privacy policies. On one hand, this is level of access may be necessary to prevent disruptions and limit liability but, on the other hand, these permissions we, as users, grant providers like Microsoft, Google, Yahoo and others pretty broad access to our data without requiring them to obtain court orders or satisfy any external legal requirement.
Facebook has decided to shut down its Facebook.com email service where you could receive emails into your Facebook inbox. Apparently not many users were actually using it. You have the option of disabling the service in the meantime and, if you don’t, emails sent to your Facebook.com email address will be forwarded to your primaryContinue reading “Facebook.com email shuts down with a surprise”
The Economist has a thought provoking article titled “Spare us the email yada-yada” with the subtitle “Automatic e-mail footers are not just annoying. They are legally useless”. The article highlights some of the challenges facing email disclaimers and there are just no clear answers that I have come across. The central challenge is the following:Continue reading “Are email disclaimers enforceable?”
One of my email subscribers pointed out that she has been receiving duplicate emails from web.tech.law since subscribing to the mailing list. I don’t know what the cause of that is and, assuming that other subscribers have the same experience, I have switched the email newsletter mechanism to a different provider altogether. Because current newsletterContinue reading “A quick administrative note for email subscribers”
I received an interesting email this morning referring me to an email which a local law firm distributed to subscribers of its property-related mailing list. Ordinarily that isn’t the sort of thing which would garner much interest from me – property law is somewhat outside my usual scope. What caught my eye is the wayContinue reading “Law firm fudges mailing list privacy and its own reputation”