We've all seen boilerplate like the stuff below in email.

My understanding is that at least in the US, it is completely
meaningless. It long ago metastasized from fax cover sheets, back in
the era when faxes had speed dial buttons, it was easy for a lawyer's
staff to press the wrong button and send somethibg to an opposing
lawyer, and legal ethics say lawyers aren't supposed to take advantage
of mistakes like that.

But email is not a fax, I am not a lawyer, and none of that applies to
me. As far as I know, it is nonsense and I can do whatever I want with
mail from strangers, give or take copyright law.

Is anyone aware of any case law or any competent legal analysis of this stuff?

Bonus question: what does tha last sentence mean? I see the words, but huh?

The information contained in this email is confidential. It may also be legally privileged. It is intended only

for the stated addressee(s) and access to it by any other person is unauthorised. If you are not an addressee, you
must not disclose, copy, circulate or in any other way use or rely on the information contained in this email. Such
unauthorised use may be unlawful. If you have received this email in error, please inform us immediately and delete
it and all copies from your system. [organization] does not accept responsibility for changes made to
this message after it was sent.

--
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In misc.legal.moderated, on Sun, 30 Jul 2023 14:22:36 -0700 (PDT), "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:

We've all seen boilerplate like the stuff below in email.

My understanding is that at least in the US, it is completely
meaningless. It long ago metastasized from fax cover sheets, back in
the era when faxes had speed dial buttons, it was easy for a lawyer's
staff to press the wrong button and send somethibg to an opposing
lawyer, and legal ethics say lawyers aren't supposed to take advantage
of mistakes like that.

There was a case in the last year where some lawyer sent something to
the wrong lawyer, and I think the 2nd one intended to use it. Some high profile case but I can't rememeber.

But email is not a fax, I am not a lawyer, and none of that applies to
me. As far as I know, it is nonsense and I can do whatever I want with
mail from strangers, give or take copyright law.

Is anyone aware of any case law or any competent legal analysis of this stuff?

Bonus question: what does tha last sentence mean? I see the words, but huh?

The information contained in this email is confidential. It may also be legally privileged. It is intended only

for the stated addressee(s) and access to it by any other person is unauthorised. If you are not an addressee, you
must not disclose, copy, circulate or in any other way use or rely on the information contained in this email. Such
unauthorised use may be unlawful. If you have received this email in error, please inform us immediately and delete
it and all copies from your system. [organization] does not accept responsibility for changes made to
this message after it was sent.

I don't know exactly what the last sentence means but I'm pretty sure
you replaced the name of the organization with "[organization]" and that
means that organization does not accept responsibilty for the change you
made. So it's on you. Boy, are you in trouble now!

--
I think you can tell, but just to be sure:
I am not a lawyer.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)