5 ms·

I would argue "be careful whom you send emails to" as well. While drivingmenuts' comment about behaving ethically might apply in this case, sometimes you might

by nathanb 15y ago

I would argue "be careful whom you send emails to" as well. While drivingmenuts' comment about behaving ethically might apply in this case, sometimes you might think you're behaving ethically and it's only later than you realize that, while operating in good faith, you inadvertently broke some law (patents and copyrights are a minefield). I prefer not to correspond with the type of person who would take advantage of this by releasing or publishing my emails. Sometimes it's unavoidable, but less often than you might think.

aidenn0 15y ago
Do you delete all your e-mails or do you leave your work e-mails on your work machine? If you don't delete them, then your e-mail archives could be used against your company. An e-mail that goes out to more than one person is virtually guaranteed to be around years later where it might haunt you.
- dctoedt 15y ago
  > If you don't delete them, then your e-mail archives could be used against your company. Unfortunately, the flip side might be as bad or worse: If you deleted emails or other potentially-relevant documents at a time when a lawsuit was reasonably foreseeable, then you could be hit with an adverse inference [1]. That is, the judge might conclusively presume (or instruct the jury to conclusively presume) that the missing emails or documents must have been really bad, otherwise you wouldn't have destroyed them. And if government authorities were involved, then you could be indicted on criminal charges of obstruction of justice. (That ultimately destroyed accounting firm Arthur Andersen LLP [2].) That's why opposing counsel can get downright orgasmic when their adversary has deleted emails or destroyed documents, and when this can be "spun" as having been motivated by a desire to conceal harmful evidence. I used to think it made sense to adopt, and then follow, a comprehensive "document retention" [sic] policy, where documents are reviewed every X months for possible destruction. In the real world, though, people get busy, and they don't take the time to do periodic document reviews. Then, suddenly, a lawsuit is imminent, and people realize they still have all these documents that should have been routinely destroyed but never were. So they try to play catch-up with a shredding party. The belatedly-destroyed documents might be utterly harmless, but that might not matter. (A belated shredding party is what got Arthur Andersen indicted.) RULES OF THUMB: If your organization doesn't already have a document-retention policy, here are two serviceable rules of thumb that might help (YMMV, I'm not your lawyer, etc.): A) Keep emails and other documents for as long as you think you'll have a business need for them -- and keep in mind that sometimes the law mandates specific retention periods for certain categories of document; B) If there's a non-trivial possibility of a lawsuit that would be even remotely related to the subject matter of the emails or other documents, then don't destroy them without first checking with your lawyer. As the saying goes, sometimes the cover-up --- whether real, or simply the product of opposing counsel's "spin" --- is worse than the crime. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_inference http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_inference [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Andersen http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Andersen
- dotBen 15y ago
  It's pretty standard for CEOs and executives of publicly traded companies to delete all email -- not just locally, but ensure their entire email system, backups, etc are set to expunge an email entirely from the system as soon as they delete it. Mainly for this reason. Case in point: Eric Scmidt http://gawker.com/5505606/gmail-overlord-always-deletes-his-email http://gawker.com/5505606/gmail-overlord-always-deletes-his-...
- ams6110 15y ago
  I worked at an investment banking company in the 1990s. They did not have email when I started, but when they adopted Exchange and everyone got a Windows PC and MS Office, the CIO set a policy that emails would be retained for 6 months, then purged. I don't know if this would fly today, but I think the fact that it was a blanket policy and not based on the content of the messages made it OK at least at that time.
  - anamax 15y ago
    > I think the fact that it was a blanket policy and not based on the content of the messages made it OK at least at that time. Nope. If discovery has started, you have to retain even if you otherwise would have discarded. That's in addition to any specific statutory requirements wrt the document's content.
    - adgar 15y ago
      I think the implication was that the policy was in place for when they weren't being sued, so that if they were sued, they could be completely reasonable in saying they only had 6 months worth of e-mails to provide for discovery.
  - elemeno 15y ago
    These days e-mail retention (as well as IM logs, recordings of calls etc.) in the financial world is based on rules set by bodies like the SEC and the FSA and runs to about seven years (at least that's the number I hear thrown about working in that world). Still, if a law suit is brought against the company, you'd generally stop deleting anything until the lawyers give the ok.
  - elemeno 15y ago
    These days e-mail retention (as well as IM logs, recordings of calls etc.) in the financial world is based on rules set by bodies like the SEC and the FSA and runs to about seven years (at least that's the number I hear thrown about working in that world). Still, if a law suit is brought against the company, you'd generally stop deleting anything until the lawyers give the ok.
- willyt 15y ago
  What if you deleted the email you sent saying "Please ensure the crane you are using is rated for that load" and you need it when you get prosecuted by health and safety for the horrible accident that just happened. EDIT: Or the email saying "Yes you can carry out the work in the manner you proposed but only if it will be at no extra cost to my client and you take full responsibility for the alteration to the original design"
travem 15y ago
Whether or not you trust the person is irrelevant, if it's not privileged information (i.e. to your lawyer + some other definitions) it could always be found later on during discovery.
Tangurena 15y ago
I prefer to walk down the hall and chat with the other person. Humor and sarcasm don't translate well to email, and I've managed to personally offend people without realizing it. By taking the time to actually look them in the eye (and wink, as needed), I find it clears a lot of things up. Now if the email is a purely technical issue, an email is usually the best solution.
ChuckMcM 15y ago
Who you send them too, other than your lawyer doesn't protect them from discovery. See Jwz's rant on the badattitude list [1] about lawyers and discovery and companies having to pay after the fact. Talking to people face to face is good, both from a legal protection standpoint and from a relationship building standpoint. [1] http://www.jwz.org/gruntle/rbarip.html http://www.jwz.org/gruntle/rbarip.html
- cageface 15y ago
  Exactly. I tend to assume that any email I write might eventually wind up permanently plastered on the net somewhere. Face-to-conversation is not only safer but a lot more satisfying.
Nick_C 15y ago
> releasing or publishing my emails Has the copyright issue on emails been decided yet (and I missed it)? I thought you retain copyright on your emails and the recipient can't just release or publish them willy-nilly.

by nathanb 15y ago

aidenn0 15y ago

Do you delete all your e-mails or do you leave your work e-mails on your work machine? If you don't delete them, then your e-mail archives could be used against your company. An e-mail that goes out to more than one person is virtually guaranteed to be around years later where it might haunt you.

dctoedt 15y ago
> If you don't delete them, then your e-mail archives could be used against your company. Unfortunately, the flip side might be as bad or worse: If you deleted emails or other potentially-relevant documents at a time when a lawsuit was reasonably foreseeable, then you could be hit with an adverse inference [1]. That is, the judge might conclusively presume (or instruct the jury to conclusively presume) that the missing emails or documents must have been really bad, otherwise you wouldn't have destroyed them. And if government authorities were involved, then you could be indicted on criminal charges of obstruction of justice. (That ultimately destroyed accounting firm Arthur Andersen LLP [2].) That's why opposing counsel can get downright orgasmic when their adversary has deleted emails or destroyed documents, and when this can be "spun" as having been motivated by a desire to conceal harmful evidence. I used to think it made sense to adopt, and then follow, a comprehensive "document retention" [sic] policy, where documents are reviewed every X months for possible destruction. In the real world, though, people get busy, and they don't take the time to do periodic document reviews. Then, suddenly, a lawsuit is imminent, and people realize they still have all these documents that should have been routinely destroyed but never were. So they try to play catch-up with a shredding party. The belatedly-destroyed documents might be utterly harmless, but that might not matter. (A belated shredding party is what got Arthur Andersen indicted.) RULES OF THUMB: If your organization doesn't already have a document-retention policy, here are two serviceable rules of thumb that might help (YMMV, I'm not your lawyer, etc.): A) Keep emails and other documents for as long as you think you'll have a business need for them -- and keep in mind that sometimes the law mandates specific retention periods for certain categories of document; B) If there's a non-trivial possibility of a lawsuit that would be even remotely related to the subject matter of the emails or other documents, then don't destroy them without first checking with your lawyer. As the saying goes, sometimes the cover-up --- whether real, or simply the product of opposing counsel's "spin" --- is worse than the crime. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_inference http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_inference [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Andersen http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Andersen
dotBen 15y ago
It's pretty standard for CEOs and executives of publicly traded companies to delete all email -- not just locally, but ensure their entire email system, backups, etc are set to expunge an email entirely from the system as soon as they delete it. Mainly for this reason. Case in point: Eric Scmidt http://gawker.com/5505606/gmail-overlord-always-deletes-his-email http://gawker.com/5505606/gmail-overlord-always-deletes-his-...
ams6110 15y ago
I worked at an investment banking company in the 1990s. They did not have email when I started, but when they adopted Exchange and everyone got a Windows PC and MS Office, the CIO set a policy that emails would be retained for 6 months, then purged. I don't know if this would fly today, but I think the fact that it was a blanket policy and not based on the content of the messages made it OK at least at that time.
- anamax 15y ago
  > I think the fact that it was a blanket policy and not based on the content of the messages made it OK at least at that time. Nope. If discovery has started, you have to retain even if you otherwise would have discarded. That's in addition to any specific statutory requirements wrt the document's content.
  - adgar 15y ago
    I think the implication was that the policy was in place for when they weren't being sued, so that if they were sued, they could be completely reasonable in saying they only had 6 months worth of e-mails to provide for discovery.
- elemeno 15y ago
  These days e-mail retention (as well as IM logs, recordings of calls etc.) in the financial world is based on rules set by bodies like the SEC and the FSA and runs to about seven years (at least that's the number I hear thrown about working in that world). Still, if a law suit is brought against the company, you'd generally stop deleting anything until the lawyers give the ok.
- elemeno 15y ago
  These days e-mail retention (as well as IM logs, recordings of calls etc.) in the financial world is based on rules set by bodies like the SEC and the FSA and runs to about seven years (at least that's the number I hear thrown about working in that world). Still, if a law suit is brought against the company, you'd generally stop deleting anything until the lawyers give the ok.
willyt 15y ago
What if you deleted the email you sent saying "Please ensure the crane you are using is rated for that load" and you need it when you get prosecuted by health and safety for the horrible accident that just happened. EDIT: Or the email saying "Yes you can carry out the work in the manner you proposed but only if it will be at no extra cost to my client and you take full responsibility for the alteration to the original design"

travem 15y ago

Whether or not you trust the person is irrelevant, if it's not privileged information (i.e. to your lawyer + some other definitions) it could always be found later on during discovery.

Tangurena 15y ago

I prefer to walk down the hall and chat with the other person. Humor and sarcasm don't translate well to email, and I've managed to personally offend people without realizing it. By taking the time to actually look them in the eye (and wink, as needed), I find it clears a lot of things up. Now if the email is a purely technical issue, an email is usually the best solution.

ChuckMcM 15y ago

Who you send them too, other than your lawyer doesn't protect them from discovery. See Jwz's rant on the badattitude list [1] about lawyers and discovery and companies having to pay after the fact. Talking to people face to face is good, both from a legal protection standpoint and from a relationship building standpoint. [1] http://www.jwz.org/gruntle/rbarip.html http://www.jwz.org/gruntle/rbarip.html

cageface 15y ago
Exactly. I tend to assume that any email I write might eventually wind up permanently plastered on the net somewhere. Face-to-conversation is not only safer but a lot more satisfying.

Nick_C 15y ago

> releasing or publishing my emails Has the copyright issue on emails been decided yet (and I missed it)? I thought you retain copyright on your emails and the recipient can't just release or publish them willy-nilly.