[oclug] Privacy violation & recipient delimieter "+"
bb at L8R.net
Fri Aug 30 10:21:53 EDT 2002
On Fri, 30 Aug 2002 07:25:39 -0400
Rod Giffin <rod at giffinscientific.com> wrote:
> On Friday 30 August 2002 06:46 am, Francis J. A. Pinteric wrote:
> > On Thu, 29 Aug 2002 20:35:20 -0400
> > Brad Barnett <bb at L8R.net> wrote:
> > > In that case, it's not really the same issue (although it is
> > > annoying). Whois information doesn't seem to back this up, but I
> > > have seen people that have more than one company name...
> > It doesn't matter who owns the company as essentially they are two
> > separate entities under the law. A corporation is a distinct person
> > under the law so coowheels selling your name to (the other name), if
> > even if they were both owned by the same person. However, if these two
> > companies were actually persons "operating under the name of ...."
> > then you have a slightly different problem, but nonetheless worth
> > exploring legally. Of course if these were corporations and they WERE
> > owned by the same person, be certain that he would argue the negative
> > in this case. But that's what the courts are for, to sort out these
> > precident setting issues. :-)
> > Did I hear the word "potential rat's nest here?
> Francis is absolutly right. In Canada, and some states, a company is
> legally a different person, separate and destinct from every other
> company and separate and destinct from the owners.
Not if it is a proprietorship. ;) See my other message.
> But I'd be willing to bet a small wager that the company is going to
> tell you something like they'd hired a new marketing manager, and he did
> this without checking the company policy. They apologize and it won't
> happen again. I'd also be willing to bet that it does happen again.
Either that, or they won't even respond to the request.
More information about the OCLUG