Re: successful build - i686-pc-cygwin

[kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu (Richard Kenner)]

    Even if we want to make the "posting gives implicit permission"
    argument, we have the problem that the individual doing the posting is
    different from the organization that insists that all mail from
    employees is confidential.  That individual doesn't have the right to
    tell us we can ignore the legal text at the bottom (or rather, we
    can't take his/her word for it), because the legal text comes from
    his/her employer and the mail was sent using company resources.

Yes, but the legal text exempts the "intended recipients" and it's hard to
see any interpretation other than that the *sender*, not their employer,
is saying to whom they intend the message to be read by.  In this case,
you'd argue it was meant to be "the public".

So I think it's OK were it ever to become an issue.  However, I agree
that having this text in the messages adds complexity that we don't
need, but I too am not sure what to do about them.

    I suppose we could rig up a procmail filter to bounce messages with
    certain phrases, like "confidential", but we'll probably get false hits.

Yes, but I've only seen one or two example of this sort of legal text,
which seem to be shared by a number of companies, so it could be very
precise for just these versions and it would capture a very high
percentage of such.