Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertine
You don't need one for it to be legal. You need one to prove it.
In the case of the conversation, you could claim that I was lying, or had found out by spying on you instead of being told by you. In a court case, it would be your word against mine.
However, with a medium like ICQ, you take away that problem - the logs can serve as proof that the conversation did indeed take place.
It's why negotiations on business deals and such often involve non disclosure agreements. Without them, people would be free to talk about what happened and what was said.
|
Not true. He takes something (text or images) that was intende for privat use, and publish it in a way the producer (in this case the one that wrote the message) did not intend it, and formulated/edited in a way where the only purpuse of it, was to defame the person.
That is why he broke the law
The mainpurpose of most non disclosure agreements, is not to prevent people from talking, but to specify what the cost would be if they did break the silence, and what topics in included in those terms