RE: [inbox] Re: [Full-Disclosure] This sums up Yahoo!s securitypolicy to a -T-
From: Exibar (exibar_at_thelair.com)
Date: 12/29/04
- Previous message: phased: "[Full-Disclosure] list noise"
- Maybe in reply to: J.A. Terranson: "RE: [inbox] Re: [Full-Disclosure] This sums up Yahoo!s securitypolicy to a -T-"
- Reply: J.A. Terranson: "RE: [inbox] Re: [Full-Disclosure] This sums up Yahoo!s securitypolicy to a -T-"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
To: <Bart.Lansing@kohls.com> Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 04:20:00 -0500
Yes I am aware that the laws differe from state to state. This would be a
federal case, a US Federal case, if it ever got that far, it won't. No
IANAL, but have first hand knowledge of a case very similliar to this.
Digital property and physical property are considered the same in cases like
this. It is something owned by the deceased. It becomes the property of
the inheritor.
No I cannot cite case law to back up my statements. But, I'm sure that
if the Yahoo! issue goes to court, we'll here about it and it will answer a
lot of questions for everyone.
But think about it, why should my online bank account, online stock
broker, online e-mail be any different than a physical bank account,
physical broker, or any other account be treated differently. Email is just
another online account......
If someone were to die without a will, and their
parents/wife/husband/kids/ etc are the legal hiers, wouldn't they also
inherit that person's ameritrade stock broker account, or at least
everything inside said account? Why is e-mail different?
Exibar
-----Original Message-----
From: Bart.Lansing@kohls.com [mailto:Bart.Lansing@kohls.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 9:56 AM
Cc: full-disclosure@lists.netsys.com;
full-disclosure-bounces@lists.netsys.com
Subject: RE: [inbox] Re: [Full-Disclosure] This sums up Yahoo!s
securitypolicy to a -T-
Exibar, IANAL...are you?
However, you do know that inheritence laws differ from state to state and
that in dealing with Yahoo! we are dealing with an international? Also, I
remain unconvinced of your assertion that a default inheritor owns digital
records. Can you cite case law to support your contention please?
"Exibar" <exibar@thelair.com> wrote on 12/25/2004 12:49:10 AM:
> His parents become the gardians of his estate by default (assuming
> he wasn't married or had children). His parents now own everything
> that man had while alive, digital and physical.
>
> Same thing as if I had died, my wife would inherit everything that
> I own. Yahoo's only in need of a legal document stating that, then
> they will have to relinquish the password for his account. If they
> do so before they receive this document, then they are breaking
> their own policies.
>
> Exibar
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bart.Lansing@kohls.com [mailto:Bart.Lansing@kohls.com]
> Sent: Friday, December 24, 2004 10:41 AM
> To: Exibar
> Cc: full-disclosure@lists.netsys.com; full-disclosure-bounces@lists.
> netsys.com; morning_wood
> Subject: [inbox] Re: [Full-Disclosure] This sums up Yahoo!s security
> policy to a -T-
>
>
> Exibar wrote on 12/23/2004 09:36:40 AM:
>
> > I applaud Yahoo for adhearing to their policies. All the familly has
to do
> > is send legal documents of their son's death, and legal documents
stating
> > who they are. At that point I'm sure the account information will be
> > released as per Yahoo's policy.
> >
> > Instead of trying to get the media involved, they should be getting
their
> > laywer involved as the clock's ticking on the 90 no-activity delete.
Their
> > lawyer will know the correct documents to send over to yahoo as proof
of
> > their son's death and that his parents have control over their dead
son's
> > belongings/estate.
> >
> > Perhaps what yahoo *could* do, or *should* do, is remove the 90 day
> > time-out on their son's e-mail account until they can have a chance of
going
> > through the courts. Perhaps extend it up to 365 days...
> >
> > Exibar
>
> We're goint to disagree here...
>
> His parents have no right to access his mail account, period. It's
> not theirs, and unless he stated in a will or prior release that
> these electronic records should be released...and to whom...they
> should vanish when his account does.
>
> These are not memoirs or a diary, or a bundle of written letters
> which could be argued was knowingly left behind with a high
> probability of discovery. These are electronic records deposited
> with a trusted entity with the expectation of safekeeping and privacy.
>
> Yahoo "should" violate their own policies in order to facilitate
> releasing this email into the hands of people who are not owners of
> those records? I think not.
>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "morning_wood" <se_cur_ity@hotmail.com>
> > To: <full-disclosure@lists.netsys.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 8:59 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] This sums up Yahoo!s security policy to
a -T-
> >
> >
> > > > If their refusal to release that mail even after their customer is
dead
> > is
> > > > an indication as to their privacy practices, three cheers for
Yahoo.
> > > >
> > > > Don't you get the whole "slippery slope" thing? If it's ok when
you're
> > > > dead (which it's not, my stuff is my stuff...destroy it when
you're sure
> > > > I've really shuffled off elsewhere, unless I gave you very
specific
> > > > instructions otherwise) then maybe it's ok if you are in a
coma...then
> > > > maybe it's ok if you are really sick and someone else is your
legal
> > > > guardian becaue you've been declared non-compos mentis...then
maybe it's
> > > > ok if it's your parents...or your wife...or a concerned
neighbor...
> > > >
> > > > What's in that mailbox is/was mine, none of your business unless I
chose
> > > > to share it.
> > >
> > > i couldnt agree more... another case of lame, illogical media
bull***
> > > BRAVO YAHOO
> > >
> > > happy hollidays,
> > >
> > > m.w
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> > > Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> > Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
> This is a transmission from Kohl's Department Stores, Inc.
> and may contain information which is confidential and proprietary.
> If you are not the addressee, any disclosure, copying or
> distribution or use of the contents of this message is expressly
prohibited.
> If you have received this transmission in error, please destroy it
> and notify us immediately at 262-703-7000.
>
> CAUTION:
> Internet and e-mail communications are Kohl's property and Kohl's
> reserves the right to retrieve and read any message created, sent
> and received. Kohl's reserves the right to monitor messages by
> authorized Kohl's Associates at any time
> without any further consent. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
This is a transmission from Kohl's Department Stores, Inc.
and may contain information which is confidential and proprietary.
If you are not the addressee, any disclosure, copying or
distribution or use of the contents of this message is expressly prohibited.
If you have received this transmission in error, please destroy it
and notify us immediately at 262-703-7000.
CAUTION:
Internet and e-mail communications are Kohl's property and Kohl's
reserves the right to retrieve and read any message created, sent and
received. Kohl's reserves the right to monitor messages by authorized Kohl's
Associates at any time
without any further consent.
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
- Previous message: phased: "[Full-Disclosure] list noise"
- Maybe in reply to: J.A. Terranson: "RE: [inbox] Re: [Full-Disclosure] This sums up Yahoo!s securitypolicy to a -T-"
- Reply: J.A. Terranson: "RE: [inbox] Re: [Full-Disclosure] This sums up Yahoo!s securitypolicy to a -T-"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
