Date: Thu, 19 Aug 93 19:35:05 EDT
From: jueneman%wotan(_at_)gte(_dot_)com
That is specifically what the disclaimer is intended to address.
Under normal circumstances, if I FAX you an order on company
letterhead, even if I weren't authorized to act as a purchasing
agent, you would generally be entitled to a reasonable presumption
that I was so authorized, for otherwise I shouldn't have sent the
order. (Of course, as I've said before, if you are a secretary
ordering a Boeing 767 or the order is printed in crayon on tablet
paper, that line of reasoning probably won't hold up as being
representative of common business practices.) But if I have put you
on notice through a well publicized disclaimer and you still accept
my order, GTE would be able to present a much more credible case that
you have acted imprudently in accepting what was alleged to be a
forgery in any case.
I don't understand.... given what you've just said above, and what
you've said about being concerned about the potential liability of
digital signatures, why does GTE let its employees use FAX machines?!?
Or have a company letterhead?!? Despite the potential legal
liabilities, most companies still use fax machines, and most companies
still have company letter head, and most companies have not gone
bankrupt over liability suits because of it. Why should PEM be any
different?
- Ted