🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Sep10.190922.900@dcatlas.dot.gov> joet@dcatlas.dot.gov (Joe Trott) writes:
>>Apparently when Wang resigned, his MCI Mail account was closed.  According
>>to the paper, MCI Mail saves messages for five days and then deleted. All
>>these came to light when a staff worker was closing the account and "looked"
>>into Wang's account and was suprised on the contents of the messages.  This
>>started court orders to search offices/residences on both parties. 

>>Question:  did the staff worker have the RIGHT to read Wang's email?
>>When I close accounts, I tar everything to tape and then remove everything.
>>I don't have time to read user's files or email that is still in queue.

>No, he did *not* have the right (unless a prior contract specified otherwise)
>to view Wang's email.  He should be prosecuted, found as guilty as he is,
>and treated as harshly as possible.  That said, the evidence that Wang was
>involved in crimes of his own *exists*.  It cannot be ignored.  Two wrongs
>do not make a right.  Wang should also be tried, convicted, and probably
>shot ("if you don't like the consequences of your actions...").

That all depends.  If the company paid for the mail account, then the mail
is *not* Wang's personal property, it is the company's, by implicit contract 
and also IMHO by moral standards.  The company has put it there for their
benefit, not Mr Wang's personal use or anything else.

I agree with you that Wang should be tried in either case.

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "This must be Thursday.  I never could get the hang of Thursdays"
                                                       - Douglas Adams
  - Patrick Taylor                                       (Arthur Dent)
    Ericsson Network Systems
    exuptr@exu.ericsson.se                       "Don't let the .se fool you"
    or exuptr@ZGNews.Lonestar.Org, exu.exuptr@memo.ericsson.se