Conference 7.286::digital

            
    The value of NOTES is now immensureable for informal discussion
    on a variety of topics, but these are informal comments. If we use
    VMSNOTES to help search for answers the contents are not  
    guaranteed to be 100% correct, should this be the case then people
    would not be willing to contribute as they do!  If you have a notes
    conference which is likely to be sensitive then this discussion
    should be a members only conference with the appropriate *rule*
    for use in the top note 1.*
    
    Regards,
    Rohinton.

VAXnotes conferences are corporate documents.

                
    
    
                        The cardinal rule of life
    

    It's about time that people started realizing that writing in a
    notes conference is NOT the same as a "lunchroom conversation",
    in many ways!  I agree with John - conferences are corporate
    documents and always have been.  So are your private MAIL folders!
    ANY file on any of DEC's computer systems is potentially available
    to searches of this nature.
    					Steve

    
    Would you say that NOTESfiles are analagous to the Nixon Tapes ?
    (Intended to be for private use; entered as evidence later)
    
    -monty-

Are we allowed to delete old versions of our files?

Martin.

    Given the scrutiny of the discovery process (as in "turn over every
    thing that's been written on the subject the litigants"), I'd have to
    say that VAX Notes represented a liability to a corporation that wanted
    to protect truly informal communication from the discovery process.
    
    The above paragraph itself could be used by a corporation suing
    DEC over it's "negligence" in not pointing out that a side effect
    of VAX Notes is to make such normally temporary or ephemeral informal
    communication quite permanent and easy to "discover".
    
    A guide to suing to DEC:
    
    Take every VAX Notes conference and extract all notes with the
    words: QUALITY, DOMINANCE/DOMINATE, PRESSURE, SQUEEZE, COMPETITOR/
    COMPETITION, MARKET SHARE, BUG, ERROR, SAFE/UNSAFE...
    
    There's gotta be something there, eh?
    
    (Read about what happenned to GE in the current issue of Business
    Week)

    Agree with John 100%. Notes are unquestionably Corporate Documents.
    One certainly can publish electronically! That is part of our age.
    You can't declare it to be 'informal' if it is written.
    
    

    There is an old adage that the legal community uses that words when
    written have a life of their own.  So, if you wouldn't want to hand
    it to a judge, or stand up and say it on camera to the world, don't
    write it here.
    
    This smacks of the Etiquette file; just because I have the anonymity
    of my terminal, what I say here I should have enough forethought
    to consider of evereyone who could possibly read the note would
    I be able to say it to them eyeball to eyeball.
    
    Jim
    
    
    

    Indeed the conferences are corporate documents.  Come to think of it,
    the attitude that the system is MINE or the conference is MINE, because
    I happen to manage that system or host/moderate that conference is
    equally flawed.  However that point becomes rather blurred in the eyes
    of some of our esteemed colleagues.
    
    Please note that I have been extra careful in NOT using inflammotory
    or accusatory language in the above paragraph.
    
    - Vikas

        "the system is MINE or the conference is MINE" only to the
        extent that I have custody of them. Using corporate guidelines I
        have the responsibility to manage them to the best of my ability
        to the benefit of Digital. 

                Mike

    I think that what a lot of people have trouble with is not that
    the stuff is written down, but WHO writes it down.
    
    Most folks have no problem with strategy memos by VP's being used
    as "smoking guns", but I, at least, can't see how a note written
    by a junior assistant programmer apprentice could carry any weight
    during litigation, especially if it was just an opinion.
    
    -joet

    
    Regarding NOTES files begin corporate documents and who has the
    right to read your mail:
    
    I remember (not with complete details) reading I think in VNS
    technology watch some months ago that the government wanted which
    ever vendor they used at the General Accounting Office to make their
    electronic mail/message system such that all messages that were
    sent were recorded somewhere in the system. Anyone remember this?
    
    

re:.13

I don't know about the vendor situation but the joint committee on the 
Iran/Contra affair has become interested in the "missing" computer messages 
once again.

    Regarding the "ownership" of these NOTES files, all of us are merely
    "trustees" of the contents therein. Trustees manage/manipulate/direct
    but do not own.
    
    						Warren

The following relates to whether or not we are allowed to delete mail,
etc.  Pay attention!
    			Steve

             <<< HUMAN::WRKD$:[NOTES_ARCHIVE]MARKETING_V2.NOTE;1 >>>
                             -< Marketing Issues >-
================================================================================
Note 468.0              Document retention for litigation              3 replies
QUARK::LIONEL "Three rights make a left"             53 lines  20-JAN-1987 10:59
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From:	LEAGLE::GRODBERG     "LES GRODBERG DTN 223-5740" 20-JAN-1987 08:40
Subj:	LITIGATION RETENTION REQUIREMENT



      * * *  IMPORTANT MESSAGE FROM THE LAW DEPARTMENT  * * *

       * *  PLEASE DISTRIBUTE THROUGHOUT YOUR ORGANIZATION  * *

                  DOCUMENT RETENTION - SECOND NOTICE

                                   
DIGITAL is currently involved in litigation containing antitrust 
claims with three companies:  System Industries, Emulex and EMC.  
These lawsuits require DIGITAL to locate and retain all documents 
relating to the claims cited in the litigation.  In order to comply 
with our legal obligation to produce documents, as well as to help 
prepare DIGITAL's affirmative case in the lawsuits, all employees are 
instructed as follows:

UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE EVERY DIGITAL EMPLOYEE MUST RETAIN ALL DOCUMENTS 
OR OTHER FORMS OF RECORDED INFORMATION RELATING TO THE DEVELOPMENT, 
MARKETING OR SALE OF PDP OR VAX SYSTEMS INCLUDING HARDWARE, SOFTWARE, 
AND PERIPHERAL DEVICES.  

This includes, but is not limited to, information relating to:

o    The design or development of any DIGITAL CPU, software, memory, 
     mass storage, other peripheral device or communications product;
o    Marketing or sales strategies for any DIGITAL CPU, software, 
     memory, mass storage, other peripheral device or communications 
     product;
o    DIGITAL's competitors and their products, competitive practices or 
     market shares;
o    The technical performance, pricing, costs, sales or profitability 
     of any DIGITAL CPU, software, memory, mass storage, other 
     peripheral device or communications product;
o    DIGITAL's bus and other patent licensing and enforcement 
     strategies or practices; or
o    DIGITAL's patent infringement litigation against SI, EMC or 
     Emulex.

NO DOCUMENTS RELEVANT TO THE ISSUES RAISED IN THESE LAWSUITS SHOULD BE 
DISCARDED, EVEN IF YOU WOULD NORMALLY DO SO IN THE ORDINARY COURSE OF 
BUSINESS.

These documents will be reviewed by a Law Department representative in 
the near future.  If you have any questions about the retention of 
documents relating to the SI, Emulex and EMC lawsuits, contact the Law 
Department (Ann Killilea DTN 223-3264 or Joe Nevins DTN 223-9233).

         

    Is there an E-mail address for me to forward my junk E-mail to
    instead of discarding it (my normal practice) or letting it overflow
    my system's disks?  :-)

      

    Well, I suppose there's LEAGLE::GRODBERG!  Realistically, keep
    mail and other files relevant to the topics in the memo I posted,
    and do what you want with the rest.
    					Steve

I only feel responsible for keeping documents that I write; I have no
responsibility to keep a mail message someone else wrote and sent to me
and who knows how many other people.

/john

    What happens if we view electronic mail as a modern replacement
    for the telephone?  Many folks (including myself) prefer
    Email because of it's ability to time-shift.
    
    There are many legal precedents regarding the privacy of
    phone messages and restrictions on wire tapping.  It seems
    to me (for what it's worth) that a company's message service
    should be considered equal independent of the vehicle used
    to transmit the message.
    
    I am not referring to electronic memo replacements or open
    note files, just person to person messages.
    
    - gerry

Let's get the discussion back on track a bit...

Revisit note .12-

>================================================================================
>Note 323.12           Are notesfiles "corporate documents"?             12 of 20
>JOET::JOET "Deatht�ngue lives!"                       9 lines   9-JUN-1987 14:29
>                            -< How low do you go? >-
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    I think that what a lot of people have trouble with is not that
>    the stuff is written down, but WHO writes it down.
>    
>    Most folks have no problem with strategy memos by VP's being used
>    as "smoking guns", but I, at least, can't see how a note written
>    by a junior assistant programmer apprentice could carry any weight
>    during litigation, especially if it was just an opinion.
>    
>    -joet

Can the junior person get the corporation in trouble by posting notes
with derogatroy and/or inflamatory comments?

Experts to the front.

Lee

In reference to the memo that Steve posted, I have a hard time taking this
thing seriously (no reflection on Steve).  If this is indeed a big deal (which
it may very well be), why haven't I been formally notified?  Am I expected to
look at every notes file for every memo someone may care to post?  I believe
this was discussed earlier in some other context, but if someone wants me to
keep my mail or alter my work patterns, let THEM tell ME about it.

-mark

    These memos tend to have odd distribution patterns.  What is SUPPOSED
    to happen is that the author sends to a set of managers (or VPs)
    who forward in turn to their staff, etc.  That's how I got the
    memo on "intent".  But sometimes one of the people break the chain,
    and "us peons" don't get the message.  Hence the secondary, informal
    distribution in conferences by helpful folks such as yours truly.
    
    I really don't know how this could be handled better.
    
    Rather than dismissing the issue because you did not receive a formal
    notification, you should accept the memo in the spirit in which
    it was intended.  For most of us, the memo on keeping documents
    related to the lawsuits is irrelevant, as few of us are responsible
    for the specific areas listed.  The memo on intent is much wider
    in scope, and as a moderator of at least one conference where this is
    an important issue, I have incorporated the memo into the conference
    rules.
    
    I agree completely with the position of the "intent" memo and
    hope that others do also.
    					Steve

    .-1 speculated that few of us are involved with the kinds of documents
    mentioned in the memo in .16.  Maybe I'm having trouble with
    lawyer-speak, but the way I read it:
    
    "The design or development of any DIGITAL CPU, software, memory,
    mass storage, other peripheral device or communications product..."
    
    As I read it, that's what most of the engineers here do every day.
    Further, the next paragraph seems to cover most of marketing.  For
    that matter, the all caps paragraph seemed even clearer: "all documents
    ... relating to the development, marketing or sale of PDP or VAX
    systems including hardware, software, and peripheral devices." 
    What am I missing?

Re .24:

>    What am I missing?

You're still underestimating the stupidity of the memo.  It doesn't
specify whether it means PDP-11 documents or PDP-1 documents.
				/AHM

    Clearly, it means both.  Because office space is tight in Spit Brook,
    I have been mailing documents that I am responsible for to the Law
    Department--I don't have room to store them here, and there is no
    suggestion that we will ever be told that it is OK to discard them.
    So far I have had no complaints from the Law Department.
        John Sauter

    Please provide the mailstop of your 400 gigabyte Law contact.

    I have been sending documents to Joe Nevins, at mail stop
    MSO1/C5.
        John Sauter

I don't know about the legal details.... but, in many publications there is
always a disclaimer to the effect that all opinions expressed in articles
do not reflect the opinion of the publisher. So my question for the
lawyers is: Would a properly worded disclaimer placed in the introductory
note of each conference remove Digital`s corporate responsibility for
opinions expressed in those conferences?

-Ed

    I'm sorry to revive this psycho killer of a topic, but _do_ disclaimers
    count?  Digital employees use 'em in other contexts - if NOTES are
    considered publishing, shouldn't they be given the same loopholes?

Yes:

From:	NAME: ED SCHWARTZ  (V.P. of LEGAL)
	FUNC: LAW
	ADDR: MSO/M6
	TEL: 223-5500 <4232@DECMAIL@CORMTS@CORE>
Posted-date: 31-Jul-1987
Subject: WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS

To:	See Below

  
 The practice of preventive law - helping Digital avoid costly legal 
 problems - is an important element of the Law Department's function.  As 
 part of that effort, I am providing this brief reminder about the legal 
 risks that can be created when employees are careless about the content of 
 their written communications.
 
 Digital's growth and corporate success make it an increasingly attractive 
 target for litigation.  Over the past several years, the Company has been 
 involved in significant securities, patent, antitrust and product cases, 
 and we must recognize that the potential for additional litigation is 
 always present.  The pretrial discovery process in such cases allows our 
 adversaries wide latitude to request the production of internal Digital 
 documents in their search for evidence to support their claims.    
 
 Not everyone appreciates that even documents marked as "Company 
 Confidential" or "Internal Use Only" are subject to being produced to an 
 adversary in litigation.  In fact, nearly every document that is written by 
 a Digital employee is capable of being introduced into evidence at a trial.  
 
 If documents are not carefully written and are capable of being 
 misconstrued, they may significantly increase the cost and risk of 
 litigation.  In some circumstances, an employee's uninformed statement 
 about the reasons for a corporate practice or decision could even be held 
 to be an admission of corporate liability.  It is, therefore, very 
 important that everyone takes care to avoid inaccurate, misleading, 
 speculative, emotional or overzealous statements in whatever documents they 
 create. 
 
 There are several publications which give our employees guidelines in this 
 area, including DEC Standard 197-0, Legal Requirements and Guidelines for 
 Digital Publications and Software and Digital's U.S. Antitrust Compliance 
 Guide.  In addition, however, all employees should remember the following 
 general rules for careful writing:
  
   o Be accurate, clear and concise and avoid speculation, generalization 
     or exaggeration;
  
   o Accentuate the positive aspects of programs, technologies and 
     products for our customers and avoid speculation about their 
     potential impact on customers or competitors;	
  
   o Never draw conclusions about the legality of the Company's policies 
     or practices or our liability to a third party;
  
   o Avoid statements that could be misconstrued to suggest an intent to 
     injure any competitor, or to dominate or control any customer or 
     market; and
  
   o Remember that any document relevant to an issue in litigation may be 
     produced to the opposition and used at trial.
  
 This memorandum was drafted for a broad audience, and I suggest that it 
 be distributed throughout your organization.

 		  
[Distribution list removed]


    

    You can bet the courts will rule that they are.

    What information do you have that I don't?

    As far as my contact at Corporate Legal is concerned there is no
    firm policy about notesfiles.
    

    If all notesfiles and not just work-related ones were considered
    'corporate documents', then surely someone would have tried to stamp
    on some of the more libelous comments I sometimes see.
    
    Example: Don't buy ..... from ....... - they are
    flakes/cheats/liars/idiots/rip-off merchants etc etc etc
    
    Could Digital be held responsible for the opinions and value-judgements
    of it's employees ?
    
    Jon

re .34:

>    If all notesfiles and not just work-related ones were considered
>    'corporate documents', then surely someone would have tried to stamp
>    on some of the more libelous comments I sometimes see.
    
As a moderator of several conferences I always stamp on statements that are 
defamatory about external businesses or agencies. If you must make
negative statements about others, make them factual, otherwise Digital is 
at risk. For example; what if a relative or friend of the libeled person
worked for Digital and read the note?

Dave.

    Dave,
    
    clearly you are an enlightened moderator. Obviously not all are
    as zealous. ;-)
       
    Jon