NanoTech Entertainment Inc (NTEK)

[shajandr]

Once again, PATHOLOGICAL LIAR, DaFoleyFelon, Federal inmate 13141-111 continues to LIE to his shareholders as [e-mail] and FALSELY tell them, and bully them, that the LIES he spews to them in emails are nott allowed to be disclosed.

HE IS WRONG. AGAIN.

You DO NOTT enter into any legally enforceable contract or obligation by asking and email question and getting a reply with a disclaimer on the footer stating that you are bound by a non-disclosure obligation. You have NOTT entered into any agreement by receiving those emails.

THAT IS A FALSE CLAIM and typical of the pathological liar DAVID RUSSELL FOLEY, Federal inmate 13141-111, convicted on multiple counts of FRAUD, crimes which involve LYING and DECEPTION. And for which he was sentenced, in part, to three years of court-ordered mandatory mental health treatment for his pathological lying criminality.

http://lifehacker.com/5790930/disclaimers-in-email-signatures-are-not-just-annoying-but-legally-meaningless

"A better analogy might be suspenders with no pants. Many disclaimers -- particularly of the “This is confidential. Do not forward. Delete and return to sender” variety -- are simply one-sided contracts. Without prior agreement from the other side, they’re unenforceable.

“If you send something without a confidentiality agreement already in place, you can’t say, ‘Oh, you’re bound by my little disclaimer at the bottom of my email.’ From a contract perspective it just doesn’t work,” Hutchins says. He compares them to “shrinkwrap agreements,” or terms and conditions agreements that cannot be read until after purchasing and opening a product -- like software back when it was bought in a box -- which courts have voided.

Several years ago, New York Times reporter Alex Berenson figured as much when he received an email from a lawyer that had been intended for another lawyer, Brad Berenson. The email was somewhat sensitive, regarding settlement negotiations of an investigation brought against drug maker Eli Lilly. Reporter Berenson was covering Eli Lilly’s legal troubles, and though he says he already knew the information contained in the email, he was not moved by the boilerplate language to destroy the email as demanded."
- http://fortune.com/2013/10/15/the-short-history-of-email-disclaimers/

"Q: Are email disclaimers legally binding?

A: In most circumstances, they would not be legally binding. What the disclaimers are trying to do is establish an agreement between the sender and its recipient that gives rise to a duty of nondisclosure. That's just like any other contract. Both parties have to agree to the terms of agreement. There's nothing in the act of simply receiving a message that would give rise to an agreement to keep the contents secret. The net effect most of the time is just to put you on notice." - http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-08-26/business/ct-biz-0826-chicago-law-20110826_1_disclaimers-legal-obligations-binding

Don't lett DaFoleyFelon, PathologicalDavey, BULLY you with bullshit about email confidentiality disclaimers. What he is telling you is CRAP and FALSE. Like most or all of the CONtent of his LIES from [e-mail] (a/k/a DaFoleyFelon, pathological liar).
While many companies use such disclaimers, disclaimers that purport to form non-disclosure agreements with a recipient, ANY recipient, intended or nott, are legally meaningless.