<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Compliance Policies and Email</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.compliancebuilding.com/2009/04/02/compliance-policies-and-email/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.compliancebuilding.com/2009/04/02/compliance-policies-and-email/</link>
	<description>Doug Cornelius on compliance and business ethics for private equity real estate</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 13:01:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: build a computer, desktop gadgets, top gadgets, buying a computer, newest technology, build your own laptop, parts of computer</title>
		<link>http://www.compliancebuilding.com/2009/04/02/compliance-policies-and-email/comment-page-1/#comment-21256</link>
		<dc:creator>build a computer, desktop gadgets, top gadgets, buying a computer, newest technology, build your own laptop, parts of computer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2011 05:47:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.compliancebuilding.com/?p=2062#comment-21256</guid>
		<description>owledge with all of my friends!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>owledge with all of my friends!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NikkaM</title>
		<link>http://www.compliancebuilding.com/2009/04/02/compliance-policies-and-email/comment-page-1/#comment-12513</link>
		<dc:creator>NikkaM</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2011 00:12:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.compliancebuilding.com/?p=2062#comment-12513</guid>
		<description>&quot;Third, employees should not access another employee’s files or email accounts, whether they are the company’s or personal.&quot;

True, however what if the employer is being compelled by the government to produce email documents?  I&#039;d suspect that these would need to square with the newer rulings from the recent Warshak case.  
See also: http://lawblog.legalmatch.com/2011/01/06/want-to-search-my-email-court-says-you-need-a-warrant/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Third, employees should not access another employee’s files or email accounts, whether they are the company’s or personal.&#8221;</p>
<p>True, however what if the employer is being compelled by the government to produce email documents?  I&#8217;d suspect that these would need to square with the newer rulings from the recent Warshak case.<br />
See also: <a href="http://lawblog.legalmatch.com/2011/01/06/want-to-search-my-email-court-says-you-need-a-warrant/" rel="nofollow">http://lawblog.legalmatch.com/2011/01/06/want-to-search-my-email-court-says-you-need-a-warrant/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Email, Warrants and Corporate Email &#124; Compliance Building</title>
		<link>http://www.compliancebuilding.com/2009/04/02/compliance-policies-and-email/comment-page-1/#comment-11927</link>
		<dc:creator>Email, Warrants and Corporate Email &#124; Compliance Building</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Dec 2010 13:01:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.compliancebuilding.com/?p=2062#comment-11927</guid>
		<description>[...] and you can decide how your employees use them. If you clearly state that your employees have no expectation of privacy for email on the company&#8217;s network then you are free to dig into their email traffic as part of an internal [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] and you can decide how your employees use them. If you clearly state that your employees have no expectation of privacy for email on the company&#8217;s network then you are free to dig into their email traffic as part of an internal [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: N.J. Supreme Court upholds privacy of personal e-mails accessed at work &#124; Compliance Building</title>
		<link>http://www.compliancebuilding.com/2009/04/02/compliance-policies-and-email/comment-page-1/#comment-5357</link>
		<dc:creator>N.J. Supreme Court upholds privacy of personal e-mails accessed at work &#124; Compliance Building</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 2010 18:00:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.compliancebuilding.com/?p=2062#comment-5357</guid>
		<description>[...] sent during work hours on a company computer, was not protected by the attorney-client privilege: Compliance Policies and Email. That later was overturned: Workplace Computer Policy and the Attorney Client [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] sent during work hours on a company computer, was not protected by the attorney-client privilege: Compliance Policies and Email. That later was overturned: Workplace Computer Policy and the Attorney Client [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael L. Pisauro, Jr.</title>
		<link>http://www.compliancebuilding.com/2009/04/02/compliance-policies-and-email/comment-page-1/#comment-2662</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael L. Pisauro, Jr.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:10:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.compliancebuilding.com/?p=2062#comment-2662</guid>
		<description>The NJ case, Stengart v. Loving Care is now on appeal to the NJ Supreme Court.  The Appellate Division reversed the trial courts decision and found that Loving Care could not use the emails.  Part of their reasoning was that it was unclear whether the policy was in place.  The Appellate Division also wrote that the employer&#039;s policy had to be related to the employer&#039;s legitimate business interests.  The Supreme Court will hear oral argument on Dec. 2nd.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The NJ case, Stengart v. Loving Care is now on appeal to the NJ Supreme Court.  The Appellate Division reversed the trial courts decision and found that Loving Care could not use the emails.  Part of their reasoning was that it was unclear whether the policy was in place.  The Appellate Division also wrote that the employer&#8217;s policy had to be related to the employer&#8217;s legitimate business interests.  The Supreme Court will hear oral argument on Dec. 2nd.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Workplace Computer Policy and the Attorney Client Privilege &#124; Compliance Building</title>
		<link>http://www.compliancebuilding.com/2009/04/02/compliance-policies-and-email/comment-page-1/#comment-1235</link>
		<dc:creator>Workplace Computer Policy and the Attorney Client Privilege &#124; Compliance Building</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 11:02:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.compliancebuilding.com/?p=2062#comment-1235</guid>
		<description>[...] sent during work hours on a company computer, was not protected by the attorney-client privilege: Compliance Policies and Email (Stengart v. Loving Care [.pdf]) That case has now been overturned. It seems that a company&#8217;s [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] sent during work hours on a company computer, was not protected by the attorney-client privilege: Compliance Policies and Email (Stengart v. Loving Care [.pdf]) That case has now been overturned. It seems that a company&#8217;s [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Corporate Compliance Insights</title>
		<link>http://www.compliancebuilding.com/2009/04/02/compliance-policies-and-email/comment-page-1/#comment-406</link>
		<dc:creator>Corporate Compliance Insights</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2009 15:31:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.compliancebuilding.com/?p=2062#comment-406</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;GRC Blog Roundup: KPMG Sued for $1 Billion For Role in New Century Collapse...&lt;/strong&gt;

KPMG is being sued for $1 billionn by the liquidators of New Century, the collapsed subprime lender, in the first big lawsuit against one of the Big 4 audit firms arising from the current financial crisis.  Also, links to blogs on email compliance and ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>GRC Blog Roundup: KPMG Sued for $1 Billion For Role in New Century Collapse&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>KPMG is being sued for $1 billionn by the liquidators of New Century, the collapsed subprime lender, in the first big lawsuit against one of the Big 4 audit firms arising from the current financial crisis.  Also, links to blogs on email compliance and &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

