[Pct] Notification/reporting correspondence to clients - PDF vs. email body

[Timothy Snowden]

But most secure servers are themselves third party services? Most fileservers are hosted outside of our direct and sole control.

Also, there is secure email (Proton is a favorite among some of our software clients) and/or other messaging services (like Signal). Practically, they would be as secure as a secure server. I'm guessing that if a party wants to make the argument that using 3rd party services waives your expectation of privacy, then the cat's out of the bag (docketing, remote file server, virtual server, AWS / Azure / Google cloud).

Just my barely-connected thoughts!
________________________________
From: Pct <pct-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> on behalf of Gerry Peters via Pct <pct at oppedahl-lists.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2024 8:58 PM
To: For users of the PCT and ePCT. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <pct at oppedahl-lists.com>
Cc: Gerry Peters <gerrypeters at jttpatent.com>
Subject: Re: [Pct] Notification/reporting correspondence to clients - PDF vs. email body

Those are good points, Krista, but I think there is at least one case
(federal case against Snowden's email provider) in which US government
took position that there can be no expectation of privacy where 3rd
party service such as email or fax service is used (ridiculous
position but it is what it is). Conversely, where US government
requires secrecy, I remember seeing regulations specifying exactly what
sort of end-to-end encryption is sufficient (3rd party service provider
can't have ability to decrypt). While you make a good point about
timestamps and recordkeeping if your goal is to persuade a court your
client is entitled to privilege, if possession is 9/10's of the law
and privilege belongs to the client, it gives me a warm fuzzy feeling
to know that there is no 3rd party that can be pressured to betray
its users. Also, besides privilege, there is the issue of keeping
material secret until a foreign filing license has issued, and for
that I think plaintext email or any email that can be decrypted by a
3rd party is probably insufficient where communications are happening
internationally or with potential access by noncitizens.
        ---Gerry

--
Pct mailing list
Pct at oppedahl-lists.com
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Foppedahl-lists.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpct_oppedahl-lists.com&data=05%7C02%7Ctimothy%40thompsonpatentlaw.com%7C767969cee59c4bf766d308dc2dd21f88%7Cbbad2d5600a44a43ade926f8d0710fee%7C0%7C0%7C638435627699766211%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ofOuJGYucWlJzbjFJJRgwHDkZh74ZUJ7nbGFkAXANLk%3D&reserved=0<http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/pct_oppedahl-lists.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/pct_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240215/9395e34f/attachment.htm>