Does the email contain a logo? Then it's copyrighted.
However they probably (for understandable reasons) don't want to do that kind of case-by-case decision making.
Regardless of how understandable their reasons are, if they aren't making the decisions case-by-case, then they are blatantly refusing to honour the ruling. However, I don't think that's what they are doing. I want to think they're simply employing the wrong people to make those decisions.
Anyway, I agree the ruling was a mess, but for another reason. The biggest problem I see is the failure to consider other search engines. They can probably force Bing to honour the ruling, because MS, like Google, has a corporate presence in the EU, but what about all the other, current and future, search engines?
The thing with the original case was that it was about information of a kind that doesn't belong in a newspaper at all. It was not a news piece, not an analysis piece, not an opinion piece. It was part of an excerpt of a government-issued journal. Those journals are available online. At the time the notice was published (the 90s in Spain), many if not most people didn't have access to the internet or didn't even know they could find the government journals online, so it may have made sense to publish portions of them on the newspapers. Today, it doesn't make sense to keep that information on the newspapers online. If they don't delete it (no, that would NOT be censorship - the information can still be found online, on the government's site), they should at least mark it as non-searchable in robots.txt.
Then there is debt inflation, legal nightmares and a few thousand more reasons not to quit the euro; those are just the most obvious.
You can find the GitHub repo here and see a screencast of installing the tool and creating an HTML5 project at the bottom of the post.
Link to Original Source
YEC is another matter altogether. It is a falsable theory, and patently false unless we basically ignore all the knowledge we have about physics and chemistry - knowledge which we regard as valid because it can be tested and has been tested through repeatable experiments.
It does take a leap of faith to state "There is no God" (atheism). The sentence isn't testable or falsable.
Agnosticism, on the other hand, is truly faithless as it avoids the question of God's existence (or at least it admits it is pointless).
But would you get a "No dial tone" error with that?
Posting to undo accidental downmod...