4 ms·
I happen to have a hobby of reading law cases on intellectual property that was sparked by my business being affected by IP issues. I used to read all kinds of
by ikeboy 7y ago
I happen to have a hobby of reading law cases on intellectual property that was sparked by my business being affected by IP issues.
I used to read all kinds of cases as a hobby even before that, for fun. I remember reading through much of Ross Ulbricht's trial documents and comparing it to what his advocates were claiming, which was enlightening.
- o-__-o 7y agoYep. The SCO UNIX trial and the ongoing oracle v google cases are exceptionally fun reads. Other notable public narrative vs reality cases included OJ Simpson, the Zimmerman guy, and what’s happening right now with Trump (the treason word gets thrown around so often yet no one actually know what that means legally)
- wbl 7y agoTreason against the United States shall consist in levying war against them or in adhering to their enemies, providing aid and comfort. It's in the Constitution.
- PaulDavisThe1st 7y agoundefined in that sentence: almost every word. "Levying"? "War" ? "Enemies"? This is why we have both a Constitution and a body of law. The Constitution uses words, the law defines what they mean.
- celticmusic 7y agoThose words are not difficult to define or understand. Only a nihilist claims nothing is inherently knowable. It's possible to understand what treason is, just as it's possible for something to skirt the edge of it and require more nuance and thought.
- o-__-o 7y agoThe words Paul Davis used are defined in the constitution, it’s a legal document. Everything has a legal definition. Legal texts are interpreted by the judicial branch which sets the limits of nuance and thought. As Paul Davis showed, however, not everyone reads legal texts as a hobby.. so one should really delegate that work to someone who does (just like I won’t ask my plumber to create some ML models for me)
- celticmusic 7y agothat's a load of phooey. Trump got elected by the people, he can be judged by the people. This argument you're making is the same mindset that causes people to argue that since freedom of speech is only applicable to the government, we shouldn't strive for the ideal in every aspect of our society. It's looking at the problem exactly backwards.
- o-__-o 7y agoExcuse me? I didn’t say he couldn’t be judged, I’m saying people are saying he has committed treason when he literally has not. Which is the difference between public opinion vs reality. I don’t consider my plumber an expert in AI, so I won’t expect him to have the best insight into my job. Likewise, folks who don’t wish to take the time to read legal texts should probably defer to someone a bit more knowledge than them. So call trump crooked, ugly, whatever.. but if you say he’s the nicest and happiest president ever would be just as false as saying he committed treason. Just like OJ being not guilty based on facts (reality) but everyone already judged him as guilty. Same with Zimmerman. Same with Ulbricht. Please don’t mistake my post for support of any particular view.
- ikeboy 7y agoSo you believe OJ and Ulbricht were innocent, and the respective civil and criminal court cases finding the opposite were mistaken?
- 7y ago