> After all, the law is but a contract between us and ourselves throught a governing body, nothing is fixed, and nothing is entirely objective. Sure. But the

> After all, the law is but a contract between us and ourselves throught a governing body, nothing is fixed, and nothing is entirely objective. Sure. But the basic idea of law is that the contract between us now and us in the future is relatively fixed. Otherwise, there is no difference between a system of written law and judges deciding cases at their whims. > But, more importantly, the characterization of libraries as something that actually hurts publishers and writers, as implied by writing that CDL would hurt publishers "no more" than ordinary lending, is something I feel compelled to oppose. > ... [bunch of text that does not actually oppose the previous statement] I think most reasonable people can recognize that: 1. Libraries are a good and useful component of modern society 2. Their lending may economically hurt authors and publishers