The article is vaguely interesting but not surprising to those of us in the law; but the headline is egregiously stupid. I get it, nerds and techies (like us)

The article is vaguely interesting but not surprising to those of us in the law; but the headline is egregiously stupid. I get it, nerds and techies (like us) love clear categories of things. But the entire point of the law isn't perfect taxonomies, it's to resolve disputes between parties. Which is to say, bellyaching over the weirdness of definitions isn't a FLAW in the law, -- it IS the law itself. There's nothing broken here.