4 ms·

Just because people break copyright law all the time and it's not enforced doesn't mean it's legal to do so. Same principle here I know I broke the law on the

by ta1243 3y ago

Just because people break copyright law all the time and it's not enforced doesn't mean it's legal to do so. Same principle here I know I broke the law on the way back from the station earlier as I did 61mph in a 60 zone. Just because I didn't get caught doesn't make it legal.

medvezhenok 3y ago
There is a difference between de jure and de facto. Defacto, going 61mph in a 60 is legal practically everywhere. De jure, it's not (the law is on the books). Same as jaywalking. It's more of a law to pass responsibility in an accident (i.e. if you were jaywalking and got hit by a motor vehicle - you are at fault because of jaywalking. Jaywalking itself is very rarely prosecuted as a standalone thing)
nerdbert 3y ago
I'm not taking a position on its legality. In most cases that's undefined because the law did not anticipate this situation and it's never been tested in court. They obviously can't prohibit people from checking emails or taking work calls while on vacation, because that means the end of big-spending tourists. Nobody has drawn a red line at a magic point along the continuum from one emergency work call during a two-week holiday, to 9 hours a day in a hotel room hunched over a computer. Where would it be, and why does that particular point maximize benefit for the host country?
baerrie 3y ago
This is not how the US judicial system works. We are innocent until proven guilty. In the case above, to say it is illegal even though it was not proven violates the above. Also, many “laws” aren’t technically codified but instead have been established by precedent, and no precedent is hard and fast. Technically you could argue both the things you mentioned above in court and win, rendering your actions legal.
- ta1243 3y ago
  We're not talking about the US judicial system here. And your statement is nonsense, murdering someone is illegal whether it's proven or not.

by ta1243 3y ago

medvezhenok 3y ago

There is a difference between de jure and de facto. Defacto, going 61mph in a 60 is legal practically everywhere. De jure, it's not (the law is on the books). Same as jaywalking. It's more of a law to pass responsibility in an accident (i.e. if you were jaywalking and got hit by a motor vehicle - you are at fault because of jaywalking. Jaywalking itself is very rarely prosecuted as a standalone thing)

nerdbert 3y ago

I'm not taking a position on its legality. In most cases that's undefined because the law did not anticipate this situation and it's never been tested in court. They obviously can't prohibit people from checking emails or taking work calls while on vacation, because that means the end of big-spending tourists. Nobody has drawn a red line at a magic point along the continuum from one emergency work call during a two-week holiday, to 9 hours a day in a hotel room hunched over a computer. Where would it be, and why does that particular point maximize benefit for the host country?

baerrie 3y ago

This is not how the US judicial system works. We are innocent until proven guilty. In the case above, to say it is illegal even though it was not proven violates the above. Also, many “laws” aren’t technically codified but instead have been established by precedent, and no precedent is hard and fast. Technically you could argue both the things you mentioned above in court and win, rendering your actions legal.

ta1243 3y ago
We're not talking about the US judicial system here. And your statement is nonsense, murdering someone is illegal whether it's proven or not.