Klarinet Archive - Posting 000261.txt from 2009/02

From: Michael Nichols <mrn.clarinet@-----.com>
Subj: Re: [kl] Fair Use
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 00:36:27 -0500

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 11:14 PM, Jonathan Cohler <cohler@-----.org> wrote:

> If X has never (to the best of anyone's knowledge that is currently active
> in this discussion on this list) been adjudicated as a violation of the law,
> then X is very likely NOT illegal.
>
> So to prove this wrong you would have to show me some X for which nobody
> currently active in this discussion knows a case, and yet X is illegal.

Actually, that's much easier to do than you think. Just find some
statute no one on the list has seen before (there are plenty to choose
from) that says something like "It is a violation of this statute to
do X." If they don't know of the statute, they probably won't know of
any cases about it, so they won't be able to name any, yet if the
statute says that X is illegal, then X is illegal (because that's the
way statutes work).

------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2009 Woodwind.Org Donation Drive is going on right now - see
https://secure.donax-us.com/donation/ for more information.
------------------------------------------------------------------