Re: Wallace case FAQ for dummies v1.5

[Alexander Terekhov]

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> 
> Qua, 2006-07-05 Ã s 11:16 +0200, Alexander Terekhov escreveu:
> > Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> > >
> > > Ter, 2006-07-04 Ã s 19:17 +0200, Alexander Terekhov escreveu:
> > > > Q: Bzzzzt, but according to RMS, "intellectual property... is a mirage,
> > > > which appears to have a coherent existence only because the term
> > > > suggests it does." So bzzzzt, what the fuck ... !?
> > > >
> > > > A: Well, well, well. But according to one FTC commissioner (and an
> > > > antitrust attorney),
> > >
> > > Alex, please let me understand your reasoning:
> > >
> > > Because a text is published by some law authority like FTC "is", or
> > > Attoneries are, or even Judges... does that have to be taken as Official
> > > in the Point of View of Law?
> >
> > Consider:
> 
> (...)
> 
> Will you please answer my question, instead?
> It's a simple 'yes' or 'no'...

42. Next question, please.

regards,
alexander.