On 3/9/2010 11:50 AM, RJack wrote:
"... but that's not relevant". Neither is your analogy.
You're wrong about that (naturally). The original conversation was On 3/2/2010 10:43 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > David Kastrup wrote: >> Taking something in a supermarket without paying constitutes theft. The >> relevant activity of the theft is done at the time I take the ware, the >> status of the theft is established when I pass the cash register. > Uh stupid dak. You're mistaken. As usual, Terekhov was wrong, and the Colorado case is an example which demonstrates this. Borrowing a DVD from a library is a legal act. Borrowing a DVD from a library and failing to return it is theft. The status of the theft is established once sufficient time has passed and the item has not been returned. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
