On Jan 14, 2008, at 9:46 AM, Craig White wrote:
> Aside from the implications in general, how does this apply to Howell?
>
> Your subject clearly states that this is a wrinkle in the Howell case?
>
> I fail to see the relevance but you are the attorney here. Please make
> your case. I don't recall ever seeing an attorney offering as
> evidence,
> laws that were never passed but you obviously have other notions.
Yet another instance where something that is 'obvious' to you seems to
be nonsense to others. At the same time, what is obscure to you is
obvious to others:
<
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080113-eff-tries-to-quash-labels-making-available-claims.html
>
Note the link at the bottom of the page.
--
Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)