Re: Voluntary Mandatory Self-Ratings and Limits on Speech
On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 02:10:18PM +0300, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
True. Yet harm gives you cause for Common Law action, no?
No. If I start a bakery that competes with yours and takes customers from yours, I have "harmed" you. Yet this is something that society encourages. If I successfully woo your girlfriend/boyfriend, I have "harmed" you. Yet this is seen as acceptable, or at least not illegal, behavior. What is "harmful" is not necessarily illegal or tortuous. -Declan
On Sat, 25 Aug 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 02:10:18PM +0300, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
True. Yet harm gives you cause for Common Law action, no?
No. If I start a bakery that competes with yours and takes customers from yours, I have "harmed" you. Yet this is something that society encourages.
No, no 'harm' occurs in that situation. Nothing that was 'yours' was damaged or othewise manipulated without your consent. Those potential customers decision to shop at your store or another isn't 'yours'. Your desires and expectations weren't fulfilled by the expectations of the market or your approach to using it. However, you have no reason to expect those people to have an obligation to do business with you. Typical logical schism in C-A-C-L thinking, the 'individual' is everything and the 'group' is nothing. Not putting 2+2 that the 'group' is nothing but the collective actions of the individual. This is not the sort of 'individualism' that Hayek and other free market proponents are refering too. In a very real sense it's mis-representation. -- ____________________________________________________________________ natsugusa ya...tsuwamonodomo ga...yume no ato summer grass...those mighty warriors'...dream-tracks Matsuo Basho The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sat, Aug 25, 2001 at 11:02:09AM -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
No, no 'harm' occurs in that situation.
Depends on what you mean by "harm." If I can't pay my rent, I go bankrupt, I can't put my kids through college, I lose my life savings and my respect in the community, and get divorced, etc. -- some folks might count that as harm. I would not say it is harm that has a legal cause of action. (What am I doing wasting my time correcting Choate? Sigh.) -Declan
On Sat, 25 Aug 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote:
On Sat, Aug 25, 2001 at 11:02:09AM -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
No, no 'harm' occurs in that situation.
Depends on what you mean by "harm."
Exactly. Thank you for agreeing with me, as well as admitting that your argument is flawed because of it's relativism. You're 'definition' of harm is so broad that it's useless. -- ____________________________________________________________________ natsugusa ya...tsuwamonodomo ga...yume no ato summer grass...those mighty warriors'...dream-tracks Matsuo Basho The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
participants (2)
-
Declan McCullagh -
Jim Choate