The Curious Propsenity of Some Cypherpunks for (loud) Willful Ignorance. Was: Re: Spoliation cites

[Jim Choate]

On 4 Aug 2001, Dr. Evil wrote:

> But the point is, yes, definitely the judge can demand every single
> copy of a document, and this case clearly demonstrates it in action.

But, in this case (as I've claimed in the past) EACH AND EVERY COPY
represent harm to the plaintiff. Of course it makes sense to recover all
copies where each of those copies will cause harm. The purpose of the
court, and law in general, is to reduce 'harm'.

That is NOT the same thing as demanding that an author of a work turn over
each and every copy of same. Of course if there was a defamation issue
then again it would make sense to recover each and every copy.

In the case of something like the Pentagon Papers it makes sense to
ATTEMPT to recover said documents. Since each copy represents harm.

Bottem line, if the court orders all copies siezed there must be some
indication of harm if ANY SINGLE copy remains unrecovered. Otherwise it's
just a violation of the 1st.


 --
    ____________________________________________________________________

                Nature and Nature's laws lay hid in night:
                God said, "Let Tesla be", and all was light.

                                          B.A. Behrend

       The Armadillo Group       ,::////;::-.          James Choate
       Austin, Tx               /:'///// ``::>/|/      ravage at ssz.com
       www.ssz.com            .',  ||||    `/( e\      512-451-7087
                           -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
    --------------------------------------------------------------------