Has there been any attempts by anyone to publish these laws via Bittorrent or ipfs?
Not that I am condoning it, but I'm curious if it has been attempted. I searched but did not find anything.
If you publish Georgia's state laws, you'll get sued for copyright and lose
81–88 of 88 posts
Re: If you publish Georgia's state laws, you'll get sued for copyright and lose
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
We can also give Georgia the benefit of the doubt and assume there was a decision maker involved in this at some point who (rightly and in good faith) thought annotations might be a great thing to add to the official law to make it more robust/useful. And they had no idea of the potential negative consequences of the way they went about procuring and labeling the resulting artifact. We have enough mistrust in the gov…
> We can also give Georgia the benefit of the doubt Something I might be inclined to do if they fixed the problem after becoming aware of it. Did Georgia arrange a deal whereby its citizens can read the law of their land for free? Did they declare the annotations were no longer considered part of the law? Or did they spend tax-payer money on prosecuting somebody for having the temerity to make copies of the law? I th…
They have not. But any attempt to make them see the light will fall on deaf ears and make them dig in their heels when it uses rhetoric.
My main quip here comes from my strong belief that much of our political climate comes from incendiary remarks (e.g., "protection racket"). And this is counter productive. Even if you are right it is still counter productive.
You catch more flies with carefully crafted honey.
Re: If you publish Georgia's state laws, you'll get sued for copyright and lose
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn't say the country was "founded" on such things. Yes, they were interwoven into the fabric of the country at the time; but the country was also created in a way that opened the door to remove those things. As for your last sentence; that's the inevitable outcome of almost all civilizations which is why revolutions happen at a somewhat steady rate.
It required a civil war to remove slavery. The country was not built to have war as the mechanism for change.
The civil war was not required to remove slavery, it could easily have been removed via the law; which it was. The war was the unfortunate result of the lawful attempts to remove slavery from the country. If the war had not happened, the Southern states would have left the country to form their own with slavery and the remaining US states would have continued making slavery illegal. The war was partly to keep the Union together. But it's a complicated thing that doesn't have just one simplified element to it.
Re: If you publish Georgia's state laws, you'll get sued for copyright and lose
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, by your logic, anything happening during a country's founding we deem today as bad means that country was founded on those bad things. Then every single country on Earth in all of human history was founded on bad things. That's silly logic.
No, that isn't my logic and isn't what I said. In the case of the US it's been a continuous legacy that began with indentured servitude and slavery, continued through slavery and sharecropping, and now exists today in various forms including in prisons. If you can't or won't argue the points I'm actually making, don't try to inject your own version of what you think I might be saying.
Well, it is your logic, you should own it.
I am arguing the points you are making, I disagree with your claim that bad things happening during the formation of a country is the basis of that country. You are the one using generalized statements to label an entire nation of people as evil.
If you want to say some, I repeat some, of the founders had unfortunate attitudes toward slavery then that's fine. Some of them did, some of them did not. But you are heavily insinuating that everyone, EVERYONE, at the time of the formation of the country was in favor of indentured servitude and slavery. Which is simply not true. I would assume the indentured servants and slaves who later became citizens would not be in agreement with such things. Although, I'm willing to bet we could find examples of ones that were.
Did those individual points happen in the US throughout its history? Yes they did, I have no problem agreeing to that. But since you seem to suggest that the US is a bad country due to that history then by standard logic we must dictate that every other country that have had similar bad things in its history must equally be bad. Which is quite likely every single country this planet has ever had throughout human history. You are choosing to ignore the good to point out the bad and then blame everyone for it, whether they are responsible or not. That is silly logic.
Just because a country has bad moments in its history does not mean that is the basis and fabric of that country.
Re: If you publish Georgia's state laws, you'll get sued for copyright and lose
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone who is part Cherokee (on the Dawes' Rolls), what do you mean by 'original inhabitants'?
In context, what do you think? Did your people found the US, or practice indentured servitude and slavery? As I understand it you were part of a very different and much older nation that predated the current one. Again, as I understand the people I'm describing came by and decided to take it from you, founding a new one its place. I'm not endorsing that, and my ancestry is utterly unrelated to either group's history.
Some Native Americans did, in fact, have and sold slaves.
Re: If you publish Georgia's state laws, you'll get sued for copyright and lose
#86This is damn disgraceful (and that's about as respectable a comment I can make about it). The same atrocious behavior happens in Britain and commonwealth countries with Crown Copyright.
For the life of me, why do we put up with this nonsense? We ought to be rioting in the streets over it until fixed.
(It's little wonder our democracies are in such big trouble when so few of the citizenry actually care about atrocities committed against democracy by 'The State'.)
Re: If you publish Georgia's state laws, you'll get sued for copyright and lose
#87Yeah, some days I think the US civil war was a mistake, and the south should have just become a separate country. Sort of a "Mexico North", or something. With apologies to otherwise intelligent people that have to live in that hell hole...
The problem isn't exclusive to Georgia (or the South). The State of Oregon also filed suit (later dismissed, IIRC) against Malamud for republishing their laws. And most progressive cities publish their official code through 3rd parties with restrictive copyright attached. This problem exists for all of America.
Oh. Well that's just great, then :-)
Re: If you publish Georgia's state laws, you'll get sued for copyright and lose
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's important to note that Georgia is one state out of fifty; most states don't do this and many have the entire body of their laws available online from the official source, not a third-party provider (And federal law certainly is as well.) What is fair to say is that the patchwork nature of America's state/federal system divide makes these kinds of gross inconsistencies happen more often than they maybe should, an…
And Georgia sucks. Not as bad as Mississippi, Alabama, West Virginia, or Arkansas. But definitely in the next tier. At least it is gradually entering North Carolina territory.
We've banned this account for repeatedly posting uncivilly and unsubstantively after we've asked you to stop. We're happy to unban accounts if you email hn@ycombinator.com and we believe you'll post within the guidelines in the future.