On Thu, 2003-07-31 at 08:25, Bill Lindley wrote:
> I hate to say I told you so, but...
> 
> Awhile back I commented that file-sharing copyright violations were an 
> outcropping of the scofflaw mentality propagated by widespread speeding 
> on the highways.
> 
> I received several replies to the effect that Arizona law permitted 
> speeding.  These alleged that "you can drive at any 'reasonable' speed." 
> 
> However, Arizona law is clear that the "reasonable and prudent" 
> provision is pre-empted by any posted speed limits, not the other way 
> around.
> 
> "any speed in excess of the following speeds is prima facie evidence 
> that the speed is too great and therefore unreasonable: ...Sixty-five 
> miles per hour..."
> 
> full text of the law at:  http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ars/28/00701.htm
> 
> I'm all for the protection of Fair Use, but copyright violation is 
> illegal and so is speeding.  Even if you don't want them to be.
> 
> We are a country guided by Laws.  Let's uphold them!
> 
> \\/
> http://www.wlindley.com
> 
> p.s., Please reply off-list as I recognize this is perhaps not entirely 
> on-topic.
----
Once again I must take issue with each and every point that you make
here.

It is purely bs to make your statements and then ask for replies off
list - if you are so arrogant to think that only your opinions qualify
as valuable to the list and everyone else's replies should be off list -
you need to rethink your position.

The concept of reasonable and prudent is exactly stated within the first
paragraph of your link and thus it is indeed confirmed. The concept of
reasonable and prudent is entirely contextual whereas speed limits are
considered only in the context of the type of roadway, access,
pedestrian traffic etc.

If you see someone swerving down the highway and you decide that you
must get in front of that person, a very strong argument for it being
reasonable and prudent to pass that person in excess of the posted speed
limit could be made - whether a police officer or a judge would agree
with your assessment that it was reasonable and prudent would be
subjective. It would not be reasonable and prudent to pass someone
weaving in a posted 15 miles per hour school zone.

If you have a person in the car who is suffering from medical calamity,
you can easily make an argument for excessive speed being reasonable and
prudent while you are racing them to emergency care. 

The law that you recited stated that speeds in excess of that which
followed constituted prima facie evidence of unreasonable - which means
that the burden of proving the excessive speed to be reasonable is upon
the driver. A person in the back seat going through cardiac arrest would
make a convincing argument for the reasonableness of the excessive
speed.

Thus once again, you have subjected us to this topic, proving nothing
except that even when you emailed me off list and finally suggested that
we drop the topic, you then emailed me a week later on about this that
you were absolutely incapable of being able to drop the topic and now
you dredge it up a month later - not surprisingly incapable of making
any headway on your original assertions. It was, still is and
undoubtedly will always be of little consequence to this message base
and I regretfully have prolonged it.

Lastly, you are trying to provide a nexus between speeding and stealing
software - they are two entirely different topics and perhaps we ought
to bring prostitution into your nexus because it too is a law that is
often broken.

Yes, people speed on the roadways
Yes, people use illegal copies of software
People make illegal copies of CD's, download copyrighted movies, music,
steal cable signals, etc.

If you opt for personal responsibility and worry about your own
activities and let everyone else fend for themselves, the world would be
a better place than having other people shove their view of morality
down their throats.

Craig