Just for the record, buying stolen goods is not a crime. *Knowingly*
buying stolen goods, however, often is. In any case even an innocent
purchaser of stolen goods acquires no valid title to them. If he loses
out to the rightful owner, it¹s he who has to go chase the thief. That is
one of the traditional dimensions of the principle of Caveat Emptor (buyer
beware.) How it fits into the present discussion I will let others decide.
End of OT law school lecture.
Ted, KN1CBR
Edward A. Dauer
Dean Emeritus and Professor Emeritus of Law
University of Denver
On 10/26/14, 4:14 AM, "
[hidden email]"
<
[hidden email]> wrote:
>Message: 29
>Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 02:33:50 -0700
>From: Jim Brown <
[hidden email]>
>To:
[hidden email]
>Subject: Re: [Elecraft] RS232 interface
>Message-ID: <
[hidden email]>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>On 10/26/2014 2:22 AM, G4GNX wrote:
>>FTDI on the other hand should be severely slapped.
>
>Let's see if I understand this. Someone steals from me, I take measures
>to make it difficult for someone to use what has been stolen, and I am
>the bad guy?
>
>In most of the civilized world, buying stolen goods is a crime. And in
>most religions, it's also immoral.
>
>73, Jim K9YC
>
>
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home:
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraftHelp:
http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htmPost: mailto:
[hidden email]
This list hosted by:
http://www.qsl.netPlease help support this email list:
http://www.qsl.net/donate.htmlMessage delivered to
[hidden email]