cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1997-06-08 - Re: Responses to “Spam costs and questions” (long)

Header Data

From: Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 0c3be6e648285b084ab817ab6d08f77e3ed55e3597bd2dfc810a2b0ec6b88813
Message ID: <19970608065652.41575@bywater.songbird.com>
Reply To: <199706081255.HAA03281@mailhub.amaranth.com>
UTC Datetime: 1997-06-08 14:15:05 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 22:15:05 +0800

Raw message

From: Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 22:15:05 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: <199706081255.HAA03281@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: <19970608065652.41575@bywater.songbird.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



On Sun, Jun 08, 1997 at 07:51:37AM -0500, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>In <Pine.GSO.3.95.970608053415.20770A-100000@well.com>, on 06/08/97 
>   at 07:36 AM, Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com> said:
>
>>I don't think commercial speech should be treated as second-class speech.
>>But my position is hardly surprising. 
>
>Well I think that there are some that would confuse the issue between 1st
>Amendment free speech and the issues surrounding fraud. Especially those
>in government who write the laws that regulate commercial speech.
>

The prospectus is a legal document -- part of the contract between the
mutual fund and the customer. 

So, the question is, should there be any legal constraints on the 
"speech" in contracts?  Can I sign a contract, and later be able to 
say "Oh, *that* clause!  That was just a *joke*"?

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent@songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html

Thread