View Single Post
Old 12-11-2007, 05:50 PM   #5
kovidgoyal
creator of calibre
kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
kovidgoyal's Avatar
 
Posts: 26,458
Karma: 5383257
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Mumbai, India
Device: Various
Well I'm certainly not a lawyer and I don't really understand legalese, but to me breaking down that sentence logically:

Clause 1: "Defendant converted into mp3"
Clause 2: "Defendant put converted MP3's into his shared folder"

Statement is Clause 1 AND Clause 2 => violation

Applying a little Boolean logic, that means

(NOT Clause 1) OR (NOT Clause 2) => NOT violation

Of course, perhaps applying Boolean logic to legalese is illegal ;-)
kovidgoyal is offline   Reply With Quote