|
I have to agree that they're weak on their morals objection. They made an agreement and that's that.
Not that I disagree with the moral objection. I think our Son of Sam law is a good thing and if that was the law there it should apply. But apparently it isn't and it doesn't apply and courts have to deal with laws and contracts as they are, not with how we feel about things. When that stops being true we're really in trouble.
The biographer's objection that no private individual should be able to control important historical documents needs a closer look. It might be different if it was in the hands of Goebel's children but it isn't. They say the rights are owned by the Goebels estate. I wonder who they are and how they got control. There isn't really enough information in that article to know what to think about this.
Barry
|