You understand that arguments about the legitimacy of law is an argument about whether a law should exist rather than if a law does exist, right?
There’s a difference between saying that someone’s “in the right” (which they’re absolutely not) and saying someone is legally capable of doing what they want. (which is debatable)
You know, it’s okay to recognize Nintendo’s scummy legal practices while also recognizing that in this one single instance they are in the right.
IP law is an illegitimate institution, so no they’re absolutely not.
Well that’s not how the law works, you don’t get to violate it just because you don’t like it.
You understand that arguments about the legitimacy of law is an argument about whether a law should exist rather than if a law does exist, right?
There’s a difference between saying that someone’s “in the right” (which they’re absolutely not) and saying someone is legally capable of doing what they want. (which is debatable)
There comes a point where being right doesn’t matter more than the fact that they’re cunts.