You understand that this is an entirely different form of argument than just linking to statute or case law.
replyI have consistently said "should be illegal", not "is currently illegal".
replyI'm entirely aware that these sorts of contracts are legal in US law. They should not be.
But your glib response above was just to quote "the law", like this was a sufficient justification. If merely quoting the law is enough, then great, we already justified perfectly the copyright and jailing weed smokers stuff. It's only now that you changed tack to make a different argument, which... I mean I might disagree with or not, but it's not what I took issue with above.
reply> But your glib response above was just to quote "the law", like this was a sufficient justification.
replyAnd this is not true for your (false!) cite of "Hacker News"?
At least my quote from the law was accurate.