>not being from maryland but, i would think that the constitution's >prohibition against ex post facto laws would prevent retro-active >applications of laws, if the usa actually followed the constitution; >but that's another topic... Ex post facto seems pretty one way. If you drop a cigg butt on the ground today, and tomorrow your town votes to make it illegal to throw cigg butts on the ground, you aren't held liable unless you do it again, AFTER the law was passed. I'm curious tho - if you sue Oracle today, and UCITA is passed tomorrow, does UCITA wipe out your suit? Rob Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: [GENERAL] responses to licensing discussion Philip Warner
- Re: [GENERAL] responses to licensing discussion Chris Bitmead
- Re: [GENERAL] responses to licensing discussion Philip Warner
- Re: [GENERAL] responses to licensing discussion Gilles DAROLD
- Re: [GENERAL] responses to licensing discus... The Hermit Hacker
- Re: [GENERAL] responses to licensing discussion Karl DeBisschop
- Re: [GENERAL] responses to licensing discussion selkovjr
- Re: [GENERAL] responses to licensing discussion Jim Jennis
- Re: [GENERAL] responses to licensing discussion Robert D. Nelson
- Re: [GENERAL] responses to licensing discussion Peter Eisentraut