Law and the Multiverse 92
An anonymous reader writes "jwz posted a link to this intensely nerdy blog co-authored by two attorneys who write about applying real-world law to comic books. Example topics include Mutants and Anti-Discrimination Laws (a three part series!), Is Batman a State Actor?, and Federalism and the Keene Act."
How is this not idle? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
I'm already convinced that Rupert Murdoch, Bill Gates, and Bush Sr. (among others, but you know, who comes to mind?) are all supervillains... so it stands to reason (to me) that superheroes are also possible, if vastly less probable.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:How is this not idle? (Score:4, Informative)
Using his charity to both invest in and lobby for Monsanto and British Petroleum as a means of investing in private wealth to evade taxes and demanding nations change laws to suit his business needs before engaging in his self serving charity used as a mask for greed and malevolence worldwide. This would be the very business model of Lex Luther, if you ask me...
Re:How is this not idle? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
You cannot get immunizations from the Gates foundation unless your nation provides strong IP protection specifically to pharmaceutical companies. The stated goal is to wipe out certain diseases, but as long as there is this restriction then it is not workable.
I will not stop bashing an evil man who illegally acquired a fortune and who is clearly working for the powers-that-be. Otherwise, why let Microsoft off the hook? If Microsoft acquired its fortune illegally then so did Gates. Why would anyone highly pl
Re: (Score:2)
Wow. That's straight tripping. Just a minor point, there was nothing illegal in what MS did, as they were aquitted by courts. Perhaps you can refer to the legislation that would highlight their illegal acts, if they have not yet been held accountable?
Re: (Score:1)
Acquitted? I thought that being found to be an "illegal abusive monopoly" was a conviction? That was just in the U.S..
The E.U. also convicted them and fined them a quantity large enough to make them comply with court orders that they had been claiming they couldn't comply with.
So when and where were they acquitted?
Re: (Score:2)
Fair enough, I should not have said acquitted. However, they were not convicted of being a monopoly on their appeal, and then settled out of court. The funds were certainly not obtained illegally however, or they would have had to give them up. The EU conviction was bullshit, and about 10 years too late to be relevant.
Re: (Score:1)
Wrong again. The appeal confirmed the original judgment it only changed the sentence. It was NOT settled out of court in anyway shape or form. Check your facts.
The EU judgment was delayed to give the U.S. the first go and when the DOJ went for a "slap on the wrist" after Bush (II
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong again. The appeal confirmed the original judgment it only changed the sentence. It was NOT settled out of court in anyway shape or form. Check your facts.
Yes, you really should check your facts, because your flat out wrong. The apellate court confirmed the findings of fact, but completely reversed the ruling.
The EU judgment was delayed to give the U.S. the first go and when the DOJ went for a "slap on the wrist" after Bush (II) took power they took up the issue. If the U.S. had properly handled the issue the EU would have dropped it. Only because the U.S. dropped the ball did the EU carry on with it.
The EU case started long after the US one had finished, in January 2009, investigating IE integration of all things. ridiculous, and far, far too late.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, and yes they did settle out of court. From the wiki page:
On November 2, 2001, the DOJ reached an agreement with Microsoft to settle the case.
Re: (Score:2)
Bruce Willis. Unbreakable. Need I say more?
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, that was a pretty awesome documentary.
Re: (Score:2)
Brushing reality aside... ...it was about as good a documentary as today's news is news. (Not very, I think Jon Stewart has a valid point.)
Speaking of law (Score:1)
The word "multiverse" shows a complete failure to grasp the basics of semantics.
"Universe" means "all things taken as one." People apparently miss that "all things" part.
If there was some kind of parallel world, it would logically already be part of the meaning of the word "Universe." Saying "there is another universe over there" is as semantically backward as saying "there is another everything over there."
So the etymological atrocity "multiverse" is not only redundant, but stupid.
Don't even get me start
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Don't even get me starting on the idiocy of the word "unisex."
Is that what you pedantically do every night in your basement?
Observable universe (Score:3)
The word "multiverse" shows a complete failure to grasp the basics of semantics.
The language they speak in comic books isn't necessarily standard English as we know it on Earth. In comic book language, "universe" means roughly the observable universe [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Speaking of law (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Any argument founded on "b-b-but the root meaning of the word X is Y!" is pretty much doomed to failure. Remarkably, words can change meanings over time. (It's their mutant power, or something.) Deal with it.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Speaking of law (Score:4, Insightful)
Unless you want to start arguing that we need to find a different name for the atom. You know, that which can not be divided.
Re: (Score:2)
Uh oh... I'm getting that "IHBT, IHL, HAND" feeling.
Re:Misdirected energy (Score:5, Insightful)
And yet you decided not to be an expert and spend time doing other things yourself.
You don't get to dictate how other people spend their time.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Rosie O'Donnell could give me great pleasure.
All she has to do is dive into a wood chipper head first on live TV.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
That wasn't dictating, that was a suggestion.
Re: (Score:1)
I simply stated my personal preference; I did not "dictate". Nothing wrong with being a comics curmudgeon. Every town needs one.
Re:Misdirected energy (Score:4, Insightful)
Meh. You and I spend our time on some random website semi-conversing with other people who largely agree with us. The person(s) who wrote that ain't getting paid for it, so that's their hobby, and I just learned a lot about about our laws and got some really good conversation material because of it. Sometimes even lawyers deserve a little time away from work.
Re:Misdirected energy (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd much rather experts spend their energy trying to get Bush and Cheney behind bars for willful torture, and other possible war crimes, than worry about pretend beings.
So do you think about doing your job, and nothing but doing your job, all the time? If not, why not?
The blog is written by comic book nerds who happen to be lawyers. It's natural for them to think about how their professions might apply to fictional worlds they enjoy. It's entertaining for them, and for the rest of us reading it. No further justification is needed, and there's no reason to think it detracts from their ability to do serious business.
I'm a full-time scientist and occasional science fiction writer. The latter does the former no harm; if anything, they're complementary.
Re: (Score:2)
A pretend being told them to go to war.
Attorneys wrote this? (Score:3, Interesting)
This presents two problems. The first is with anonymity, i.e. creating and maintaining a fictional person who is really one of the richest people in the world just doesn’t work.
Say what now? An immortal fictional person who is one of the richest people in the world doesn't work? Have they not heard of Exxon Mobil?
A privately held corporation, and a few shell corporations, holding companies, scattered internationally... maintaining an immortal fictional entity with stupid amounts of wealth is essentially a solved problem.
I'd say their immortals just need some better lawyers. :p
Re:Attorneys wrote this? (Score:5, Informative)
Hi, I'm one of the two co-authors, although I did not write that particular article. A comment on the blog raised the issue of incorporation as a solution, and my co-author addressed it in a follow-up comment [lawandthemultiverse.com]. The short version is that easily-created corporations did not exist until the mid-1800s, so it would only be a solution for immortals that aren't actually very old yet. Before that corporations could only be created by royal charter or a private act of the legislature (depending on the country), which are not very compatible with maintaining anonymity.
Re: (Score:2)
Not really.
Well connected nobles can provide a shield against the local government that the immortal resides at. We can _call_ it a corporation, but names matter not.
Instead, a well connected, informed, and rich immortal can create a form of shadow government in which he is the ruler. Instead of by commanding force, (s)he uses influence to bind them. Instead of restriction, being under the immortal OPENS doors that those nobles would not usually have.
If you knew that a tithe of 10% of your wealth to them op
First question: can immortality be shared? (Score:3)
How many people do you think would help you if they knew that you'd repay them by making them immortal?
Also, are there other immortals? Or are you the only one (and will remain the only one)?
Finally, how much wealth are we really talking about here? Would a "job" that pays really well be sufficient? So you're really "working" for an alter-ego. But the cover would be easier to maintain. Particularly in the past. Prior to corporations.
In fact, wouldn't the creation of the corporation (and easier access to hid
Re: (Score:3)
Also, are there other immortals? Or are you the only one (and will remain the only one)?
There can be only one!
Re: (Score:2)
Damn, I thought I already killed off the rest of you.
Ok, meet me on top of the mountain, in the middle of a thunderstorm. Be sure to bring your sword, so it isn't too easy to do. I really enjoyed my "last" kill, because I thought it made me the only one. Now you've ruined it, so I'm going to have to thoroughly enjoy this one too.
Re: (Score:2)
But you're going to wish you weren't one of those "highlander immortals" who can't die.
Certain forms of immortality are immensely overrated.
Re: (Score:2)
Concrete doesn't last forever. It's even less if the structure is torn down.
It may be a long dark dream, but in the scale of eternity, that's a very short time. I can wait. By the time I awaken from my nap, I will have thought of very evil ways to get my revenge. Prison of any sort isn't punishment, it's a way of delaying the inevitable. Then there will be only one.
Re: (Score:2)
Then can decide what to do with you when more convenient - e.g. send you to space (some random orbit, Moon, Mars, Alpha Centauri etc).
I'm not so familiar with the Highlander details, are you sure you will actually nap when that happens? Wouldn't you be conscious for much of the time?
Re: (Score:2)
Waking or sleeping, it doesn't matter. It will be dark, and there will be lots of time for plotting my revenge. Every day, and every night, one thought will remain, revenge on those who did this to me.
I know you do not have the technology nor budget to send a roughly man sized concrete block to orbit, The Moon, Mars, nor Alpha Centauri. I will remain on Terra Firma, and celebrate at the place where your rotting mortal container is placed.
With deepest regards,
Re:Attorneys wrote this? (Score:4, Insightful)
The short version is that easily-created corporations did not exist until the mid-1800s, so it would only be a solution for immortals that aren't actually very old yet.
Of course, the mid-to-late 1800s was also about the time that it started becoming more difficult for people to establish an identity simply by saying who they were. An immortal older than that could have existed very easily up to that point just by moving around a lot, and then -- seeing which way the winds were blowing, with corporations becoming effectively immortal people in the eyes of the law -- started building a corporate identity.
Re: (Score:2)
As in the phenomenal movie The Man From Earth [imdb.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Looks interesting -- I'll have to check it out.
Re: (Score:2)
The short version is that easily-created corporations did not exist until the mid-1800s, so it would only be a solution for immortals that aren't actually very old yet
And good state record tracking of wealth didn't exist until the mid 1900s. It was perfectly possible then to turn all of your money into gold, disappear, and appear somewhere else with little or no paperwork and a new identity. It was also very easy to invent a 'nephew' who would inherit all of your wealth, leave it to them when you fake your death, and then have them (you) appear shortly afterwards.
Re: (Score:2)
And good state record tracking of wealth didn't exist until the mid 1900s. It was perfectly possible then to turn all of your money into gold, disappear, and appear somewhere else with little or no paperwork and a new identity. It was also very easy to invent a 'nephew' who would inherit all of your wealth, leave it to them when you fake your death, and then have them (you) appear shortly afterwards.
The Boat of a Million Years, by Poul Anderson.
It may sound silly..... (Score:5, Interesting)
But these laws need to be figured out, as our fellow humans in Tibet have already done so, to an interesting extent.
In the Tibetan region, reincarnation isn't some religious lofty newage crap: it's true and obvious to their culture. It's well known that you are born, live, and die, and when you die, you'll find a new place to be reborn in. Almost always, unless otherwise needed, you will be reborn somewhere on your family tree, just as the ancient Celts also believed.
Understanding that: Tibetans and Ancient Celts alike form contracts that are binding between lives. Now admittedly, these contracts aren't in the usual that some property is transferred, but instead promising protection or other services one can do themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
"The kind of cosmic inbreeding you describe can't be good."
According to evolution we are all inbred. The whole idea of our existence requires it, it's only that populations are now so large and geographically isolated over geological time that we don't notice, its far removed.
Re: (Score:2)
So, we have genetics.
And we are all descended from the "mitochondrial Eve". Which alone suggests a certain degree of inbreeding.
Given that the we seem to have the chromosomes of chimpanzees, with their last pair folded into one the remaining human pairs, this also suggests some level of inbreeding - for the life of me, I can't see such a thing happening without a VERY small initial "human" population (yes, the initial popul
How is that inbreeding? (Score:2)
If you are born into the same family, that means that you will marry and reproduce with someone outside of the family, decreasing the chances of inbreeding across reincarnations.
Alter-ego (Score:2)
One of the Better Angles of Movie "Hancock" (Score:5, Insightful)
Not to mention "The Incredibles."
I mean, how long do you think some do-gooder who's Doing of The Good involved the typical comic book level of property damage would stay out of court (and bankruptcy) in Real Life?
"Lookit, I don't care if he did just stop an invasion from a Hell Dimension, SOMEBODY'S PAYING FOR THAT GODDAM WINDOW!!"
Re: (Score:2)
This is an issue we plan to address in a future post or series of posts. The short answer is that it's probably not for nothing that superheroes maintain a secret identity.
Re: (Score:2)
"Usain Bolt" performance levels gets you manageable or even desirable attention. But if you start doing 100 metres in less than 5 seconds you start getting the wrong sort of attention.
Say you were mere "Spiderman" level, and persisted in wearing leotards and going after petty criminals, some Dubious Organization will capture you and start experimenting on you to figure out what makes you superhuman.
Of course if yo
With great power comes great liability (Score:2)
I mean, how long do you think some do-gooder who's Doing of The Good involved the typical comic book level of property damage would stay out of court (and bankruptcy) in Real Life?
Well, some of them could probably get the money back by suing whoever it was who failed to keep that radioactive spider in its jar; forgot to print the obligatory warnings on the magic amulet or activated the intrinsic field generator without checking that nobody was inside. They could cite any post-1980 superhero story as evidence of the distress and trauma caused by being burdened with superpowers.
Superman might be able to claim diplomatic immunity (or set up a tax haven in the phantom zone and make a ki
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, how long do you think some do-gooder who's Doing of The Good involved the typical comic book level of property damage would stay out of court (and bankruptcy) in Real Life?
1: The Fantastic Four have essentially gone bankrupt at least twice. In the Marvel U, I believe Reed Richards isn't just Hawking, but he's Gates, Jobs, and Wozinak too.
2: "I'm a @#%ing superhuman. Bite me, I'm not paying."
3: Now you understand the reason for a secret identity.
And what about Transformers? (Score:1)
Wrong mix (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Wrong mix (Score:5, Insightful)
It's true that laws normally adapt to changing circumstances, but in many comic books the world is presented as essentially the same as our own, except with superheroes and supervillains. Legal institutions and actors like courts, the police, judges, lawyers, juries, mayors, governors, legislatures, etc still exist and seem to function like they do in the real world. Occasionally a point is made about a new or different law, such as a Mutant Registration Act or the Keene Act. Our conclusion (and the premise of the blog) is that in the comic book world the legal system is basically the same as the real world, so there must usually be some way to reconcile the law of the real world with the facts of the comic book world. So for example we can find a way to make the Keene Act constitutional.
Sometimes it is not possible to do this, though. For example, if we conclude that Batman would be a state actor in the real world, which seems likely to me, then that would lead to contradictions in the comic book world. Therefore, Batman is not a state actor in the comic book world, and the law must be different in the comic book world. Then we can think about the most likely tweak to the law in the comic book world necessary to accommodate the facts.
Basically we first try to explain how the facts and the law agree. Failing that we figure out how to adjust the law to fit the facts. Failing that we say, eh, it's a comic book.
Re: (Score:2)
> nothing in the law forbids any of both cases, even if there is an exploit to the system in the second one.
Actually, there is a law:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_against_perpetuities [wikipedia.org]
Comics and the law at Yale Law School (Score:4, Interesting)
http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/rarebooks/archive/2010/10/18/video-of-quot-superheroes-in-court-quot-talk-is-now-available.aspx [yale.edu]
Floating timeline (Score:2)
Lawyers = villains? (Score:2)
Yeah, I can see that.
After all, Two Face was born Harvey Dent, a District Attorney.
Hell, what's the difference between Lex Luthor and Dick Cheney? (Okay, that may not be a fair comparison. Luthor won't shoot you in the face and never even apologize.)
Politics seems to be the final stage of law, where an already withered sense of morals finally gets strapped onto greed and a sense of entitlement and your soul finally dies.