News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:U.S. Alleges $6 Billion Money-Laundering Operation Using ... by AnthonyMouse on Tuesday May 28, 2013 @11:18PM (#5784372)
Your scenario is assuming the conclusion. Defrauding someone will cause you to be guilty of fraud, because that's what "defraud" means.

What you mean to say is that there are some things which are contemptible but still technically legal. But the converse is also true: Some things remain legally prohibited that would otherwise be morally unobjectionable. Legality and morality are independent variables.

Whether doing a thing is 'good' or not has nothing to do with whether that thing is legal, "technically legal" or totally illegal. All its legal status tells you is whether you can expect to be convicted of it if accused.

Re:U.S. Alleges $6 Billion Money-Laundering Operation Using ... by pyre on Wednesday May 29, 2013 @11:40AM (#5786867)

  | Defrauding someone will cause you to be
  | guilty of fraud, because that's what
  | "defraud" means.
The legal definition and the 'common' definition of something don't always match up.