News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Our Path Forward. Parent comment

Re:Our Path Forward by dublinben on Thursday July 10, 2014 @03:25PM (#8016676)
It wasn't a loophole, it was the law. Aereo were following Copyright law and previous case law as exactly as possible. The Supreme Court changed that law in their ruling, because they felt it went against the 'spirit' of the law.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Our Path Forward by paulgb on Thursday July 10, 2014 @04:07PM (#8016930)
Isn't doing something that is legal but goes against the spirit of the law by definition exploiting a loophole?

Edit: now that I think about it, there is room for a distinction between areas where case law hasn't ventured and exploitable holes in areas that case law has explored. But I'm interested in hearing if there's a more formal definition.

[ Parent | on HN ]