Morning Links

Thursday, May 24th, 2012

Digg it |  reddit | |  Fark

61 Responses to “Morning Links”

  1. #1 |  Helmut O' Hooligan | 

    “Dr. Zipes’ study just adds credibility to the position that Tasers could be potentially dangerous. He is well-respected in the medical community,” said Allen.

    And the FOP responded that Dr. Zipe is just another faggy anti-cop liberal who smokes to much dope. Furthermore, they allege, Dr. Zipe is also an anti-government extemist who needs to be watched…closely. And the American Heart Assoication is a front for Al Queda and The American Communist Party ; )

  2. #2 |  whiskey | 

    They haven’t actually filed a nonprovisional patent application on the steak, as far as I’ve been able to tell, so they can’t even call the steak “patent pending,” I don’t believe.

  3. #3 |  C. S. P. Schofield | 

    “The $1.45 trillion fighter jet.”

    The entire system development project cost 1.45 trillion. Each individual jet will cost 135 million to “build and maintain” (whatever the f*ck THAT means).

    Not that I necessarily want to spend the money. But “$1.45 trillion fighter jet.” is a rhetorical tactic on the same level as describing a reduction in the rate of increase of spending as a “spending cut”. At best it is sloppy thinking. From there it slides into outright dishonesty rather quickly, in my opinion.

  4. #4 |  Helmut O' Hooligan | 

    RE: Ticket for giving money to panhandler…

    “I don’t mean any disrespect toward the police department at all we need ‘em but I just wish I didn’t have to pay this ticket,” said John Davis.

    Well, Mr. Davis, if Cleavland PD has the time to ticket you for that bullshit, I think you and the taxpayers of Cleavland need less of them.

  5. #5 |  Jim Collins | 

    I wonder how much the fine is for the “giving money to panhandler” law is? I bet the fine for littering is more.

    One thing. Everybody bitches about the cop, what about the stupid laws?

  6. #6 |  Peter H | 

    Re: Steak Patent

    Whiskey, you have no way of knowing whether a nonprovisional has been filed or not, since it could have been filed with a nonpublication request, or have been filed within the last 18 months.

    In general, a method for cutting up a cow is certainly patentable subject matter (it even passes the machine or transformation test posited by the Fed. Cir. in Biliski which was found too strict by SCOTUS). It’s also likely to be rejected under 35 USC 102 and/or 103 for prior art/obviousness.

  7. #7 |  Yizmo Gizmo | 

    “•That didn’t take long: Texas police agency now wants armed domestic drones.”

    Not a big fan of Texas, but isn’t there a contingent of Don’t-tread-on-me anti-big-gov’t good-ol boys who would would be happy to get out the toys and blow these things out of the sky, just for kicks?

    And why is a Florida governor so in cahoots with Pentagon warlords?
    They already have a terrible corruption/debt/overpolicing problem. Maybe pissed off citizens can hijack the F-35 and go after those armed drones in Texas. That’ll show who’s boss.

  8. #8 |  Burgers Allday | 

    I guess the question is whether the patent application and possible patent will make it more likely, or less likely, that you will have the privilege of trying this type of steak in your lifetime.

    Patent system doesn’t care about the metaphysics involved in patenting food, because, like, “so what?” System cares more about the real practical question of what is in Radley’s mouth in 5 years and will it be something different from what is in his mouth today. It is “consequentialist.” It is about public choice.

    It is about creating a market for long range progress, to counterbalance the shortsightedness and complaisance that comes more naturally to the propertied class who decide where the capital goes. I am not saying it always works, or even usually works, but that is the theory of the thing.

    I mean, patents on the genetics of food may raise some metaphysical concerns because genes allow a degree of code based control (see Lessig’s Future Of Ideas book or Code 2.0 book) that traditional agribusiness is not really susceptible to. Maybe that is a problem. Maybe it is an opportunity for maximizing aggregate utility. I don’t know.

    But patents on food production outside the world of genetics, like this steak patent, are old hat. I guess what I am trying to say is, “get over it.” No one is going to come round to your dinner table and sue you for eating the wrong steak.

  9. #9 |  Burgers Allday | 

    It’s also likely to be rejected under 35 USC 102 and/or 103 for prior art/obviousness.

    If it is something that could have been done for a long time, and should have practiced for a long time now, but never was practiced, then that suggests that these putative inventors have come up with an especially non-obvious invention. It suggests that if these guys at Oklahoma had not done this thing, then Mr. Balko would NOT have the privilege of trying a Vegas strip in his lifetime.

    The obvious thing to do was to make steaks the same old way they were always made because they have been made the same way for so long. This kind of market inertia is what the patent system seeks to (and may in fact) counter.

    This happy theory may fall to pieces once the prior art is reviewed, but, I don’t think any of us have done that review yet.

  10. #10 |  EBL | 

    Bill Clinton: Hillary, the country needs us!

  11. #11 |  Nick T. | 

    Re: There Outha be a Law

    Requiring tests for citizens to pass before they can vote is a terrible idea with an ugly past, but maybe requiring state legislators to pass a test before they can propose legislation…..?

    Nothing crazy, but maybe 2 questions that essentially ask “Are you at all familiar with the concept of free speech?”

    I’m pretty much kidding, but I’d love to see a survey of state legislators demonstrating their knowledge and familiarity with the bill of rights (and 14th Amendment) as to what sort of things they can and can’t do.

  12. #12 |  omar | 

    One thing. Everybody bitches about the cop, what about the stupid laws?

    Everyone bitches about the cop – says the second person to comment on the article.

    And for the sake of precision, the first person, they bitched about the police department, not the cop.

  13. #13 |  Beyond-The-Political-Spectrum | 

    I think I am beginning to understand the logic of some in the powers-that-be:
    Pay the rich more to make THEM “work harder,” and pay the poor LESS to make THEM “work harder.”

  14. #14 |  Helmut O' Hooligan | 

    #12 Omar:
    That is correct sir, I did use the phrase “Cleavland PD.” Thank you.

    #5 Jim Collins:
    Yes, the law is a case of ridiculous overreach. Governments have a bad habit of making these laws. However, “officer discretion” can be a very powerful tool to use in these cases. Perhaps the officer should have used his discretion in this instance. If individual officers used their discretion more often, say in dealing with drug offenses and other non-violent “crimes”, then policing in the U.S. would be headed in a much better direction. Remember Jim, “just following orders” should not be acceptable in a free society.

  15. #15 |  Rick H. | 


    I guess what I am trying to say is, “get over it.” No one is going to come round to your dinner table and sue you for eating the wrong steak.

    No. They’ll just hand this so-called patent holder a new monopoly privilege: to sue for infringement. The victims will include any old butcher who’d been cutting meat that way for decades, but didn’t have the “progressive” foresight to involve the government and indulge in this kind of scummy rent-seeking.

  16. #16 |  Jozef | 

    I wish I were as cool as Bill Clinton…

  17. #17 |  Maria | 

    Re: Arming the drones with tear gas and rubber bullets.

    I think the police mentality is well and clear in the following “Those are things that law enforcement utilizes day in and day out and in certain situations it might be advantageous to have this type of system on the UAV (unmanned aerial vehicle),” McDaniel told The Daily.

    I live in a huge urban center. Even here the rabble isn’t so badly rabbling that day in and day out use of rubber bullets and tear gas is a “thing” (yet?) It seems that yet again the war mentality of us/enemy is exposed for everyone to see. How soon after the rubber bullets will these things be armed with real bullets?

  18. #18 |  H. Rearden | 

    #13 H O’H – Every action of a LEO (or anyone else) involves discretion. Just because you disagree with the results of his discretion doesn’t mean there was none. Sure, the LEO could argue (wrongly) that he is just following the ‘letter of the law’, but the argument would fall apart when it is pointed out the many times he used is discretion to not ticket or arrest an offender of the ‘letter of the law’.

    This LEO was an a-hole. And I can understand why the victim is so reluctant to make this obvious conclusion.

  19. #19 |  Jack Dempsey | 

    “It’s a snowball rolling down the hill that is only going to get bigger. Law enforcement agencies now are going to be taking a skeptical look at Tasers,” he said.

    Yeah, right. I’ll believe this about as much as I believe the police follow the laws they are sworn to uphold.

  20. #20 |  madchemist | 

    Rick H,

    If a local butcher can show that he’d been using that cut for years, the patent would be void. Once an “invention” is in the public domain, it can not longer be patented.

    If a provisional patent had be filed, even with a non-publish request, OSU could still disclose the invention without losing protection. My guess is that the patent is still being written and they’re jumping the gun.

  21. #21 |  Robert | 

    RE: The panhandler. I’d be willing to bet that at the end of the day, a shiny new pickup truck pulls up to that guy and he stands up, throws the wheelchair in the back, and then hops in the cab.

  22. #22 |  Burgers Allday | 

    . . . The victims will include any old butcher who’d been cutting meat that way for decades . . .

    I have yet to see an actual case like this.

    I have heard this kind of possibility raised lots and lots and lots of times.

    Yet to see it happen in reality.

    It kinds of reminds me when Judge Posner recently wrote that people should not be allowed to record policemen because then witnesses and informants would not feel comfortable talking with a policeman in a public setting, and might not talk to the policeman at all. I was like, “ummmm, I can IMAGINE that happening, and it might have actually happened at some point in history, but it is still an invalid objection completely unmoored from real relity.”

  23. #23 |  perlhaqr | 

    I think it was just two days ago that someone in the comments either here or at Reason said armed LEO drones were unpossible.

  24. #24 |  Peter H | 


    The application has not been shown to the public, but they’re touting it heavily in public. My interpretation of this is that the application is weak. If the application were strong, you’d do one of three strategies:

    1.) Publish it (necessary for international filing anyway) and start marketing the steaks while pending, and documenting anyone who copies it for the purposes of getting a reasonable royalty during pendency suit.

    2.) Keep it completely secret, and not blab about it until prosecution on the merits is closed, or even not until issuance.

    3.) (possibly in combination with 2) Get track 1 examination on it to hopefully have an issued patent very quickly.

    Right now, they’re trying to hype their steaks, but at the same time prevent anyone from searching the prior art to shut them down. The reason you’d do that is to get alot of press while maintaining the mystique of it being patent pending, even if the application won’t hold up through prosecution. Basically, it’s a FUD strategy.

    Butchery is a very, very well worked art. I’d be shocked if there’s a new steak to be had that hasn’t been tried. Maybe they’ll get some really narrow method claims allowed, but I doubt they’d get a claim allowed on the cut itself, more likely something like a sequence of 10+ exact slices used to get there.

  25. #25 |  albatross | 


    The really disturbing thing about the drone story isn’t near-term. We have spent vast amounts of wealth and smarts building technology to let a small force hold down a large, hostile population. Now that technology is coming home.

    Sooner or later, it is almost inevitable that this technology will be used for what it was designed for–to impose an unwanted government on a hostile population, while shutting down most organized resistance via assassinations and torture chambers, with the targets of these things chosen by social network analysis helped along by cellphone and related technology. Developing this technology was a horrible idea, comparable to spending billions to develop some engineered plague that, if released, would wipe out the human species.

    The particularly nasty part of this technology is the automation. A coup traditionally requires getting a lot of people inside the country on your side. A coup using flying and driving killer robots, massive surveillance technology, and a few people in the right places to operate those things, can be far smaller and more concentrated. You need a few humans to man the death squads and torture chambers, but mostly, you just snuff out likely dissent by blowing people up, perhaps with a real or made-up terrorist threat to justify it.

  26. #26 |  MacK | 

    Isn’t Oklahoma State University a publicly funded (your money, not theirs) institution, and I thought as such can’t hold patents, or copyrights?

  27. #27 |  Burgers Allday | 


    Bring on the prior art then.

    Let’s imagine that there is great prior art out there.

    So what would that mean:

    (i) these guys worked on making a steak they otherwise may not have worked on;

    (ii) these guys publicized a (“rare” (npi) if not unknown type of steak that otherwise would not have gotten the publicity; and

    (iii) this steak is likely to FINALLY be brought to market in a big way because of butchers hearing about the work of point (i) and/or the publicity of point (ii).

    Under this course of progress, the patent applicant loses (that is, is out $5 or $10K or $15K) and Mr. Balko’s mouth wins. Now that is progress!

  28. #28 |  CyniCAl | 

    Am I the only one here who finds it interesting that the link to ban anonymous online speech in NY is posted here just a day or two after a prolonged Dondero sighting regarding the very same subject?

    Art imitating life?

  29. #29 |  Dante | 

    Re: Arming domestic drones

    I can already see how this will go, we have a current play-by-play blueprint via the justification for SWAT teams:

    “They will only be deployed for the most dangerous situations like bank robberies and hostage taking”

    “They help keep the public safe, more safe than if SWAT teams did not exist”

    “We deploy SWAT teams as a last resort, only when the situation becomes violent and there is a danger to the citizens”.

    See how it will go? The drones will be sold as “keeping innocent people safe”, and then they will basically begin killing innocent people. They will be sold as a “last resort against the most violent criminals” and then they will be deployed to kill jaywalkers, panhandlers and innocent folks watering their lawns. No actual crimes will be stopped, no real violent persons will be apprehended with the drones. But tens of thousands of us will suffer when they are deployed because Law Enforcement likes to blow stuff up for fun.

    How long before the police get Hellfire missiles?

    Protect & Serve (Themselves!)

  30. #30 |  nigmalg | 

    “We’ve never gone into surveillance for sake of surveillance unless there is criminal activity afoot,” McDaniel told The Daily. “Just to see what you’re doing in your backyard pool — we don’t care.”

    Anyone care to take on this one…?

  31. #31 |  omar | 

    @#30 | nigmalg |

    If you’re not doing anything illegal in your pool, it’s ok if they look, right?

  32. #32 |  Brandon | 

    “RE: The panhandler. I’d be willing to bet that at the end of the day, a shiny new pickup truck pulls up to that guy and he stands up, throws the wheelchair in the back, and then hops in the cab.”

    So the fuck what? What possible difference would that make in this case? So you think it should be illegal to give people gifts, is that it? Or the government should decide if someone is “legitimately needy,” and punish people who give to someone who isn’t? Or are you just a kneejerk asshole trying to rationalize not helping anyone?

  33. #33 |  Charlie O | 

    Armed police drones = Second Amendment remedies. Shoot those fuckers out of the sky. Time to start shopping for RPGs.

  34. #34 |  ParatrooperJJ | 

    What was racist about the psychologist’s comments. FBI crime data clearly shows black males commit crime at a much higher rate then white males.

  35. #35 |  Brandon | 

    #30, That may actually be more offensive than the “If you have nothing to hide” crap. “It’s ok for us to completely disregard your rights, because you’re not important enough for us to use this power against you.” Fucking disgusting.

  36. #36 |  Brandon | 

    #34: “”Young Black Thugs who won’t follow the law need to be put down not incarcerated. Put down like the Dogs they are!””

    You really want to white knight for this guy?

  37. #37 |  Mattocracy | 

    A neighbor of mine works for Lockhead Martin. I’ve asked him before about the cost overruns for various new jet fighter badassery. According to him, granted I’m sure he’s engaging in CYA with this explaination, he says that the problem is the military doesn’t really understand what they’re asking for. I think there is some validity to this.

    If there are any programers who visit this site, I’m sure you’ve run into situations where management has asked for some software developement that sounds easy to them but is actually very difficult to produce. He says it’s similar with weapons development. The military asks if they can get a plane that can do x, y, and z, and the guys selling the new F-1000 Super Dick Jet say sure, we can make that happen. They settle on a price tag which is way below actual cost, because if they had told the military the actual cost they would’ve said no way. That, and the military brass has no real idea they’re asking for something that is crazy-ass hard to create in reality.

    Low and behold, the project runs out of R&D money before the engineers can produce the impossible. The sales guys go back and make more promises, the military/congress feels like if they’ve sunk this much money into the project already they might as well see it through. Repeat this scenario a few times, and Super Dick Jet costs what it should have cost to begin with, a trillion dollars or more.

    I don’t necessarily think that the military is quiet that naive or easily duped, but I can see this as being true to a certain degree.

  38. #38 |  a leap at the wheel | 

    Wow. Intelligent commentary on the patent process in a public internet forum? The Agitatortots really are the smartest commenting section on the net. I… actually have nothing to add to what has already been said.

  39. #39 |  omar | 

    @#36 Brandon

    He also said “I truly love people of all races, creeds and colors and I have dedicated my like to serving children.” So clearly he’s not a racist. He said so.

    At the risk of doing what I’m about to complain about – lots of libertarians seem to have a bad habit of lumping people into groups to express how those groups are collectively responsible for the actions of individual members.

  40. #40 |  Burgers Allday | 

    On the Vegas strip story, my biggest concern is that if they stop using the Vegas strip part of the steer in hamburgers then burgers will be less delicious than they are now. As you may know, I am all about the burgers, so this does worry me.

    Burgers, out!

  41. #41 |  Peter H | 


    I’m not saying their work is unimportant, I just think that they’re unlikely to get a patent (or to get one with much value anyway).

    Since we still don’t know what the steak is, it’s hard to say if it’d be an improvement or not over existing methods. They’re indicating that it comes from sections that are currently largely used for ground beef. If it did become a new standard butchery method, it’d likely slightly depress steak prices, and raise ground beef prices. Good for steak lovers, bad for burgers (npi).

  42. #42 |  Dana Gower |

    On the same side Radley links to: Google outs an anonymous blogger

  43. #43 |  Peter H | 


    Saw your comment @40 come in after I posted mine. I think we are in agreement on the burgers question.

  44. #44 |  Burgers Allday | 

    Which really is the important question. This new technology must be supressed! It is a threat to my very being.

  45. #45 |  Max | 

    3 police officers in Omaha twice tasered a 106 lb 79 yr old man with dementia. He had some safety pins & a police spokesman said safety pins can be dangerous especially if the pin is not sterile. Omaha World Herald reported this.

  46. #46 |  omar | 

    On the same side Radley links to: Google outs an anonymous blogger

    Google FORCED to out an anonymous blogger. TIFIFY

  47. #47 |  Bob Mc | 

    John says that’s not what he was ticketed for. He was cited for littering from a motor vehicle, and the officer advised him to “take it up with the courts.”

    John does plan to challenge the ticket in court, mainly because it carries a hefty fine. It could cost him $500 once you add the fine plus court costs.

    John says he has always had a deep admiration for Cleveland police, and he isn’t trying to start trouble, but that’s a lot of money for helping out someone less fortunate.
    I hope this incident cures him of that “admiration” thing.

  48. #48 |  Personanongrata | 

    •There oughtta be a law.

    There oughtta be someone in the NYS Assembly/Senate who is well versed in reading comprehension in such a manner that they would understand their oath(s) of office and the documents upon which they swore said oath:

    I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the constitution of the United States, and the constitution of the state of New York, and that I will faithfully discharge the office of

    United States Bill Of Rights

    First Amendment – Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    The Constitution Of The State Of New York

    Article I Bill Of Rights

    8. Freedom of speech and press; criminal prosecutions for libel

    There we have it both the US and NYS constitutions clearly acknowledge the peoples inalienable right(s) to free speech/press.

    I live in NYS and the Assembly/Senate are really good at deferring todays problems to future generations and renaming roads and bridges.

    If the NYS Assembly/Senate were to close it’s doors today the people of NYS would never notice the differnece (the exemption being there would be fewer statist parasites stealing their earnings under the guise of taxation and the destruction of their livelyhoods through excessive licensing and regulation would cease).

    NYS Assembly/Senate = boobus-americanous

  49. #49 |  DoubleU | 

    Fighter Jet: “Scott famously refused $2 billion for high-speed rail, but his team loves the $1.45 trillion F-35 project

    Mother Jones is more disappointed the government didn’t waste money on high speed rail then they are with wasting money on war projects.

  50. #50 |  Ted S. | 

    Mattocracy wrote:

    If there are any programers who visit this site, I’m sure you’ve run into situations where management has asked for some software developement that sounds easy to them but is actually very difficult to produce.

    Reminds me of the cartoon here:

  51. #51 |  Dave | 

    @#37 Mattocracy

    Reading that made me think of the book/movie “The Pentagon Papers”. I thought the movie was pure comedy until I read the book…then it just became depressing.

  52. #52 |  Personanongrata | 

    •The $1.45 trillion fighter jet.

    Boondoggle: a project funded by the federal government out of political favoritism that is of no real value to the community or the nation.

    Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.

    ~Dwight D. Eisenhower, From a speech before the American Society of Newspaper Editors, April 16, 1953
    34th president of US 1953-1961

  53. #53 |  Bad Medicine | 

    Re: arming the drones…

    To quote Leslie Nielsen:

    “Yes. Well, when I see 5 weirdos dressed in togas stabbing a guy in the middle of the park in full view of 100 people, I shoot the bastards. That’s *my* policy.”

    I can also see LARP-ers getting the short end of the stick on this…

    “Lightning bolt! Lightning bolt!” *tear gas*….

  54. #54 |  omar | 

    Mother Jones is more disappointed the government didn’t waste money on high speed rail then they are with wasting money on war projects.

    Leaving aside standard libertarian qualifiers about theft, force, etc, I have to agree with Mother Jones to a degree here. Having public transportation does raise the quality of life among the people near it. Making advanced weapons makes the quality of life go down for anyone on the receiving end.

    If the government is going to steal our money and spend it, I’d rather they build 500 public transportation systems than a single new fighter jet. Add to that, these politicians are BRAGGING that they rejected the transportation system that costs 1/2 of one percent of a project they are championing.

    Mother Jones is not the group you should be pissed at.

  55. #55 |  perlhaqr | 
    On the same side Radley links to: Google outs an anonymous blogger

    Google FORCED to out an anonymous blogger. TIFIFY

    Two years ago. Thanks for the news flash, Dana.

  56. #56 |  Dana Gower | 

    You’re welcome.
    Okay, maybe it’s old (I didn’t notice that), but what got me was the comments on the article where everybody was defending Google, saying, “Well, if the court says you have to…”
    Even on this site, where people seem smarter than most other sites I’ve seen, it seemed to get a yawn.
    For those of you who post anonymously, I think it’s kind of a wake-up call that, no, Google isn’t going to fight for you. And don’t say, oh, they had no choice. The way the story reads, they just threw in the towel without even trying.
    I use my own name, so it’s not that big of a deal to me. But at least I’m aware that the big companies are willing to throw me under the bus.

  57. #57 |  Steve Miller Band | 

    I see your point on the steak, Radley, but damn! I have to admit it sounds pretty tasty… I’m pulling a T-bone out of the freezer as we speak.

  58. #58 |  BamBam | 

    Anonymity solved by TAILS Linux distribution
    The Amnesic Incognito Live System

    No data saved during use, all memory wiped at shutdown, Tor network used by default.

  59. #59 |  BamBam |

    The Amnesic Incognito Live System or Tails is a Linux distribution aimed at preserving privacy and anonymity. It is the next iteration of development on the Incognito Linux distribution. It is based on Debian, with all outgoing connections forced to go through Tor. The system is designed to be booted as a live cd or usb and no trace is left on local storage unless explicitly told to.

  60. #60 |  Pi Guy | 

    @#34 | ParatrooperJJ

    What was racist about the psychologist’s comments. FBI crime data clearly shows black males commit crime at a much higher rate then white males.

    Careful how you spin your stats. From Wikipedia’s “Race and crime in the United States”:

    Racial inequality in the American criminal justice system is mostly caused by a racial imbalance in decisions to charge criminal defendants with crimes requiring a mandatory minimum prison sentence, leading to large racial disparities in incarceration.” {emphasis mine}

    Perhaps it’s better to look, instead of through the lens of racism, rather to consider his statements with respect to his view of his role in the system.

    The main premise of the entire educational system has to be that people can change. They can learn. How, in good conscience, can an educator be taken seriously when they’ve already conceded that changing one’s behavior is not possible? What, exactly, does he think his job is if it’s not to find ways to trick, if you will, young people into trying to aquire new knowledge leading to what will hopefully be beneficial new behaviors?

    He shouldn’t be fired for being a racist. He should be fired for acknowledging that he’s not willing to try to do his job.

  61. #61 |  Alan Miller | 

    Re: the panhandler, sounds like a perfect opportunity to put the Citizens United case to work – I suspect you could come up with a challenge based on “The Supreme Court has ruled that in effect money is speech, therefore laws restricting my ability to give money are government restrictions on my First Amendment rights.” Even if nobody’s buying that argument, they may just drop it based on you being the kind of annoying pedant that they don’t want to deal with in court.