>>"No -- *generating* legalese is what lawyers are for. If they wrote things
>>in clear English that everyone could understand, we wouldn't need as
>>many lawyers or judges."
The English language is infamously vague. Multiple meanings are a way of
life. Like any science, the science of presenting information in a way
that cannot be misinterpreted requires a set of rules. Those rules are
'legalese' as you put it. Anyone who spends enough time working with legal
texts will eventually come to be comfortable with reading them. You may
still have questions but you'll generally get the concept down. Of course
a lawyer is an expert in this system and can verify these things for you.
Text written in 'plain text' is exactly the kind of think that gets you
into court due to misinterpretation. And court sucks...even if you are in
the right. Yes, leagalese is artificial BUT it is necessary until everyone
on the planet stops trying to screw one another.
At 10:56 PM 9/17/2000, you wrote:
>At 10:37 PM 9/17/00 -0400, Adam Dray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I don't mean this in any snotty way: Explaining legalese is what lawyers
> >are for.
>
>No -- *generating* legalese is what lawyers are for. If they wrote things
>in clear English that everyone could understand, we wouldn't need as
>many lawyers or judges.
>
>Rogers Cadenhead
>E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Web: http://www.prefect.com
>-------------
>For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
