Fair enough, but everyone take note the comment conflates two different concepts:ScottDLS wrote:Practically, the risk that I would be discovered and successfully prosecuted for my actions is low enough that I am willing to ignore such notice, and be comfortable that I am not breaking the law.
1. "the risk that I would be discovered . . . is low enough"
Clients have asked me from time to time how likely it is that their proposed conduct will be discovered and that they will suffer adverse consequences. My reply is always some variation of "You are asking me not if X is legal but whether you can get away with doing X even if it is illegal. I was absent that day in law school."
2. " comfortable that I am not breaking the law."
This, of course, is what it sounds like, an opinion that the proposed conduct is legal. If you use the comment as a guide to your conduct, be aware of the two different points. Calculations of whether you can get away with something are always chancy and posts to this board, if traceable to you, are likely to be used in court.
All that said, I don't disagree so much with the previous comment as with the spirit that seems to be behind it. If you follow the governing statutes in a spirit of cooperation and compliance, you're less likely to run into trouble. Guiding your conduct prospectively by an extremely fine parsing, on the other hand, may get you in trouble. The time for fine parsing of statutory language is during a prosecution. Then you try to make law because you have to.