<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Steve Janke: Angry in the Great White North: Comments for "Bloomberg reports on the Dunn case"</title>
    <link>http://stevejanke.com/archives/200422.php</link>
    <description>Comments for the entry "Bloomberg reports on the Dunn case"</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <generator>Movable Type v2.64</generator>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
<lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Oct 2006 17:00:52 -05:00</lastBuildDate>
     <item>
      <title>Comment from ebt</title>
      <description><![CDATA[<p>I've been doing my best to see a story here, or something of any real interest, but I don't.</p>

<p>The powers of the OSC are not new and not accidental. The OSC is as competent as any court to determine the law.</p>

<p>And an American doing business in Ontario is subject to Ontario law. If he wants the protection of American law, shouldn't he be doing his business under American law? If he chooses to walk away from that protection, where's the injustice if it turns out that he needed the protection?</p>

<p>And of course, the idea that because he's an American, the OSC shouldn't be allowed to ask him the same questions they're entitled to ask anybody else, would be offensive if it weren't just bats.</p>

<p>Is there really any reason to take this "story" seriously? What injustice is being done here?</p>]]></description>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">200422@http://stevejanke.com/#c973889</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Oct 2006 17:00:52 -05:00</pubDate>
    </item>

  </channel>
</rss>
