Say "Bye-Bye SCO!"

[Joe Fish]

That's funny, but isn't the purpose of health code laws quite different than
that?

I'm not sure, but I thought that the laws regarding health codes (well,
federal laws anyway)  came under the adjudication of the FDA.

Which if you look it up, is explicitly NOT an organization whose charter is
to promote (or even protect) public health.  Rather, its charter states that
its raison'd'etre is to promote the sale of U.S. agricultural products ...

Interesting, even if they're NOT the ones that monitor health regulations
...





JOE

On 9/25/07, David Nicol <davidnicol at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 9/25/07, Joe Fish <reverend.joe at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Another bad anology -- health code laws are about as different from
> > copyright laws in both their written form, and their interpretations in
> > court, as two things can be and both still be called "LAWS".  You're
> still
> > missing my point -- the trend in this country is to try to create "IP"
> law
> > (both written laws and case laws) that gives the creator of something
> > ULTIMATE, TOTAL, AND ABSOLUTE CONTROL UNTIL THE END OF TIME of the thing
> > they've created.  Can you really say the same seems to apply to laws
> that
> > govern health conditions at McDonald's?
>
> Health codes are designed to give the public some assurance, absolutely,
> totally, and until the end of time, that you will not get food sickness by
> eating at a compliant restaurant within city limits.
>
> That said, loading my bowl with sliced clams right before closing at
> Genghis Khan was stupid and I harbor no ill will against the place.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://kclug.org/pipermail/kclug/attachments/20070925/0d0c5fdd/attachment.htm