Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyKell
Weird because from this article it sounds like you have to have permission to use the land. So if they'd gone to trial couldn't they have argued that there was, in fact, no permission. 
Sucks that people can use antiquated laws for unethical purposes.  |
That's not how I read it.
You don't have to have permission at all. It is basically implied UNLESS the rightful owner takes proactive legal measures.