>>107966023Even Bird Law must have established precedents versus theory. If a completely new legal controversy arises, it's theory.
Obviously this is some kind of Bird Law because there's no such thing as magic, so we can't know what Magic Law is like. But if every aspect of Magic Law is some kind of fucked up black letter with no room for new developments, then how do magic creatures even deal?
An apt comparison here would be copyright law. It's black letter that if you buy a house, you're allowed to buy new plumbing or make any changes you want. But what if you buy a Google Home™? They hook up software to all your home's parts, and then license you to use the software. So what if you decide you don't want to use Google Pipes™ and alter their software to work with another company's pipes? What if Google discontinues support for its Google Plumbing™ software and now you just can't obtain running water in your home? Nobody knows, because digital licenses are still a recent development in legal-think.
But I think if the Gunnerkrig Aztec were the judge of the case, it'd throw the home owner in prison for asking difficult questions about civil laws.
