<美國法律呼悠談> sucks

I don't know how many people ready or even buy this book. come on, you can write a so-called article just by describing some basic rule under "long-arm statute"?

I am not saying this is too little. Rather, I am thinking it's too much, too much as misleading to some lay readers that American laws are so simple that everyone can "hoyo" on it.

No defense, but shame on the author to publish such a book, if he did receive some basic American legal education.

In short, the book is not professional, and less value can be proved only by setting out several common law rules that the author himself does not know much about it.

所有跟帖： 

• I didn't read it -Michelle74- ♀ (648 bytes) () 07/07/2004 postreply 00:35:01

• yeah, just browse 2 chapters -Michelle74- ♀ (331 bytes) () 07/07/2004 postreply 01:24:51

• the book is nothing -wal-mart- ♀ (239 bytes) () 07/07/2004 postreply 04:33:03

• A Dummy's Guide is more useful -xmm11- ♀ (112 bytes) () 07/07/2004 postreply 12:43:56

• good to have u guys here, hehe -cannothelp- ♀ (941 bytes) () 07/07/2004 postreply 19:35:41

• 我感覺這些文章就是個獵奇的作用，給對美國法律完全不了解的中國 -人點兒新鮮東西看- ♀ (0 bytes) () 07/07/2004 postreply 18:28:43

• 是的,把案例用寫小品的口氣編書,你說是給誰看啊! -Michelle74- ♀ (0 bytes) () 07/07/2004 postreply 19:42:36

• 這裏最近明白人很多涅!以前怎麽都不冒泡啊 -Michelle74- ♀ (141 bytes) () 07/07/2004 postreply 23:30:36