Helps to avoid the other big problem with outdoor sandboxes as well.

Cats.

If the numbering scheme is copyrighted separate from the laws, does that therefore imply that it is not considered part of the law?

Thus, is it the case in Oregon that legislation revising laws must identify the text being revised by including that text and not by referring to numbering arbitrarily imposed by a third party?

Could a lawyer on the verge of retiring submit briefs referring to laws using his own numbering scheme, and when called on it by the judge point out that a) the numbering that the judge is expecting is provided by a third party, not the state, and is not a part of the laws, that b) there's nothing in the laws that requires using the numbering scheme imposed by that third party and that c) there'd be good grounds to challenge any laws that said the equivalent of "You must use the numbering scheme that you must purchase rights to from company X?"

@15:
That's why I commented that it was probably mostly a list of folks outside US jurisdiction and that applying it to folks within the US (and requiring its use for purely domestic transactions, though I didn't mention that) was a sign of sloppy thinking/planning.

It's a bureaucratic screwup, and until a Senator is unable to buy a car because his name is similar to one on that list it's unlikely that anyone in OFAC or Congress is going to care enough to fix it.

@Aaron:
I suspect that it's not really a terrorist list of any sort. The Office of Foreign Assets Control is responsible for policing a variety of financial dealings including known drug traffickers, foreign countries, etc.

Basically, they're the folks who have to enforce the "No, you can't wire US$10,000,000 to the Medellin Cartel in Colombia" or "No, you can't wire US$10,000,000 to your cousin in North Korea" policies. Part of how they do that is with a list of names or known aliases for people covered by those blocks.

I could be wrong, but I suspect that the list mostly includes people and companies that are outside US jurisdiction; if you're both on that list and within the US then there are probably one or more government agencies or police departments that would like to have a few words with you. The fact that companies are checking against the list for folks within the country indicates some sloppy thinking on many peoples' part.

I'm not so sure that non-lethal booby traps are illegal. Illegal to set the garden hose to spray the next person through the door?

For that matter, I'm not sure which is worse: vandalism or cleaning up (or just putting up with) the chicken poo that you've sprayed across your property.