Comment

neukenindekeuken@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

Seems to fit the official definition pretty neatly. Colloquially, I tend to agree with you, there’s a spectrum for fraud. But this still counts as fraud. It’s a fraudulent misrepresentation of the truth to convince others to part with something of value (a gift).

The fact that it’s a gift doesn’t change that this is fraud, only the severity of fraud in a legal sense. Image

source

Sort:hotnew top

Hackworth@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

intentional perversion of truth in order to induce another to part with something of value

Advertising and politics?

source
- IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world ⁨22⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
  laws don’t apply to politicians.
  
  source
lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com ⁨22⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
image of text: there’s this cool alternative called text that doesn’t break the web or accessibility. linking to source & quoting text makes an altogether better web for everyone.

dictionary definition: not an official, legal definition.
source
- IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world ⁨22⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
  great, y’all want to get into Japanese criminal legal definitions?
  
  source
knight_alva@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
Fraud in the sense that the guy is lying and profiting from it, sure. But the common / google definition of a word and the legal definition/ application of that word are two completely different things.

source