[Avodah] reasons for torah loopholes in dinei mamonos

[David Riceman]

I want to muse about this over Shabbos, but I have two knee-jerk responses:

> RCL:
> What to my mind is intriguing about hezek she'eino nikar as it is 
> brought in
> the Codes and as the rabbis legislated for it, is that the decrease in
> value, the difference between the main market and the shadow market, if that
> is the way you want to express it, is solely due to Torah values.  If we did
> not have commandments regarding tumah and tahara, or yayin nesech or even
> shechita and nevilos, we would not have these two markets.
See Ramban VaYetze 31:35.
> RCL:
> Based on a different principle I think, so I don't think it helps.  To fully
> be analogous I think we need a case where there is a ma'ase b'yadaim - as
> there is most clearly in the deliberate making of food tamei or making wine
> nesach - the person does something that acts on the item and decreases its
> value, just it is not visible.
>   
A  regular event in PG Wodehouse novels is that some bishop condemns a 
novel from the pulpit, causing the price to skyrocket, the printers to 
order extra runs, the booksellers to stockpile the book, and the author 
to go dancing in the streets (this seems to be happening more in the 
Jewish book world nowadays).  Suppose this happens, and then the 
Archbishop of Canterbury, the Grand Imam of Manchester, and the Chief 
Rabbi of Scotland announced that they'd all read the book, found it 
delightful, and intend to use it for bed time reading for their 
grandchildren (this is a tangent, but why don't we have Archrabbis?).

As a result the price of the book plummets, the booksellers and printers 
are stuck with unwanted stock, and the author (this is a PG Wodehouse 
story, after all) has to break his engagement.  The Archbishop, the 
Imam, and the Rabbi have acted on the book (somewhat indirectly) and 
decreased its value.  Can the printers and booksellers sue the clergymen?

Is this the case you're looking for? Again I don't think it helps, 
though in this case I don't think there'd be liability under halacha or 
in the US (British libel laws are so strict I couldn't even guess what 
the rule would be there).

David Riceman