Love Potion, Huge Violation of 3rd Law?

[Snark Knight]

Doesn't matter if it's voluntarily taken or not.
Altering someone else's mind is a violation.

I think there actually is a consent qualifier on the mind magic law. Otherwise Harry and Molly's sparring at mental invasion and defense would have been grounds for the choppy-chop in the first place.

Morgan clearly and obviously did not know everything magical that Harry did, otherwise Morgan would not have assumed Harry was committing the murders in the first place. He also would have known that Harry didn't summon the demon that he accuses him of summoning.
That Morgan never brings up the love potion means he did not know about the love potion.

Not to mention, Morgan hella definitely did not know about the illegal spirit of intellect Harry was keeping in his basement the whole time.

Actually, it seems kind of odd that if Morgan was the equivalent of an overzealous parole officer in at least the earlier part of the series, he wouldn't have been inspecting Harry's lab.

[peregrine]

Depends.  When Bob isn't "on" he looks like a normal human skull.  Unless Morgan is going around Seeing things, which I don't expect he'd be keen on doing in someone else's lab, he might not have noticed Bob.

Also, note, the mind magic law is specifically against invading another's mind.  That is different from entering.

[Mr. Death]

I don't think that Morgan didn't know about the love potion. I mean come ON.. miss 2 naked people running around? he did see the demon, and the end of the fight. One girl who was out of her mind, and naked. hmmm. Not hard math there.

People can only run around naked when there's a love potion involved?

There's a dozen other conclusions you could come to based on what he saw.

[Mira]

I don't think that Morgan didn't know about the love potion. I mean come ON.. miss 2 naked people running around? he did see the demon, and the end of the fight. One girl who was out of her mind, and naked. hmmm. Not hard math there.
Mira: Laws are about their letter, not the spirit. According to the ruling bodies anyway.

But the spirit of it kept Morgan on Harry's ass for ten years!   

[vultur]

Harry says in Turn Coat that wards that "suggest" people not notice someplace are generally accepted in the Council as not violating the Law. He says the same thing about the sleep spell he uses on Evelyn Derek (he calls it "grey" magic, but says the Council accepts it).

There seems to be some sort of established distinction here, but it's never clearly explained.

It doesn't seem to be as simple as emotions vs directly forcing actions, either -- the way Molly's spell in PG is described, it seems to be emotion-based (fear), and Harry never even tries to argue at her trial that that makes it a non-violation or even a gray area...

[Arjan]

Harry says in Turn Coat that wards that "suggest" people not notice someplace are generally accepted in the Council as not violating the Law. He says the same thing about the sleep spell he uses on Evelyn Derek (he calls it "grey" magic, but says the Council accepts it).

There seems to be some sort of established distinction here, but it's never clearly explained.

It doesn't seem to be as simple as emotions vs directly forcing actions, either -- the way Molly's spell in PG is described, it seems to be emotion-based (fear), and Harry never even tries to argue at her trial that that makes it a non-violation or even a gray area...

Just like placing an illusion in someone’s head in stead of creating a phantasm but the Merlin did exactly that to explain his battle plan in turncoat.

The communication spell between Elaine and Harry is nowhere described as breaking the laws or even dubious. The same for the mental training Molly and Harry did, invitation is important.

But just flooding someone with some emotion might be acceptable as well. What Molly did was invading a mind to couple an emotion to an action in an effort to change a persons nature, even soul. That is so obvious law breaking that nobody could argue anything else.

If some wizard does it in the books and no issue is made of the wizard or the deed it at all then it probably is not a violation.

[vultur]

But just flooding someone with some emotion might be acceptable as well. What Molly did was invading a mind to couple an emotion to an action in an effort to change a persons nature, even soul. That is so obvious law breaking that nobody could argue anything else.

Oh it clearly breaks the Law, I agree. But why? That is, how is the distinction made?

It can't be because the emotion is used to induce an action, because the "don't notice me" ward that Harry says is generally accepted does that too (inducing people to go on by rather than stop and look).

Changing their nature/soul... oh, I agree it's probably something like that, but how is that defined? It seems to me that one could just as easily argue that an addiction in and of itself compromises free will, and so countering that with an emotional spell actually ends up with the person having a greater degree of free will - which seems to be the opposite of 'enthrallment'.

(Now, Molly's spell had other negative effects because she was untrained and, in Nelson's case, angry - but it's not described as "it would have been OK with the Laws if you knew how to do it right".)

[Fcrate]

People can only run around naked when there's a love potion involved?

There's a dozen other conclusions you could come to based on what he saw.

Yes, and based on the fact that Susan is (sorry, was) way out of Harry's league, the first one to come to mind is prostitution. Second would be compulsion.

But the spirit of it kept Morgan on Harry's ass for ten years!   

Let's just say Morgan is a tender spirit. And completely duty bound.

[groinkick]

The production of the love potion -- and any other potion -- involves using magic. The text is explicit about this.

As the potion is magic, any changes it makes in a person are magical in nature, and thus part of the law. Note in Turn Coat, how Peabody's law violations are centered around his inks, i.e., a potion he concocted to break the laws of magic.

Actually I don't know if this is accurate.  When you go back and read the part in Storm Front where Harry makes the potion he uses magical energies to activate the potion but the objects in the potion react to both the wizard, and the drinker.  Like Bob saying that the love potion needs money because it's sexy, and chocolate because women love chocolate.  The magical energies Harry is using to activate the potion is not the same as when you enter a person's mind, and you must really believe in what you're doing.  That requires real belief, and the real desire to alter the person's mind which twists the wizard, and destroy's the other person's mind while Harry just focused on his irritations with Bob and everything going on to push energy into the ingredients to activate them.

As for Peabody.  There is a difference between messing with vanilla mortals, and messing with members of the Senior Council.  I don't know if he actually broke the laws of magic, but that doesn't mean they wouldn't kill him for messing with the Council.  Remember Eb told Harry that some of what he was saying would have gotten him killed by the Council in earlier days.  So they don't just kill for violating the laws.

[Wizard Sibelis]

So I was re-reading Storm Front (for the first time in a long time) and Bob convinces Harry to make a Love Potion.  Isn't this by definition a huge violation of the third law, forcible violation of a human mind?

I was confused since Harry didn't really object to making it despite Morgan practically hanging over his shoulder and it being a more clear violation of the White Council's laws.

I could chalk it up to being the first book and not everything being thought out but was wondering if Jim ever chimed in on this.

i'd bet since it effects the emotions and physiology over the psyche it's in the same grey area of free will violation that lets Whites be residents here.

[groinkick]

Yes, and based on the fact that Susan is (sorry, was) way out of Harry's league, the first one to come to mind is prostitution. Second would be compulsion.

I've seen incredibly hot women go for not physically attractive men...  Character, personality, chemistry is much more important to a lot of people out there than pure physical attraction.  And no it wasn't about money either cause these guys didn't have any..

[Mr. Death]

Yes, and based on the fact that Susan is (sorry, was) way out of Harry's league, the first one to come to mind is prostitution. Second would be compulsion.

So an attractive woman could only have been with someone (who you consider to be) less attractive because she's literally being paid or forced?

[Fcrate]

Not really. But an attractive woman could only have been with someone I hate and think is the devil incarnate because she's being paid or forced.

[Mr. Death]

If Morgan thought so (and I hope/presume you're speaking from his point of view and not your own), he would have said so.

Given he doesn't seem to pay her any mind, I doubt he's jumping to those kinds of conclusions.

[Kindler]

Brewing a love potion wouldn't violate the Law, but slipping it to someone against their will might count for the purposes of enforcement. Similarly to owning a gun; I have it, but my use of it is restricted. I don't break any laws until I disobey those restrictions.

Now, here's a question: was the Three-Eye drug Victor Sells brewed illegal by Council Law? Or was it illegal to distribute? Harry says the potions he sees in Sells's clubhouse have a nasty, black-magic-ish aura, but is that just Harry's interpretation of how horribly the potion corrupts the user?

He violated a bunch of other Laws regardless, so he'd be executed no matter what, but if he had just stuck to the drug trade without the murder and demon-summoning, would he have been?