Yup, it's mine.
I now own that exact phrase.
Ya see, I punctuated and capitalized the Latin to agree with English rules of grammar.
I put a comma after the actual greeting, before the name of the person I was addressing.
And then a period at the end of that sense unit.
The next sentence, and those two words are, or at least can be a sentence unto themselves, looks as if it has no subject or verb but that's where my expertise, the real work I put into this morally justifying my assertion of copyright. See, in Latin, the verb esse need not be explicit but can be understood, and its second-personedosity (he, not that I think of it, "personedosity"also ©. And while I'm at it, personitude ©. Gotta cover my bases,) can also be understood from the preceding vocative and no other noun or pronoun in sight to be the subject.
And of course I used upper case for the initial of the first word in that sentence, but not for that of the second. In the first sentence, the second word is capitalized because it is a proper name.
So when you choose to punctuate and capitalize the phrase the same way, just give me a call -- I'll cut you a good deal on the royalities.
All this by way of an introduction to Jeffrey Tucker's thoughts on an important aspect of Pope Benedict's latest encyclical.
In response to an accusation I heard that the Bow-Tied One is a hammer to whom everything looks like a nail and the Holy Father had no intention of applying his teaching on the just application of intellectual property rights to the official music and words of Catholic worship, I say- PAH! or maybe, FEH!
For starters, JT is no hammer, he is a freaking NAIL GUN.
And secondly, how can it NOT apply?
Principles are principles, that's the whole point of calling them "principles" rather than "whims".