The idea said:Is that a statement about the existing law as you understand it or is that a statement about how the law should be?
It's a statement about what the First Amendment says, which is the only law brought up for discussion here. I'm perfectly aware that there are many laws violating it.
I assume that by "contains" you mean something like "makes" or "asserts." In order to establish that some claims are fraudulent, an author may need to fully identify them by including them in the book.
Yeah, basically. You understand what I mean. James Randi isn't actually making any fraudulent claims in his books because, although he states the claim, he goes on to debunk it.
A more substantive issue: can one be prosecuted for fraud if one is not actually attempting to gain something by fraudulent means?
I guess theoretically he could, but there wouldn't be any actual damages to recover, I wouldn't think. He'd actually have to be taking people's money.
Should it be illegal to advertise Stephen Wolfram's book A New Kind of Science with words such as "whole new way of looking at the operation of our universe"?
I don't know the book you're referring to, but offhand, I'd say "no," as it may actually be a "whole new way of looking at the operation of our universe," just not a correct "way of looking at the operation of our universe." Being wrong is not the same as committing fraud.