I think the anachronistic law u are referring to comes out of an old European doctrine. But I was referring to the actual WY law the judge “instructed” the jury to take into considerations which to me was bullshit. I mean why wouldn’t she instruct them as well then to take into consideration the state attorney general opinion letter on it being not illegal. Idk it just seems she’s really dumb and now making a fool of herself simply to make a point at the expense of taxpayers dollars. No common sense here in my opinionHistorically this body of law‘s entire purpose was to prevent access. The law didn’t start when drones were invented - or helicopters either. I believe it is anachronistic law, but laws don’t change just because the times do. Judge rulings, regulatory rule changes, legislative statutory changes are what change the law. The 1% of Americans who big game hunt out west shared common sense does not change the law. And jury verdicts don’t change the law.
As a matter of literal reading, this is more likely trespass than not. With one or two judicial rulings or a single statutory change it all goes away. The fight will go on past this one jury verdict.