Capitalism definitely puts a premium on creativity. At least when demand for the underlying product is, shall we say, high:
"Pycher, Radnia, and Adam Larson founded Nestdrop in 2013. Initially, the
Nestdrop app allowed Los Angeles-area users to order alcohol for local delivery within
the hour. In October or November of 2014, Nestdrop’s developers expanded the app to
allow deliveries of medical marijuana in parts of the City. To procure marijuana through
the app, a user orders from a menu of products. The order is then placed with a medical
marijuana business with which Nestdrop has partnered. According to defendants, an
employee of the providing medical marijuana business or a “volunteer” then delivers the
marijuana to the purchaser."
Capitalism isn't the only creative force. The Court of Appeal demonstrates its cultural awareness as well:
"Defendants . . . . contend the measure
summary and impartial analysis that appeared in the ballot pamphlet materials for
Proposition D described the ordinance as authorizing delivery of medical marijuana by
vehicles and they maintain that the voters enacting the proposition adopted that
construction. This argument is meritless. We do not rest our interpretation of an
ordinance on statements in ballot pamphlet materials where the text of the measure is
otherwise unambiguous. [Citations] But more
to the point, and paraphrasing Inigo Montoya, we do not think the ballot pamphlet
materials mean what defendants think they mean."
Inigo Montoya got his man in the end. But Los Angeles area residents can't get their weed via delivery. So holds the Court of Appeal.