No, your reasoning is NOT sound....Both Goodwill and Salvation Army take donations both monitary and material and sell the material items...for money.

How is having a paid support structure where the money goes back into the charity for more charitable uses any different than both of those?

Fuck security guards.

We were going to go to NASA Space Center, and they have a "security checkpoint" before you enter. You know what they're looking for? Food! I couldn't bring in a sandwich so my son with food allergies (yes the real, anaphylaxis kind) could eat lunch with us. All so they could make an extra buck at the snack counter. I guess they got enough complaints, because they allow bottled water now. I raised a big enough stink about it that they finally let me in, but what the fuck? If it's a goddam security check, look for guns and knives and forget the rest. If a little ham is going to cause the Mars exhibit to implode, why don't they have another checkpoint as you leave the food court?!

Anyway, I would have left, but my wife had already bought the tickets and was pissed at me for raising such a fuss. I was offended that she was not outraged. I mean this is complete bullshit, and she wants to raise our kids to just roll over and take it. More people need to get pissed at these "security" checks. I see it happening at more and more venues: football games, art museums, etc... At least the metal detectors in the courthouse came as a response to actual shootings. But come on, who is going to bother with a terrorist attack on the Duct Tape Museum of Greater Bumfuck? At some point the security measures cost more than what you're actually preventing.

I'll probably get modded down for this, but it looks like this is a case of a judge stretching the law as far as possible to try to enforce an order against some really crappy people. If the plaintiff is correct (AFAIK they are), then the defendants absolutely deserve to get struck from Google's search results. Hell, if they're really bait-and-switching customers, you'd think Google would be pleased as punch to give these guys the finger.

Look, it's nice to talk in absolute terms about freedom of speech, sovereignty, judicial activism, or what have you. But this is part of an ongoing trial, and the judge is trying to do what's fair while the underlying trade secret case plays through. I wouldn't want to be in her position. If the plaintiff goes under because all the Google results for their equipment point to these other asshats, then the judge will be blamed for not doing enough.

If one of my engineers started up a company in Canada using my technology, I would love for a judge to be able to enjoin Google to remove their search results. This is a feature, not a bug.

Ha! I parsed that as "muppet-conjuring." I had a fleeting image of the Count as a muppet necromancer. One, two, three, four! Four muppet zombies! ah ah ah ah.

Just finished updating a few apps on my phone.
Adobe Air has a new permission group it requests. However, on the 'here's the permissions Air is requesting' pop-up after you hit the update button, they no longer mark the new permissions with "NEW". So now you have to cancel out of the update and go check each and every app you're going to update to see what the new permissions it's requesting.
Totally stupid move by Google to not even mark the new permissions with 'NEW'

Go ahead and complain all you want about this ruling....until YOUR child is stuck with one of those 3% of poor performing tenured teachers and you can't do anything about it until all the union appeals are done with.

What kind of fucked up place are you from where they whack little babies upside the head all the time?! And you think WE have issues?

In fact, most rental car companies give you a map that says, "If you go past here, we will fine you $XXX." Never tested it out, but I was tempted.

But... but... freedom invisible hand small government patriotism free market liberty state's rights!