Very interesting point, in theory. Luckily, that kind of thing has been studied, and it=s the other way around. Copyrights hinder availability, and entering public domain is an incentive for publishing.
Look at this, it was a study on Amazon availability of books : http://offsettingbehaviour.blogspot.co.nz/2012/03/copyright-stagnation.html.
This shows that books seem to get republished as soon as they enter the public domain, and for a long time after that too.

If they really wanted to line their pockets, they'd sell them to the black hats.

And who's to say that he doesn't have another three dozen that he knows about, but held back?

Apple makes more profit selling PCs than all the other manufacturers together, and these profits are growing year after year after year. Why would they get out of that business?

Is killing an American hostage worse than killing a non American hostage? For practical purposes, we know it is, and even the Italian guy is from another NATO country, so not an American but an ally.
But I just would like to know if there's any difference on paper in your responsibility, when you kill non hostile local civilians vs your own civilians / allies .

Also, about the title, drones don't kill people. Some force did, or some guy behind the controls, but the drone itself, no matter how autonomous it might be, doesn't kill people.

My suspicion with these so-called African landfills, or anywhere, is where is the economics of transporting heavy waste ten thousand miles just to dump it. yes, the US and European laws make dumping it a home expensive, but just to dump it elsewhere for the kid to play in? Does not seem to add up. Transporting it to be used for a few years and them dumping it, that makes sense. That still has the problem of concentrating toxic waste in places where there are not good regulations to protect the populous, but that is a different issue.

This is why I do not buy DRM videos from anyone. At some point something will happen where you can't play them. The music is OK because it was never particularly hard to remove the DRM.

That said, the same thing can happen to pirated content. You hard disk can crash, the file can corrupt, the content can be taken down. If you have good backups you are ok, but in my experience backing up terabytes worth of content is non trivial.

It is convenient have your licensed content on the cloud. It off course is a trade off.

Apple stopped selling music with DRM over six years ago. But it would seem that the problem is connecting to the Apple Store and purchasing (which hurts mostly Apple) and playing music and videos with DRM _on that computer_. Everything should continue to work phone on iPod, iPhone and iPad.

Anyone here who has actually listened to or viewed DRM protected content from Apple on Windows XP in the last year?

There are four things government is in a position to do better than anyone else: military defense, law enforcement, public works, and the erosion of liberty.

They had to, after one developer conference was sold out within less than two minutes...

Because your original statement

Can be interpreted at least two ways:

"part of the gender which is a minority in positions of power like government, CEO's, etc."

or

"part of the gender which is a minority in positions of power like government, CEO's, etc."

I admit, I read it pretty fast, but it struck me the second way. I could have thought about it more. I did wonder why you were saying I was in a position of power. :)

But just FYI, I didn't claim to be any particular gender, or belong to a minority, or be in a position of power.

I repeat: my Tungsten at 320x480 was very nice, pretty fast, and the graphics were pretty impressive for their day. As I mentioned before, Bejeweled (for one example) played and looked great.

My point -- which you still seem to be not getting -- is that if they'd simply stuck a phone in it, we'd have CLOSE TO what we have today, years before it actually happened. No, the screen was not AS big. No, it did not have AS HIGH a pixel size. But neither did anything else. It would have been a phone that decently ran apps, AND had pretty good (again for its day) handwriting recognition.

The problem is precisely that often nobody knows who they are. THEY get protected, but the people they abuse do not.

Well, my comment was really meant in the context of ISPs.

Sure, there are small innovative companies. Like Instagram and even Netflix (it didn't start out big). BUT... what about companies that bring those services to the consumer? The ISPs? That's where Net Neutrality really comes in, and they have erected huge barriers to entry for anybody small (or innovative).

No, I don't believe that's true. While they might know the words, they haven't really studied it, or its history, enough to UNDERSTAND the intent of the words when they were written.

Further, many of them think they don't have to... that it's a "living document" that changes meaning over time.

I call bullshit.

---
"The first and governing maxim in the interpretation of a statute is to discover the meaning of those who made it." -- James Wilson, founding father