I always edit PDFs like this so that they use the font size I need them to, to fit my answer in the space provided.

I hope this makes it to the Supreme Court. This ruling does not jive with the Federal Circuit ruling in Chamberlain Group v. Skylink Technologies and 5th Circuit in MGE UPS Systems v. GE Consumer & Industrial that link circumvention with infringement. In short, that circumvention is only illegal if it is for the purpose of infringement.

Where in the USA is FPV flying illegal?

Why do you think you have to go to certain areas to fly RC planes?

The obvious safety solution is a parachute that deploys if radio contact is lost or the plane impacts anything while still in the air. They exist, but almost no one uses them.

You don't need airspace clearance to fly a model in most classifications of airspace. General rule of thumb is don't fly over any airports or military bases. I've gotten visits for flying inside an army base's radar coverage, but they were just curious.

What regulation are you referring to in your first question?

As to transmitter power, it is likely (but not certain) that he has a HAM license and was using one of their bands for his transmitter. It's legal, but not especially common. Go to a fly-in (R/C meetup where flying happens) with a thousand people and maybe twenty of them will be using HAM radios.

Just off the top of my head, having built and flown a lot of RC craft in the past, a 54" plane could have a flight time of an hour at 80mph, so he could easily reach his 27 mile radio range and back, with time to maneuver in between.

That's the question... Does developing and selling an XBox game *legally* require a license? That is, if you bypassed Microsoft's technological license-required controls, would you be violating a law? Put another way, is there any legal power behind Microsoft's XBox development licensing scheme? Before the DMCA the answer was obviously pro-consumer. Today it would be a hard case.

I think you are suffering from a sampling bias. "from what I've seen, and from what my friends have seen"... How many of those friends go to an ivy league school? You, being from an ivy league school, are more likely to encounter, at every step of the process, people and organizations who prefer ivy league students. If there are recruiters out there who prefer state school students (and there are, I assure you), their candidates would have the exact opposite impression of yours.

Consider an HIT that is worth one cent every ten seconds. To an American, $3.60/hr sounds appalling. To someone in a third world country where $3.60 will buy a week's worth of food and $20 is rent for a month, that's a hell of a good job.

Right, what you've described are the common dictionary definitions. Those are the definitions a misbehaving juror might find, that would probably cause them to incorrectly answer a question such as the following in some circumstances:

"Did the defendant possess a copy of any work for which they were not the author?"

Because potential offenses (such as "possessing a ____ copy") are based on the same definitions as the rest of the statute, it is the job of the lawyers and judge to make sure that the jurors know, in attempting to answer that question, that according to US copyright law...

“Copies” are material objects, other than phonorecords, in which a work is fixed by any method now known or later developed, and from which the work can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device. The term “copies” includes the material object, other than a phonorecord, in which the work is first fixed.

which means that the original and any duplicates are all "copies", and laws [in this section] that refer or apply to a "copy" apply to the original as well.
and

In the case of a work made for hire, the employer or other person for whom the work was prepared is considered the author for purposes of this title

which means that laws [in this section] that refer or apply to the "author" of a work apply to the employer, not the employee.

When you create a work for hire, the person who paid you is the Author.

When you create a painting, or take a photo, or record yourself playing an original musical composition, that's a Copy.

Do those examples help illustrate the problem?

So what is your proposal? Should the law contain made up words (that is, should the legal "copy" be a "foozle")? Should the definitions be included inline like my example above? Something else?

Why do you think they failed? It seems quite likely that one or both sides would have covered rape trauma in depth during the trial.

No? If you couldn't make a chapter-specific definition of "copy" ("a physical object containing a fixed representation of a work") then easy-to-read sentences like this:

All copies must be made based on an authorized copy.

Would turn into something like this:

All physical objects containing a fixed representation of a work must be made based on an authorized physical object containing a fixed representation of that work.

(All of the above is hypothetical or paraphrased, that's not the exact definition of "copy" from the copyright code and that sentence doesn't appear in the code)

Would it help if you had access to a copy of the law where all of the re-defined terms were hyperlinked to the definitions section?