They'll just say a little molestation is a price worth paying to ensure our "safety".

Can you represent a rights holder without their consent?

Who needs to commit perjury? If a person has an Internet connection, it's pretty much guaranteed that they've violated the DMCA in at least a small way.

What is this "chance to defeat ACTA" of which you speak? The process has been specifically designed to keep us excluded it's too far along to change. At this point, the best we can hope for is wisdom from countries that are less concerned about the freedoms of their corporations and more concerned about the freedoms of their citizens.

Yep, well, when it cost less to produce a newspaper for the iPad than it does to print one and you have the balls to try and sell it for more than a printed newspaper, I'm sure you'd love the iPad as well ... at least until you find out that people aren't as dumb as you thought and they don't save your collapsing industry by buying into your inflated subscriptions.

What happens when you conspire to infiltrate groups with conspiracy theories?

If it violates child porn laws when children are involved, does that mean it's regular porn when adults are involved? So much for not violating privacy.

Yup. And yet, almost every major website with advertising has figured out a way to deliver ads that are not only localized, but also, and even better, targeted based on my browsing habits. If content distributors would take a moment to step into this century, they would realize that they don't have to license the content locally. All they need to do is to get local advertisers to *come to them* and then distribute the ads appropriately based on IP. They've already figured out how to *block* us geographically based on IP ... but, content distributors always seem good with technology when it comes to *pissing off* their customers.

I only ever read 4 of the books in the series, and found them to be WAY too large. The first book split in half down the spine before I finished it. And, I was grateful because it was easier to read. Books 2-3 I split on my own before I even started reading them.

Same here. Got through the first few books, and stopped once I realized that it was going to take at least 15 years before I'd ever see an ending.

And, there is nothing remotely new in this. Marketing agencies have had paid actors posing as real customers for ever. Most of Apple's "Switchers" were paid to say so. All of Microsoft's laptop shoppers were paid to choose a laptop running Windows and complain about Apple.

The cost of someone gathering it up is still a *distribution* cost which, again, is much easier (less costly) to do now.

No, ads don't pay for the *information*, they pay for the *distribution*. You're still buying in to the con that there is a cost to information. If there was, you'd have to charge for sharing with your friends the information you just read from a newspaper.

That's not the way the world works *currently*. But, prior to the last few years information *was* free; people only had to pay for distribution of that information (and, hence, the invention of the "newspaper"). Now, we have an insanely cheap technology for distribution and the old guard are trying to change the model to pay-for-information without anyone noticing.

We're in a thread discussing Apple, and you try to claim that we don't have an alternative to Microsoft?