You sir are in violation of my Two Patents:
"How to deal fast with adversities", which covers nuking, spanking, general intimidation and cease or desist letters.
"Land exchanges between countries using words, meetings and IT".

No that happen when companies start suing each other for not being able to provide equal quality products... Oh Wait...

Pro-business? Like patents ever helped people who know how to do business...

Luckily it wasn't an iphone or she would be labelled as terrorist.

So you think of her as a dissident? Even thought she is not even Israeli?
The guys probably overreacted, AFAIK they're kids, it happens just as it happened to Americans in Iraq, don't think Israelis are that special.

BTW I think you forgot to add "does her family had her house destroyed?"...

Yes I know you've serious problems in your country but that is not an excuse for everything you do wrong, or do you allow a kid with a bad family to freely beat his colleagues?

Is installing software on my IPhone Illegal?

So whats next? Being anger with PunkB*ster for not letting you cheat?

Modded consoles are used for:
Play pirated games(you don't need a chip to backup anything so sftu)
Cheat on online games
A few other not illegal or "immoral" activities.

So if you want more functionality(last of the above uses) on your XBox why not start a petition or something so M$ knows what you want?(I'm not saying they'll even consider it but at least you tried) Otherwise you're either engaging in illegal activities(the law is the law until its changed) that M$ can't tolerate because its bad for business and they risk themselves by allowing it, or you're an useless looser that likes to ruin everyone else experience on online games just because you can't figure out how to play tic tac toe.

Buy Apple products? Is that the same Apple that bricked a couple of IPhonys?

As the zealot in me would say: "That would be anti-competitive! why should any program be allowed to get special treatment? I believe Windows installer should ask if I want linux and other OS, and also I believe that every distribution of linux should ask me if I want any other distribution. I Want Freedom and I don't care if it takes a week to get everything running and goes against every freedom of the market! Also I want to eat whoppers at McDonalds!" Its ridiculous when "Free" software crusaders and idiotic judges think they can enforce freedom, its their product you don't like it you don't use it, there are plenty of alternatives out there. Consumers aren't babies, stop treating them like their mothers would.

Yeah... now they have only a medieval warlord named Balmer without Bill to stop his attack on Google with chairs.

They wrote code that uses GPLed source, does that means they do not own the code they've wrote? No, the article does not says they copied all the code it says they've used some portion of GPLed code. My comment is about ownership not copyright.

Yes, "if they were".

First of all: Microsoft OWNS the copyright so they can change the license for whatever they want, whenever they want, GPL does not imposes restrictions on ownership;

Second: They released a first driver as not being GPL, and then they released it as GPL, but there is nothing in GPL that says that former versions of the code have to be GPL(that would be stupid), only derivative ones;

Third: I remember again they own the code (until someone proves they do not at least), GPL cannot, and does not, restricts ownership, and as a owner they can do anything they want, even change to other license;

Fourth: If Intel decides that their processor implementation is GPL would that mean that every program made for an Intel processor would have to be GPL by "Freedom Advocates" reasoning, because it would be a derivative work of the processor.

I rest my case, freedom is about choice, it is not about senseless whining and forcing others to do things your way, so if you embrace this kind of thinking stop calling yourself freedom advocate and start calling yourself totalitarian.

Yes but today most linux distribution are as close to the other as they ever were 10+ years ago. They still use the same kernel (I admit with minor patches but still essentially the same), they do not start modifying the kernel to suit the distribution needs and because of that they remain a distribution: a bunch of programs on top of an operating system that in essence is the same for everyone of them.
That is not the case for most today's BSDs they evolve without fear of modifying the OS from which they derive as independent OSes with independent goals.

RHEL, I think, is another case, if I remember correctly RHat initially modified the kernel to suit its needs never intending much cross-compatibility.

Having to work on a schedule makes most people work more efficiently(no more time lost playing "Who can hit the beer bottle with a piece of paper" or "lets paint Carl's face while he is a asleep").
Also if its security oriented I would never expect it to have a long release cycle (12 months is a lot of time in terms of security)