I would never voluntarily pay more tax than I am legally required. I do not know anyone who would voluntarily pay more tax than is legally required, regardless of their political beliefs. I do not think it is wrong to take advantage of any legal means at my disposal to reduce my tax burden. This problem will continue until the lawmakers start actually doing their job instead of trying to shift the blame for their failure.

Tax evasion is illegal. Tax avoidance, which is what these companies are practicing, is not. There's no criminal wrongdoing taking place.

Even though the politicians bluster on and on about the problem, they always forget to mention that they are the ones with the power to fix it, if they chose to.

There must be precedents or applicable laws for physical analogies. If a company operating in the US happens to store physical records somewhere outside the US, and those records are pertinent to the case, would those not be covered by a US subpoena? If the company has access to them and the ability to procure them, what does the physical location of the records or their headquarters matter?

Cue the whoosh replies...

That works, expect you get to sit in jail indefinitely for contempt as a result.

The Court seems to think it's likely that the Legislative/Executive branches would have modified the law in a way that clearly included what Aereo doing to circumvent it. They're probably right, but what they should have done is refuse to hear the case and let the correct branches of government do their jobs. Many parts of the government are overreaching their authority in ways that are really troubling.

FCC "rules" that jailbreaking is legal. Yeah FCC!
FCC "rules" that Net Neutrality is dead. Boo FCC!

SCOTUS rules that cops need a warrant to search your mobile. Yeah SCOTUS!
SCOTUS rules that Congress meant to include Aereo in a law made before anyone had any idea that technology would make something like Aereo possible. Boo SCOTUS!

Executive says they won't enforce federal drug laws regarding pot. Yeah POTUS!
Executive says it's kosher to kidnap or even kill citizens without due process, as long as they're pretty sure they're bad guys and are physically in some other country at the time. Boo POTUS!

Where the hell are the lawmakers? Oh, that's right, They're busy dicking around spending all their time trying to make the other team look bad.

Public meaning anyone can sign up to and access the service.

Probably yes, whether it's wifi or two tin cans and a string. But, unlike Aereo, Netflix has purchased licenses to allow them to do so.

The amount of cabs in the airport at any given moment is strictly regulated. They can't do that with ride-share apps. More cars = more traffic.

In the 1960's the prevailing opinion about Japanese quality is that it was inferior in every way except cost, and there was ample justification for that opinion. Then the same thing happened again a couple decades later, but this time it was Taiwan. In the early 1900's? Germany was the dog-shit bottom-feeder of manufacturing.

All three of the above are now considered to be among the highest-quality manufacturers in the world.

Things change.

Agreed that it's not in the summary, but as you correctly note, it's just a "summary". Anyone who reads the underlying blog post will read this among the facts on which the court based its opinion: "The public was allowed to search by keyword. The search results showed only the page numbers for the search term and the number of times it appeared; none of the text was visible."

So those readers who RTFA will be in the know.

I take it you don't fly in or out of LAX very much? Traffic is a nightmare. It can take 30-45 minutes to simply loop through the terminals a single time when it's busy, which is damn near every night. I'm not saying that these rules don't defend taxi's turf, but there is more reason to it than just that.

Well, there are the millions that visit China each year, and anyone who's ever bothered setting up a VPN connection so they could FaceTime with family or whatever.

Wouldn't the release of the software and/or documentation need to predate the patents for that to work? I'm not sure how this would work.

5) They've been using it to track some for-real bad guys, and the release of the documents would compromise an ongoing investigation or investigations.

I suspect it's a combination of mostly (2), some (5), and a sprinkling of (3).