I have only hangup in considering cellphones equivalent to a cardboard box: is it possible to delete data from a cellphone in the same way one can remove a letter, photograph, or business card from a cardboard box.

If so, then I have no objection to considering the two equivalent. There should be the same level of legal protection on both.

If not, then they are not equivalent. If you can't delete data from your cellphone, then, for many people, it is equivalent to having the information chained to your leg: getting rid of it without crippling yourself is practically impossible.

I think you meant to say "Filesharing and attempting to stop spam are ... not comparable"

The defendants in this case are people who are attempting to stop the transfer of information to people who don't want it, rather than people who are attempting to transfer information to people who do want it and/or attempting to get information they do want.

I read a bit of the article, and the calls targeted likely supporters of candidate A, and basically said "You can relax, candidate A has enough votes" the defendant is being charged because he was attempting to deceive voters to influence the outcome of the election.

If only politicians could be charged with something like that for not fulfilling campaign promises.

I don't know if "Uncle" is the right relative anymore, perhaps some sort of older sibling might be more appropriate...

Well...
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLHardware

So, what, capitalism and totalitarianism are known for intelligent decision processes?

That sounds like a fair exchange.

What Manning allegedly did.

No.

Killing people is absolutely the wrong way to go about this, it is exactly the sort of over-reaction that has us all upset about organizations such as the MPAA and the RIAA; it will mostly serve to push people who would otherwise support us into supporting those organizations just to stop us; what we need is instead to better educate the people who make the decisions, both in the courts and in the legislature, as well as the voting public, about what is really going on with these laws, and about why it is wrong.

Actually, with interfaces, everyone doing it the same way is better than a few of them doing it differently, even if those few are actually doing it in a way that is otherwise easier to use, because the point of an interface is for people to understand how to use it.

Much as I love to support freedom, whether on the Internet or elsewhere, I have to disagree; people could really get hurt by this; if sensible precautions are taken they probably won't be, but then again, if Sony had taken sensible precautions they probably wouldn't have had this problem in the first place.

But ... we can see Mars at night sometimes, so we sorta know where it is...

"Why didn't you involve me in your porn production?"

There is a difference between information for use by others, e.g.:
* Music
* Movies
* Software
and information not for use by others, e.g.:
* Financial information
* Calendar
* Passwords

Actually, before I came across this, I had such a perception, Now I don't.