He discovered the first Kuiper belt object.

You can think of him as an American Piazzi, if you'd like.

As far as I'm concerned, "mobile" is just an excuse to make money off market segmentation. Want to watch hulu on your PC? No problem.
Want to watch it on your tablet PC? Sorry, you'll need a hulu plus subscription.
Want to watch a video on your PC? Enjoy.
Want to watch it on a handheld PC? "This content is not licensed for your device."
A mobile device is simply a computer without cords. It's high time the market defragmented and realized this.

Incorporate yourself. Obtain corporate credit card. Problem solved.

Of course it does. Afterall, you don't bu Adobe's Creative Cloud--you subscribe. Same goes for Microsoft's Office 365.
So subscriptions and in-app purchases are right iin.

Some years back, the fuel efficiency tests were changed.

Hypothetically, if you screwed a camera lens onto an iphone, the lens cylinder would project beyond the rectangular prism that is the iphone. And if you dropped that iphone, and it landed on the lens, it would probably stress that lens mount quite a bit.

I think the patent is for lens mount that decouples itself in the event that the phone is dropped-- potentially reducing the damage to the phone and lens.

I'm just trying to steer the conversation towards monopoly, and away from larceny.

Thieves steal copper cabling all the time. The value to the thieves (as scrap) is a mere fraction of what it's worth to the telecom provider.

If some one grants you a monopoly and you don't have that monopoly any longer, than the monopoly was stolen by those who infringed upon it.

It's not about stealing. It's about infringing on an legally granted monopoly, It's akin to trespass.

Hold it-- lego bricks from the 1970s are still compatible with bricks made today. According to Lego, that's down to extreme quality control. You blame it on patents. Yet a patent only lasts 20 years. So how could a patent be the primary barrier to interoperability, given that the patents should have expired in the Reagan administration, if not before?

here's a source

I don't have a micrometer sensitive enough, and most of my childhood toys are in storage, so someone else will have to confirm.

from your link

Now, if you don't really care about the toy aspect of legos--tiny reconfigurable bricks--
  sure, you can just make a large hunk of plastic to take the place of dozens of bricks-- but that's a different kind of play.

"holds like glue"
  If you apply glue to lego, it'd be less useful.