That's why I think fines should be based on a percentage of revenue for the timeframe of the infraction, instead of a fixed (usually capped) amount. That would make it difficult for them to say with certainty that it would cost less to break the law than to actually deal with it (not to mention the investors' backlash if it affects dividends, etc).

I agree with this too. I understand their desire to make sure people don't post things that are "too long", but 140 is too damn short! I way to potentially solve the problem: give one @-user mention and 1 URL link free - that don't count towards the limit; that would make conversations a lot more useful without adding stupid bloat.

Of course, because they've got balls for trying to get this done as if it weren't "surveillance".

Google's right to order its search results as it sees fit.

You mean, to present them from least relevant to totally irrelevant?

It also replaces 30% with nothingness, since, as you said, you still need your sales and marketing departments.

I've yet to read any developers say that the MAS replaced their departments, thereby making the "Apple MAS Tax" of any real value.

I'm pretty sure nobody at LEGO or the producers of the movie signed off on any of that!