Your're not thinking outside the box enough. The most resilient place to host this material would be on a constellation of (relatively) cheap, redundant micro satellites. While the technology surely exists to destroy these, it is still in its infancy and would be prohibitively expensive to deploy repeatedly (not to mention the fact that the smaller the target, the harder it is to track and hit). There are continuing improvements in low cost ways of getting things into orbit so I can see space become part of the theater of the war for information freedom.

The battle for freedom of the centralised, unencrypted internet is being lost (after the writing being on the wall for decades), everyone who really cares is moving to more hardened, resilient methods of communication. I've seen more increase in activity on freenet, etc in the last 2 or 3 years, than ever.

Hear me out, there might be something that can be done about this..

It's not often these days I have any faith in protest actions by the general public having any meaningful impact, but to me this incident is just crying out for some action to at least cause the waste of oxygen who brought the lawsuit some hassle, and hopefully make anyone else considering similar actions think twice. What needs to happen is for as many people as possible to take the same photograph on their cameras and upload to image sites, forums, wherever, with a link or explanation included. Ideally, someone would host a website containing the explanation people can link to (no need to actually host any images there and make oneself a DMCA magnet). The uniqueness original work will become so diluted as to be worthless, awareness of this bullshit ruling would be spread, and there's no way you take down all the 'infringing' images.

Except it doesn't. I'd like to see someone try firing a rifle made of the glorified Play Doh most of these 3D printers are capable of working with. At the moment and probably for the foreseeable future, the affordable models can only print toys and other stuff that doesn't have to take very much physical abuse.

Why doesn't it show the unemployment rate and graduate income of maths/economics/medicine majors? Can someone point me to the mythical land where engineering majors have the highest likely income, as this article seems to be suggesting.