The fact that currently, encryption would have to happen at Google smells to me like a gigantic flaw in the whole "web apps for everything" mantra. I can not only encrypt when I run my own mail client with standard protocols, but I even get to choose whether I want to go S/MIME or PGP. Neither is an option in the webmail space unless I want to delegate crypto to the service provider.

(Depending on your conspiracy bent, you could also say this constitutes a non-flaw from Google's perspective.)

When you consider that they recently patented finding people likely to be evildoers based on their social connections, well... http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/11/09/1452243/google-patents-guilt-by-association

"There is not a legal solution that is going to work. People just don't get it. Throwing people in jail doesn't solve the problem."

Tell me about all the types crimes that have been eliminated from throwing people in jail. So I guess we should legalize rape and murder.

Deterrence is but one purpose of the criminal sanction.

Android fanboys all over the Net pilloried iPhone 5 for not having NFC.

that the iPhone 5 was criticized by Android fanboys for not having.

Criticize their decision in shorter time. Amazing! Sign that guy up for jury service!

Who better than the average person to decide if the average person is confused by dilution of trademark/patent when buying a phone?

And there is that whole BILL OF RIGHTS thing.

>>Patent law is too complex for the average person.
If not, then SHUT THE FUCK UP.

Groklaw is an obviously anti-patent site. Don't quote them as authority on mainstream patent law.

The whole point of this article is that the average juror isn't smart enough for these cases (forgetting the 7th Amendment).

Now we have a foreman with a patent, and he's too smart? Catch-22 much? I guess we need these ivory tower philosopher kings to administer your "software and hardware should be free, fuck Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution" ethos.

"The foreman told a court representative that the jurors had reached a decision without needing the instructions."

Fucking lie. Stop relying on Groklaw and listen to the actual foreman's interview:

http://www.bloomberg.com/video/apple-vs-samsung-foreman-we-focused-on-evidence-eRnU07ChTjeV8MuvEiBSxw.html

Anyone who owns physical property can't sit on a theft or burglary or robbery trial? Women can't sit on rape trials because they have vaginas?

Because they have vaginas. And anyone who owns physical property can't sit on a theft or burglary or robbery trial? Only ascetic monks can sit on those?

So the average juror is too dumb, but a patent holder is too smart?

Bullshit. Anyone can be fair if he puts his mind to it.

No, not one of them were iPhone owners. And the foreman's wife had a Samsung dumbphone.

Steve Jobs DOES NOT EQUAL Larry Page.

So, why not reassure those worried about the situation by publicly tracking Page's location via Maps Coordinate?

Uh, because there would be no point? What does the CEO's location have to do with stock performance?

And I'm no Google fan (I'm an Apple stockholder), but there are obviously some security issues involving the whereabouts of a famous billionaire CEO (e.g., kidnap and ransom?) that don't apply to the rank-and-file employee.