As desirable as it would be in the case if ISIS, wouldn't implementing such kill switches on weapons be as ineffective as DRM for copyrighted material, with undesirable side-effects for "legitimate uses" and plenty of workarounds for "illegitimate" users?

The missing link is http://www.audioholics.com/audio-technologies/5-reasons-dolby-atmos-is-doa

For those who are looking for information rather than hype, there is the source:

http://www1.icsi.berkeley.edu/~nweaver/UlbrichtCriminalComplaint.pdf

At the bottom of page 23, you can read the following:

"32. Although I believe the foregoing exchange demonstrates DPR's intention to solicit a murder-for-hire, I have spoken with Canadian law enforcement authorities, who have no of there being any Canadian resident with the name DPR passed to redandwhite as the target of the solicited murder-for-hire. Nor do they have any record of a homicide occurring in White Rock, British Columbia on or about March 31, 2013."

Yes you can (for instance swissvpn.net - untested by myself but heard from French cyber-refugees using it).

And as a Swiss citizen, I have to VPN through a Rackspace VPS that I rented mostly for Netflix! These (mostly) US copyright holders wouldn't want to accept my money otherwise, probably thinking I should pay them more, somehow, maybe, or not, in the future, if they suddenly want to... and that somewhat proves one of the points in TFA.

So, I'm sorry about paying you that money that you did not want in the first place, US copyright holders.

Isn't it ironic, don't you think... ? :-)

I'm a Swiss citizen and I can confirm that while downloading is legal, uploading is technically illegal. On the other hand, mass-discovery methods to detect uploaders ARE illegal here as well, and there are no political intentions to criminalize copyright laws. Switzerland is a direct democracy, meaning that any new law that is passed may be challenged by the people by collecting at least 100K signatures (that's about 1.5% of the population) against it.

About two years ago, one of the three judges of our Supreme Court made it clear in an interview that he was personally against going after people for "personal copyright infringement", stating that when the majority of the people is found to be infringing some law, that law was likely to be biased against the general interest.