*Was* a community organizer. Your meme has expired. Barack Obama is PRESIDENT. He is the only man eligible to be President aside from Jimmy Carter that can claim that, period, end of story. He has experience being the most powerful executive in the world.

Sarah Palin on the other hand... hmm... governor of a state of low population, couldn't hack it and quit.

You are right. The FCC can't grant powers to itself. If it does overreach, it gets spanked in the courts. So it is unclear what you are frightened about... the checks and balances are in place, and by your own example, quite effective.

The current rule making, as all successful rule making, is based on EXISTING AUTHORITY ALREADY GRANTED BY CONGRESS. The FCC tried to use its existing authority to create net neutrality rules. The court didn't like how they justified their authority so they sent the FCC back to the drawing board with reasoning that forms a roadmap for the current iteration of the rules. That was version 1.0. This is version 2.0.

Consider the pace at which Congress is able to pass laws. It is glacially slow. In our system of government, enforcement and interpretation are left to the executive branch and the courts. It is the only thing that makes the whole system work... that other branches closer to the practical problems of implementing the law are left to "fill in the blanks." Congress INTENTIONALLY leaves those blanks because it cannot predict every eventuality.

"the document does not make many guarantees about freedoms for enterprises or corporations of any sort,"

Mostly true... but it does guarantee freedom of speech for exactly one type of organization: The Press. Guess that's the exception that proves the rule.

It all hinges on what intellectual property Arrington has. I mean, a web tablet... is that innovative? Really? Web only devices have been around for some time. Making an oversized PDA that only does web browsing does not equal innovation.
So if all the IP he has is trademarks that Fusion Garage is not using, well, game over. Take it as a life lesson and move on.

Obstruficates? Is that like encapsulates, or abstracts?

Where do individual authors get off thinking that their incremental improvements on the ideas of other inventors which they released out into the world as a working product get to keep other people from making incremental improvements on top of it and distributing their own products?

Where do authors get off thinking they are doing more than riffing off someone else's chord?

And where do they get off thinking the government needs to enforce a monopoly for them on these derivative ideas?

No it doesn't. Read it again... it says "Krause says Matthew Krippen advertised online and had a large clientele."

That's presumably a fact, but it doesn't say anything about advertising specifically to run pirated games.

I'm not a journalist, so I don't have an obligation to write an unbiased summary. I added my interpretation intentionally. If you want an alternative bias, just read TFA.

Doing something that should be legal, in a country that loves liberty, for profit, doesn't make it more or less wrong.

It is quite popular to make homebrew games for consoles. Just, say, google for "homebrew wii games"

Here's a

Linux distro for the Wii:

To run it, you would have to mod the console violating the DMCA.

QED.

Seriously? Are there legitimate applications for modifying an odometer other than cheating people?

There are legitimate reasons to jailbreak an iPhone, or a game console: running unsigned binaries on equipment you own.

The government shouldn't take your liberty to protect a business model.

Yes... so are you arguing that the government has a right to control how we do everything because we permit it to control some things? Where does liberty come into the equation then?

The general idea is that your right to swing your arms stops at your neighbor's chin.

The Supreme Court may have found a corporation to be a person, but I don't.

All these examples you gave are pretty weak. Disable your catalytic converter, and you have a fairly direct effect on air pollution which impacts you and your neighbors health. Roll back your odometer... there's really no reason to do that ever except to cheat someone. That's effectively interfering with an official measurement. Remove seat belts in a car... again, a safety issue.

Now, a game console. There is a legitimate purpose to doing that: running unsigned games on hardware you own (did you sign a contract saying otherwise when you bought your console?). That shouldn't be illegal, if you believe in liberty.

Well, it sounds like you have an opinion. But I'm not really sure since you didn't say anything substantive.

I understand you were correcting another poster, but if you agree that this is an issue of the government intruding on personal freedom, it shouldn't matter whether he was modifying the consoles for profit. The owners were exercising their own freedom in getting the console modified. They paid someone else to do it. That doesn't bear on the question of whether it is right to imprison someone for taking a soldering iron to some computer equipment.

So it falls on us to explain it to anyone who will listen.

Pick one person to explain it to today while you are fired up.