Many folks would be wrong then.

Why? Because for biologists, there is no relevant difference between microevolution and macroevolution. Both happen in the same way and for the same reasons, so there is no real reason to differentiate them. When biologists do use different terms, it is simply for descriptive reasons. When creationists use the terms, however, it is for ontological reasons — this means that they are trying to describe two fundamentally different processes. The essence of what constitutes microevolution is, for creationists, different from the essence of what constitutes macroevolution. Creationists act as if there is some magic line between microevolution and macroevolution, but no such line exists as far as science is concerned. Macroevolution is merely the result of a lot of microevolution over a long period of time.

Evolution Explained - Micro vs Macro

How about Gone With the Wind, E.T., Doctor Zhivago http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films#Highest-grossing_films_adjusted_for_inflation

Why is information like this on computers that are connected to the internet?

I'm curious as to why in the article they didn't mention exactly what model of e-reader is used.

It does, and I quote " ... delivered via Chegg’s DRM-protected e-Reader ...", which is, according to this page, just an HTML 5 web page.

What's the ROI for non-labor engineering expenses vs. non-labor marketing and sales expenses? I think you'll find your answer to the budget question here.

What invisible cap? They tell you exactly what it is here

Debatable. IMHO running a piece of software shouldn't be governed by copyright law, but certainly some parts of the software industry believe that you need a licence to waive the copyright laws, since you are inherently copying the software into RAM. I don't think this has ever been tested in court (?)
WoWGlider lost a case where Blizzard claimed that them copying the game into memory violated their copyright. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glider_(bot)

Then you sir, are an idiot and I wouldn't want to work *for* you. Try opening a dictionary someday and looking it up. It's a word, people need to get over it and move on with their lives.

Merriam Webster http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless
Cambridge http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/irregardless?q=irregardless

Please, tell me what is a 'reputable dictionary'? Do these qualify?

Merriam webster: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless
Cambridge: http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/irregardless?q=irregardless

It is still a word.

It's a word, get over it http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Irregardless

You'll be fined no mater what the jury system determines. Defending yourself from any charges that are filed will take a non-trivial amount of money. You could lose your job (who wants a possible criminal working for them?), your possessions, etc. and still be found not guilty or have the charges dropped.

Move to a new host. Don't talk about the old host, don't post the script, don't describe it at all. You don't want the lawsuit/criminal charges that will follow.

1) Form shell company
2) Have shell company send take down notices about my competitors website
3) Watch them vanish from the search results
4) Profit!

Asimov also did some books (under the name Paul French) that were intended for juveniles - the Lucky Star series.