Then its not "official" advertising related to the shop and so not subject to the Quebec language rules.

See if the response is the same.
Tell the patrons that its OK, you're not actually recording anything despite holding the camera in a manner to record.

Or you could just put the Google Glass in your pocket and socialise with your friends without the need for a constant internet connection.

If you're screaming "Fire the lasers" then you're an idiotic BMW driver. Those clueless morons who have no idea as to the rules of the road, good manners, or the English language. It is "Shoot the lasers". You can only 'fire' a firearm - as it is the method of introducing fire to the propellant to launch the projectile.

Although saying that - burning down their superbright blinding headlights would be a bonus for other road users, so perhaps "firing the lasers" would be beneficial, along with firing the rest of the BMW including the driver :-)

Police performance should be judged on the public perception and reporting of crime.
Its not how many tickets you issue - its how safe the neighborhood feels to the public that live there.
So if speeding in the neighborhood is an issue the public have then that is one of the areas the police should tackle, if the public aren't worried about the traffic then the police shouldn't be concentrating on speeding tickets and should look at those areas where the public are highlighting issues.

I know, its a crazy idea that the public should be guiding the policing policy :-)

As you're spirally down to the ground - you'll have free beer :-)

Often the manufacturers of the legitimate sportswear get a contract to make 10,000 shirts. So to cover the expected rejects, they make 12,000 shirts with the knowledge they'll have 10,000 good shirts to supply to the customer. Now what to do with the 2000 shirts they made extra and/or were rejected due to manufacturing issues (label upsidedown, etc) - they sell them on. They don't get the little hologram label saying its legit, but its made in the same factory by the same people, its just outside of the contracted numbers.

Why create a new law - the device self-destructed, risking injury to the law enforcement officer/operative attempting access. I'd see assault and possibly bomb-making charges coming in their direction.

Unless they define the terms of the meaning of "person" to exclude certain people.

Thats the point - you want it highlighted on those junctions where it's not permitted, so you don't get caught by the cop sitting in the gas station on the corner waiting for those that do turn.

VirtualBox has a commerical revenue stream.

Basically when Oracle took over they went around all the departments and asked them what their revenue stream was and so justify their existance within Oracle.

Patents are not intended to stimulate others to innovate - only to protect those who have already innovated.
If I innovate then I have the knowledge that if I patent it I can protect my creation from being stolen by others while I have the ability to exclusively benefit from it.

Unfortunately in these days patents do not protect those who innovate, only those who legislate.

We should distinguish between the end user and a commerical user.
While I don't think there is much to be made from the early Beatles albums (first 2 albums are now over 50 years old), I don't think anyone should be allowed to use one of those tracks in movies, adverts, etc without permission or payment.

So 50 years for sales, 70 years for commercial re-use.

As the drone is an aircraft engaged in commerce then this applies:
18 USC 32 - Destruction of aircraft or aircraft facilities
a) Whoever willfully—
(1) sets fire to, damages, destroys, disables, or wrecks any aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States or any civil aircraft used, operated, or employed in interstate, overseas, or foreign air commerce;
(8) attempts or conspires to do anything prohibited under paragraphs (1) through (7) of this subsection;

shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years or both.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/32

Now you could argue that the as the drone is local that it is not performing interstate commerce and so it would not be liable under this federal law, but if the drone is foreign registered then it is covered under a later clause.

IF GM had collapsed then the remains would have been picked over by the other main car manufacturers and you'd have ended up with the brands being owned by VW, Fiat, TATA, etc. Not good for the America.

Although Fiat already has strong links with Chrysler (they basically own it)

Its was off duty cops and a research institution doing specific work for a government department.
The contractors were going a specific job for the government, they're not government employees.