It's more than that, though, because your current setup in many cases should be legal.

How many dollars have been stolen from consumers by way of the politicians that have been bought to extend copyright on works that should have entered the public domain decades ago (copyright is supposed to be for the public benefit, which is why their government enacted it), and how does this compare to the money the industry claims is being stolen now? I think they may owe us a perpetually growing chunk of change, in fact.

And as a preemptive strike against the pedantic counterpoint, let's assume for these purposes that yes, selling somebody the Brooklyn Bridge is stealing from them.

I'm not certain I understand why a child needs to be taught not to play with something that looks like a gun. Sure, knives are in the kitchen, as is the stove. Where are these guns, within reach on every flat surface?

Exactly. I'd like to see those NFL motherfuckers pay some coin for "prohibiting" descriptions of games they broadcast.

Maybe in 1995.

I think Seinfeld, rather, had it right. "Limited to what, how many you can sell?"

Further, the number of sites with iPhone-specific versions is surprising. The potential audience is so large that those same developers making fancy flash websites also seem to be making fancy iPhone-tailored editions.

I'm sorry, but the photos look like an interracial gangbang to me.

If you have enough money you can pretty much do what you want. Money fuels politics.

The simplest answer is usually the correct one.

That's a good point. To bring in a car analogy, there are laws and standards regarding the vehicles permitted on the road. Would a Microsoft bigwig be championing this idea if it meant an NHTSA would be regulating their ass?

Sounds great actually. Coupled with the Justice Department discouraging monopoly abuse, we'd have the another regulator preventing MS from putting a house of knives on the road.

Good. Copyright law has been quite ridiculous for some time now.

I wholeheartedly agree and have practiced this rigorously, to some recently mixed results. I selected the secret question, "What was the name of your first dog?"

Fast forward to my forgotten password. You see, I've never owned a dog. I tried "none," "null," to no avail. Tech support time. "You see..."

Woman: You don't remember? Oh, I see what you did...
Me: No idea!
Woman: It's three letters... I can't say it.
Me: Uhmmm...OH! [feverish typing] Got it reset!

Secret answer: WTF

The best was I was at work as it was a corporate vendor's website.

It's "My voice is my passport, verify me." You sound like a damn fool when you say it wrong. Now make like a tree, and get outta here.

qbasic /run nibbles.bas

[reaches for the turbo button]

While I agree with your sentiments, what is an 8Gb camera? Is that like a 1.6GHz hard drive?

What about blind people who cannot speak? Personally, I don't think universities should be allowed to encourage devices except to the lowest common denominator: Helen Keller.

The solution becomes clear, then, and it's the Braille machine used by Whistler in the movie Sneakers. This, of course, is a completely different device as opposed to a variant of a viable e-book reader the rest of us use but with additional features. Therefore, this device is the only that should be allowed, and we bitches with all of our senses functioning should have some compassion and learn Braille already.