but we are not talking about the death of media, we are talking about the death of newspapers, a peculiar and old fashioned way of delivering the news that assumes one organisation with massive overheads needs to be the authoritative source for all of your news and culture and opinion and restaurant reviews for the next day. I do believe that reporters add value, but the majority of what is in a "newspaper" at this time is just rehashed AP/Reuters stories, perhaps with some banal comment added - there is very little value in that. There is no more value in that than there is in cat videos's on youtube.

If the reason you are licensing your software under the GPL is to produce "free" software - which is the predominant reason people use the GPL then yes, it is currently impossible to produce software that will run on an un-jailbroken iphone without violating either the spirit (GPL v2) or the letter (GPL v3) of the GPL. Sorry!

Your software was released under the GPL v2. According to the FSF compliance officer (http://www.linux.com/archive/feature/131752) - While the new provisions fo the gpl v3 would be violated by the app store code signing the GPL v2 does not contain such a provision and therefore you are not in violation of the license. As pointed out the fact that you are "selling" the software clearly does not place you in violation of the GPL. However, as the FSF point out - it is not currently possible for you to produce "free" software - according to the FSF definition of the term, for the iphone as it does not meet the 4 requirements of free software - an end user cannot modify your software and run it on their own iphone without also signing up for an apple developer account. because of this you are very much in violation of the spirit if not the letter of the GPL - you must decide whether you want to continue in this regard. If you wish to continue the project in the spirit of the GPL i would suggest you port it to jailbroken iphones and remove it from the app store

I agree a rolling cart for every department (along with interactive whiteboards) was the solution used at a top private school i used to attend. It was by far the best solution because it meant IT resources were always controlled by the school and rapidly available when needed and tucked away. the cart was also a charging station when not in use which ensured all the laptops were always ready for use. It was pretty cost effective and worked really well. As an aside they used mac's which worked surprisingly well as most of the "geek" kids were not familiar enough with them to bypass the security and install trojans or games)

'We simply cannot accept terms that fail to appropriately and fairly compensate recording artists, songwriters, labels and publishers for the value they provide,' there is the problem. You see only one of those groups deserves compensation for their work from youtube, the rest should at best, be paid for their "work" by the artists at an agreed fee. A business model built around leeching money you don't deserve dose not travel well.