I agree with the idea, but not on the conclusion. Example:

I /did/ buy a Mac Mini to do development on iOS, but because I enjoyed the OS so much (on it's own merits) that I purchased a MacBook Pro, too.

In short, developing for iOS led to exposure and perceived value in the OS, not just for the development platform.

I prefer the colloquialism: Freedom Grope

I think your comparison is without merit. Lindows was obviously trying to ride on the coat-tails of Microsoft by using its name as a way to 'confuse' people into using Linux versus Windows. Linspire's own lawyers didn't even want to defend the case, as the article points out.

This on the other hand, is parody, a key ingredient to a successful defense.

They are not making a mockery of the system, the system has been at the funny farm for quite some time. They are just playing by the same 'rules' that Facebook are. Going after legit businesses with 'book' in their name is just as farcical as this.

Which is why I did not invest in the technology until it could be ripped. I was able to rip my Avatar BluRay disc the day it came out. Too bad those who don't resort to breaking the law are the ones left out in the cold. You'd think the jailer would get a clue.

If you have agreed to abide by a code of conduct, on or off campus, why not? The worst they could do is kick you out.

Don't you know that megapixel does mean resolution? Granted, that's using the equivalent language as "I navigate my bike to work", but it is still technically valid.

That and "Is that a bomb or a colostomy bag?".

No to mention Y2K was a pun of sorts for shortening 2000 to three bytes from four. Now we're taking more space than the original; Y2K16 vs 2016. Those COBOL programmers would be rolling in their graves.

Or is it just a cost of doing business. When weighed against using IT, how much productivity is gained, dollars earned, and dollars saved? Is great to spout out the costs, how about the benefits, too, for a real analysis?