I think you may be onto something deeper than you may expect. I am becoming to believe that this behavior is really a side effect of our runaway copyright/trademark/patent system, but also the nature of statutes.

No reasonable person would accept 'book' as a copyright/mark. The word as it stands alone is indicative of anything specific. But since the bounds on in this ears seem to be keep getting stretched and morphed, as well as less than stellar protections for individual/fair use, this is what to expect.

However, the pitfall of statute is that if you leave the language too broad you catch things you didn't intend, if you iterate every possibility you can think of there are always loopholes. There is a reason why many statutes are 'vague', and why we have a judicial system, but its a mess either way.

That being said, I really would like to see tome tightening up of both law and legal action on unethical/illegal clauses in user agreements. Perhaps with some penalties. If a clause is generally known prohibit legal action, and that action is a right that cannot be waived, then putting it in an agreement should carry a penalty for attempt to defraud.

I'm glad you asked, and I didnt go and put this in the first post as to not get off course.

It's not going to end. I predicted 'this' pretty much a decade ago. Any company who chose to get in bed with the media companies and start to proactively 'censor' would soon run into the gaping maw of corporate greed and be faced with 'you aren't doing enough'. Sadly, it's worse and will be worse. The media monsters want carte-blanche to expunge anything they deem damaging to their failing business model (rightly or wrongly). And even if you were to sue google and the media companies, they would just demand the laws get rewritten to allow them to get away with it based on some meaningless threshold that wont even amount to a slap on the wrist. They have already crafted an atmosphere in which 'look ppl we don't care about and end up firing anyway are gonna lose jobs because of blahblahblah.

Its part and parcel of the mindset that bundles boatloads of crap into your cable TV package you don't want, for the 6 things you do, all the time claiming they not only can't do anything about it, and that all the crap you dont want is in fact good for you.

Which would be conspiracy to defraud. Other than your sarcasm, this isn't actually to far from that. Google makes money on false claims, the media company makes money on false claims. They claim it was reviewed. The claim of it being reviewed, and if it not in fact copyrighted, that attaches intent. The counter claim would have to be 'error'. However to go to court and claim error of the reviewers, in the case of birdsong, would be tantamount to claiming abject incompetence, bringing in to question every other alleged review.

Actually I want to clarify. I recall better now that at least the first version of Safari did not have this feature. Later versions did, but it did not work.

IIRC the first 3 major versions of Safari on OS X totally ignored the setting for 'don't allow 3rd party cookies'. I had to file a bug that apple.com was setting these cookies w/ safari.

These assertions are really empty for me personally, since apple's site has partners that set these cookies, and apple's devs couldn't bother to implement this feature right.

And yes, my bitterness permeates everything:)

Totally ignoring the garbage cans full of presumed explosives at checkpoints?

When I flew thru narita, they put bottles on what I can only assume was an ultrasonic densitometer. This isnt rocket surgery ppl.

Perhaps you can acquire one of those EMP weapons Newt Ginrich is so worried about?

"No customer data is captured and stored on the ATM itself."

The keypad is just there for show.
The actual PIN is recorded by mindreading lasers stationed physically inside the VM.

I am strongly for the advance of secularism, however part of that core is that people are allowed to choose. Thus, this kind of 'secularism' is incompatible with that.

well...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Lisa#The_end_of_the_Lisa
In 1987, Sun Remarketing purchased about 5,000 Macintosh XLs and upgraded them. Some leftover Lisa computers and spare parts are still available today.

In 1989, Apple disposed of approximately 2,700 unsold Lisas in a guarded landfill in Logan, Utah, in order to receive a tax write-off on the unsold inventory.

"Her scene in "Big Momma's House 2" and "Tropic Thunder" was deleted."

Sound like its way to late for her to worry about her career being over.

Credibility will never be the same.

Its just a theory. I advocate intelligent shoving ;)

Isnt this the part where the conservatives should be screaming about changing American traditions, selling us out to the European bureautacracy? And so on? Why shouldn't our antiquated system of patents be defended as viciously as our antiquated system of marriage?