yes, trademark is radically different than a patent (even though that is still dumb). This whole story smacks of inaccuracy.. not just patent instead of trademark, but also assuming that "geophysical" == "geographical". Language is picky - you really have to learn to use the *right* words.
I agree with you (nearly) totally. Like I said, the actual implementation has sucked. Bigtime. The reason I don't totally agree is on display in this thread. Yes, some people (wayyyyy too many for my taste) REALLY DO think its OK to fly with guns and knives. And some people REALLY DO think that all structures must be made safe for collision with a transatlantic plane full o' fuel. Go figger.
sorry, this would not have stopped the shoe moron if he had been able to use a lighter. C'mon, we need basic protection. Having rules that are enforced like "no bombs on planes (REALLY)" is not usurping your civil rights. On another note, though
... I was flying out of England just after they had a rash of attacks on their airports in 2006. While Heathrow did not allow any lighters (again, I have no problem with this), they had an interesting rule at one of the other London airports I was flying through - I think it was Luton. "No more than one lighter"... WTF?
Google has always had plenty of balls. It stood up to gov when it asked for IP addresses in (supposed) child pornography case. The issue then was that it was overly broad, and *our* gov would not guarantee it would not use the info for other purposes. Google said "hell no" and went to court, and got the data anonymized and MUCH smaller amount. In the meantime, Y!, AOL, and Mr. Softee - no balls between 'em - had already complied. I think Google sincerely thought they could change China gradually from the inside, so that is why they allowed censorship (althought they did indicate that the data was censored). When they realized that was not going to work - that China was just getting bolder - they used the attack as a fake reason to back out. Balls all around at Google.