How do you know that. Ubisoft has given no information as to exactly why the keys were revoked. It could be that they were bought with stolen credit card numbers or it could be that the keys were just sold from non-official resellers but are still perfectly valid keys.
Even if the keys are sold by random people through various markets like G2A's marketplace that still doesn't mean the keys were stolen. As others have said they could be keys that weren't being used by people that bought new video cards that game with free games, or they could be keys bought in regions with cheaper prices. None of that is illegal though it is certainly frowned upon. The region issue can cause problems if a game is region locked but clearly if the people were playing for up to a year that couldn't be the case.
Until Ubisoft comes out with an official statement we can't know if the keys were 'stolen' or just bought from an un-official marketplace.
Isn't the page really the issue? If the information is wrong or out of date then should it be forced to be taken down/edited instead of removing it from Google. After all I imagine many of the pages being linked do contain mostly correct information so the pages are still relevant. It's just some bit of information that the individual is taking objection to and wanting to be made unavailable.
(Of course I realize that this gets into another issue which is that many of the pages may exist outside of the EU and hence outside their control.) Though the same could be said for search engines unless the EU is going to hit up all of them across the world and not just Google.
Do you live in California? That seems to be an area that regularly gets brown outs. It seems like they don't have the proper infrastructure in place to support the population when ever the need for electricity goes outside the norms.
So since Los Angeles stays comfortable most of the year the grid doesn't seem to handle the load well when temperatures head higher than 90F. I don't know if that's a problem with the grid itself or the amount of power available. Either way it looks like the normal choice has been made to design a system for normal usage which may fail under unusual conditions.
No, they will get a corner office.
When journalists start to attack the company because the guy at the top is happy that he's getting laid that begins to sound like journalists engaging in personal attacks. At that point I can see some people deciding to return the favor.
Now when they describe things the company is actually doing that are anti-consumer then I think they are doing their job. If drivers are actually attacking passengers then of course it should be reported and the company should take action to investigate and discipline the drivers if they are guilty.
The way I've heard it told is that companies don't care about having uncrackable DRM. What they want is DRM that won't be cracked during that initial sales rush that comes upon release of a new game. If the game's DRM is cracked a month or more after release that won't impact the sales in the way that having the DRM cracked in the first week would. That's why some companies have even removed DRM from games that have been out for some time. (Admittedly the games were out for years but still.)