Surely, if Proview is established as the owner of the trademark within China, then the iPads being produced in China by Foxcon are counterfeit items. Could that be the basis for an injunction banning the export of these items?

That would be an excessively heavy hammer to bash an enormous settlement out of Apple.

Correction: cfit is no longer the leading cause. Terrain warning systems make then almost impossible, which is the point of this article.

You've obviously never been to australia. Hint - it's very big.

I agree fully with the between-the-lines message here: like Big Content, the bricks-and-mortar-store's business model is finished. They need a new one. I can see two: One is that the manufactures should start paying B&M stores to market their products. It already happens in supermarkets: Coke pays supermarkets huge amounts to get those end-of-isle promotion spots, and the same happens on the ordinary shelves: If you don't pay, you'll end up with 6 inches near the ceiling or by your feet. Those 12 feet of John West Tuna cans you see at eye level? John West paid for that. Quite a bit, too.

The second is travelling road-shows. Outside of major cities, we will have Samsung or Hewlett Packard sending out a fitted-out semi with displays, listening rooms, and well-clued-up salespersons, all set up to allow customers to touch and see their products. They'll have a headline act like a huge 3D screen showing a recent release film or something - flavour of the circus here - and all ready to take your order with fast shipping if something takes your fancy, or give you a mouse mat with their online store's address.

Will B&M adapt, or try to stop the world instead? Only one of those options will work, and it doesn't involve 'earth-moving equipment'.

Whenever they are posting HTML, which, like a sane programming language, ignores extra whitespace.
Click that 'Options' button, and change the "Post Mode" to "Plain old text". And Enjoy.

And as to why HTML is the default - well, this is a techie's site, and techies would get really annoyed by their html codes showing up if they forget to log in, or having to use (gag) BBCode, or (Double Gag) a javascript WYSI(almost, but not quite, entirely unlike)WYG editor.

The sun puts in 1.3kw per square meter. Or, if you prefer, 1.3 Gw per square km. It's hard to compete with that type of energy input.
Water is a greenhouse has, certainly. But the amount of water is dependant on the temperature. If there is too much water in the atmosphere, it rains. Yes, other gases like NOX, ozone and methane are also a concern, but their volumes are low, and they are short-lived. We are pumping huge volumes of CO2 into the atmosphere, and the plans ability to remove out is, well, fairly constant.
Lastly, recall this. It's not that we noticed the earth warming and thought greenhouse. We knew the physics said that, if we pumped lots of extra CO2 into the air, it would get hotter. That's what we then did, and, lo, it went and got hotter. Normally, that would be considered proof positive!

It is already happening in some neighbourhoods, where there is a lot of solar panels. The voltages in those areas are getting uncomfortably high, and the transformers and substations were never designed to take energy from the low voltage side and lift it back to the high tension lines.

The geographic requirements for pumped storage installations make it difficult. You need two large reservoirs with a good height between them. When you start thinking of places to put them, you start to see the problem. If there is a good place to build a dam at the top, then it's likely to be a flat plain at the bottom. Places with a nice valley at the bottom tend to have flat land at the top. Because it is hard to move large volumes of water long distances, the height needs to be good, to cut down on volume, and the distance between them has to be small, to keep piping to a minimum.
Add to this that it needs to be fairly close to both the demand and the supply, to keep transmission infrastructure costs and losses down, and you find that the opportunities to build pumped storage stations are, unfortunately, limited.

Then again, maybe I am looking at it with Australian eyes, living in what is a very flat country. And we have a very active green lobby, which is very good for some things, but makes it very difficult to, for instance, build a dam anywhere.

I think some if it is remnant thermal energy from the kinetic energy of the millions of asteroids and minor and major planets that collided to make the ball of molten rock that became (and still is!) earth. (Probably what another poster meant when he suttested "angular kinetic energy" above.

The cost of power _is_ the distribution costs. Marginal generation costs are a very tiny part of the picture (Marginal cost not including the construction and other standing costs of the power plants, which they would incur anyway) Any amount given back to grid-tie customers is out of the goodness of their hearts, as it probably costs more to adjust for that extra power input than it would cost them to generate it themselves.