This seems like a good thing on the surface, but the EU is now a bloc where people in most of the countries are getting their brains implanted left and right for non-consensual human monitoring and control purposes. The victims usually think they are "human research subjects" but more often than not, it seems like a means of high-tech political control of human populations. So it's nice to see a ruling where cells cannot be patented (if that is indeed what this is about) but where is the outrage over using other technologies that effectively allow humans to be owned directly, without their cells being patented? Just an open question.

Not just in Russia ... it is happening in the USA, Canada, EU countries, Australia, etc. too. It's called synthetic telepathy and is an application of modern neurotechnology.

I hate to be a spoil-sport, but this same technology is already being implanted in people EN MASSE in all western countries without their knowledge or consent. It's neurotechnology in your brain and it lets a remote operator control your REAL limbs and nervous system functions from a computer terminal. They can also put thoughts, images and sound into your mind, and read your natural ones. It's not science fiction, it's really happening now and it is being done for political control of populations, not just to help those poor paraplegics.

This remote desktop thing is cool. But a far superior extension is the one that lets you beam YouTube videos into a sleeping person's subconscious dreamscape, provided that their brains have been fitted with the necessary neurotech implants. It's not available to the general public yet, though.

Hollywood is obsolete, now that the shadow government can beam movies into your brain wirelessly while you sleep. Who needs the box office when you've got Induced Dreams?

Losing records is bad, but it's not the worst thing in the world. At least they're not secretly abducting people and implanting their brains.

The current state of implantable neurotechnology is far more advanced than this story. The good stuff is not in the public sphere at all. Total remote control of the human mind and body via wireless link is where the real neurotechnology is at now. It's being deployed against unwitting subjects without their knowledge or consent. For more information check out this research material: http://www.google.com/search?q=%22covert+implantation+of+radiotelepathy%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

The interesting thing about this cutting-edge technology is that in many cases it is being tested on people who are not even aware that they are subjects of experimentation. And when they become aware, the subject will often complain and their statements can be matched to mental illness definitions so that psychiatric laws can be used to deprive them of their civil rights, helping to bring them even further under control. If you give a damn, check out http://www.google.com/search?q=%22targeted+individual%22+%22synthetic+telepathy%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

If you want to know where the technology is REALLY at, check this out: http://www.google.com/search?q=covert+implantation Warning: If you care about human rights and oppose experimentation on non-consenting subjects, this is disturbing material.

Synthetic telepathy implants are already in the brains of countless people. They are being implanted covertly in medical settings, so-called "alien abductions," etc. Technology is helping usher in a brave new world of high-tech slavery. These devices allow two-way communication of thoughts between humans and computers over wireless links. Basically a much-advanced version of current smartphone technology.

The problem is that it's being used for gross and mass human rights violations, without a person's knowledge or consent. For more information and to help spread awareness of this grave issue please download and help seed these torrents:

https://startingpage.com/do/metasearch.pl?q=%22jordan+maxwell+related%22

Here is what I suspect is a public example of how the technology is being abused:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzghbUlLeP4&feature=related

Doesn't "business" internet cost a lot more than a "residential" connection, all other factors being equal?

People are making all sorts of comments in response to this article about what's really efficienct and what works the best. Excuse me but has anyone stopped to consider the fundamental question of what business does the government have banning light bulbs in the first place?

... Simply set your application firewall to block all IP traffic originating from Firefox.

Aliens are already here and do not recognize SETI or any human government or group organization. They deal with and judge each human being on their individual merits and faults. For more information, see http://www.alliesofhumanity.org/

You cite the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as though it were holy scripture. It isn't; it's a worthless political creation of the UN, which is nothing more than an international criminal syndicate which has a history of actively working against human freedom. See http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-527956831065413624

Anyone who would claim copyright as a "fundamental right" as though it was something that was inherent in our nature as human beings or given by God himself is spewing their own wishful thinking. The idea has no basis in logic. Copyright is an arbitrary creation of government based on the questionable premise that it somehow contributes to the greater good of society. Just because it's something we're all familiar with and accustomed to doesn't mean it is good or right.

On the other hand, the freedom of speech and communication has long been (correctly) recognized by many societies as a fundamental right. Any laws, copyright or otherwise, which conflict with the exercise of this right should under any just system of government be forced to yield. That means the rights of individual human beings to use P2P networks trumps the alleged "right" of corporate media entities to make profits.

A proper application of this principle might result in the movie and record industries going out of business. But protecting the right of free communication is more important than the existence of these special interest groups. If they failed, music and movies would not disappear. We might not see the blockbuster wonders costing hundreds of millions of dollars, but movies would still be made. People that wanted to see expensive movies might have to pay for them in advance through clubs of some sort. Art would continue to exist. And society would be free of the weighty burden of entrenched corporate entities that use mafia tactics to perpetually harass and extort the population.