The problem with games is that they're more difficult to develop on a (DFSG) free software model than applications that are not games. Creating assets other than code costs money, and you have to recoup expenses somehow. The problem with paid apps on Android is that Android got launched in a lot of countries that didn't have Google Checkout yet, meaning the only way to get an app in front of users in those countries was to offer it without charge. This set an expectation among users even in other countries that apps would be $0.00.

And there's a developer problem when the upgrade from Android 4.1 to Android 4.2 broke every game that can use the Wii Remote as a controller through Bluetooth. It's just one that's impossible to work around from user space.

AMERICA is the home country of both Google and Dice Holdings. And the big three carriers IN AMERICA refuse to give a discount on service for not taking a subsidized phone.

So what should one target when Android 2.x completely lacks an API that does close to what is needed?

Thee is a concept in copyright called nonliteral copying. If enough of the preceding conversation matches concept for concept that the passage ends up being a close paraphrase, any clause meaning "I honestly don't care" might infringe. Individual ideas are not subject to copyright so much as their selection and arrangement. Otherwise, one could get away with rewriting a best-selling novel in simplified language and calling it one's own original children's book.

In practice there's little difference. Everything created while your parents are alive will be in copyright until after you are dead.

I don't see how saying that "copyright shall include the exclusive right to exploit the work [...] by making it available to the public, [...] in translation" isn't the same as saying that making and distributing a "translation is a copyright owner's exclusive right."

Now try getting 51 percent of the public in each affected country to 1. agree that current law is not right, and 2. agree that this discrepancy between current law and what is right is more important than other domestic and foreign policy issues.

Explain to me how this is a case of parody, and I'll consider it.

An adaptation is a work based on another work. Because it's a work, it deserves its own copyright, but because it's based on another work, it requires permission from the author of the older work unless the original work was created before 1923 (the perpetual copyright cutoff). As for a permissively licensed modern-language translation of the Christian Bible, you could always try the World English Bible.

Please define "progress". Some people might define "progress" as the publication of more distinct works, including works that are created only because the author had an assurance of creative control.

I imagine that the majority of these fansubs are not intended as transformative comments on a particular work but instead as faithful reproductions of the original work's meaning.

Which countries might those be?

I don't see how it's "entirely fan-made". Under current law, a translation of an audiovisual work's original script into another language is a derivative work.

From System 7 (2Q 1991) through Mac OS 9.x, the application's icon at the top-right corner of the screen was a menu listing open applications. Or was that in some way too hard for users to discover? In any case, it was easier to discover than the hot corners in Windows 8 that hide an invisible Start button at the bottom left and the charms bar at top right.