This happened because he opted out of the stupid whole body imaging machine. THEN he tested positive for something that may or may not have been explosives. It snowballed from there (and yes by the sound of it, there was a bit of racism going on, AFTER he was pulled aside)
This was NOT random, or profiling.

Pretty much everything.

Fair Use doesn't specify what percentage is ok. In some cases 100% of the original can still be fair use.

FTA:

Looks like it was pretty clear how it was used.

Well if they had a negative experience, they have EVERY right. You know "word of mouth" works both ways. Customers can vote with their wallet, but they can also vote with their mouth.

Sure. You do that by addressing the complaints, and solving the problems and providing better service. Not by silencing your critics.

The light didn't seem to bother it... so why leave it on?
It is just a "little" cockroach, not sure what the big problem is.

Isn't this the WHOLE point of negative reviews? I don't know Canadian law, but in America what this guy said should be protected. Basically you are saying no one can say anything bad about a business.

No. People like blaming Obama for not doing anything about the apparatus that was setup under Bush's watch, and for not doing what he said he would do. We blamed Bush when he was in office, now he isn't. So we blame the person who is in charge, who isn't doing anything to fix the situation.

So are you saying that over the past 20 years feral rats have become lazy?

So who owns the copyright on a multi artists piece of work? There is nothing wrong with transferring copyright (how do you give up your right, if you can't transfer it at all?) and work for hire should still exist.

All of those licenses are worthless without some form of enforcement. DMCA is a bit draconian, but it is enforcement, and can be used with the licenses you mentioned. DRM is just a technology and can also be used with those licenses that you mentioned

It isn't entirely unfair. You as a person (and society as a whole) benefit from sending the masses to college. Although I do agree more people go to college than need to. But if you make it harder for people to become doctors, you end up with fewer doctors. If you make it harder for bridge builders to become bridge builders you end up with fewer bridges.

Isn't this an issue even without Amazon getting involved, since Oregon doesn't have a sales tax.

Why would they have to "raise" the prices? I hope Amazon won't raise their price to cover the sales tax in another state as I already pay tax on my Amazon purchases. Just tack the tax on like every other business does.