Was it of utmost importance for the school to strip search her right away? What would it have taken to contact her parents first? 13 then and now still means a person is a minor, right? If they really suspected her of having these drugs - which apparently she didn't have - was there any need to rush? As long as she was supervised? The thing is, they didn't even try to contact her parents, emergency contacts, or even ask her first.

Also, just listening to one person's statement that someone has ibuprofen is enough to strip search somebody without any other proof? Do schools have martial law or something?

What if someone accused another person of having something just to humiliate the other person? Job done and they had the schools to do it for them.

This is not even considering the situation of teachers / administrative staff misusing this zero-tolerance combined strip search policy as an excuse to touch under-aged children for deviant sexual reasons. Just because the person is the same sex as the child doesn't mean anything.

I do understand the legal issues that the copyright holders have, but I think that in their quest to control what they own, they are also minimizing the value of those items.

What is the use of something if not too many people know that it's there and can't purchase it/don't have access to it? Since Google Print started, I have been able to find books that are actually relevant. This is especially important in an multidisciplinary academic environment where you may be researching a topic and not know the exact domain.

In fact, without this service I would never have bought the 4 books I did. Granted, these purchases couldn't automatically be traced to Google Print, but maybe if online sellers created a checkbox (Google Print recommended) they would be able to find out just how many sales were attributable to it and would give them a general idea of whether it does more good than harm or vice versa.