I don't think you were supposed to identify with or agree with Archie, any more than you were supposed to agree with Al Bundy's misogyny or Karen Walker's alcoholism. The portrayal of those flaws is so over the top you're meant to laugh at the flaw, not with it.

Of course they use non-IE browsers; they probably either spend considerable time exploiting IE, or at least are aware that IE is often exploited. I'm sure criminals who break into houses through open or poorly secured windows have wrought iron bars on all of their own.

Sure, but a) they are a business advertising a product and have a legal obligation to ensure their advertisements do not misrepresent their products' features and b) they are a party to a contract and have an obligation to uphold their end of that contract.

Nobody's forcing you to choose Apple/AT&T, but nobody's forcing Apple/AT&T to advertise and agree to terms they can't meet.

In the end, it was not guns or bombs that defeated the aliens, but that humblest of all God's creatures...

The Tyrannosaurus rex.

Glider does not bypass warden. Glider is stealthy and is not detected by Warden.

The word is not 'bypass,' it's 'circumvent.' Glider circumvents Warden by avoiding detection.

Glider is not a tool that "accesses elements of a copyrighted work". It is a tool which accesses elements of a copyrighted work that you, as the user/developer, have a legal license to access

As you state, Glider is a tool that accesses elements of a copyright work. Everything starting with "that you" does not matter, because the DMCA does not permit you to make a circumvention tool just because you have a license.

In other words, Glider does not bypass protection mechanisms granting you the ability to access copyrighted work without a license.

Again, you've added words that don't matter under the letter of the law. All that matters is that something accesses elements of a copyrighted work and circumvents access control mechanisms to do so. It doesn't matter if you bought it. For example, people who buy a DVD cannot legally create or distribute DeCSS (or modern equivalent).

Repeat after me: the DMCA is not about preventing copyright violation. It is about the copyright holder controlling the work once it's in your hands.

It doesn't matter what the overall purpose is; Warden could be intended to act as a profanity filter or prevent overweight bearded men from playing female night elves named Sextasia, as long as it does so by controlling access to elements of a copyrighted work, i.e. the game.

The problems are:

1) They sell software as well as the service. Their terms say you can only use their software with their service. The legal enforcement of this could have far reaching consequences.

2) Their enforcement of those terms is through the courts, where the arguments of their lawyers stretch laws like the DMCA or the validity of EULA's to cover more and more ground. Once there's precedent it affects everyone, not just WOW players or gold farmers.

He understands the difference, and his findings don't rely on Glider breaking the EULA. Basically he said that since Warden controls access to certain parts of the game by checking for software that accesses these parts in an unapproved manner, and Glider attempts to bypass these checks, the DMCA applies.

In other words, a tool that a) accesses elements of a copyrighted work b) evades protection mechanisms to do so violates the DMCA. Maybe the issue isn't with the judge, but with the law he's interpreting.

You mean: don't live in a country with a law like the DMCA.

Maybe the idea is to say it often enough, and show it often enough, that it stops giving people the gross outs.

No, there's really only two: one involving rude people and one involving masturbation. Of course, the second one makes the [head explodes] tag all the more understandable.

There's one additional joke to be made about the relevance of your username to this topic left as an exercise to the reader.

Did farmers and ranchers in 19th century Kansas have time to be informed citizens? Did steel factory workers and meat packers in the early 20th century have time to be informed citizens? Did the non-aristocratic members of the thirteen colonies have time to be informed citizens?

Consider the ease of acquiring information today compared to any other time in history. Do you have to travel into the nearest city to get your news from pamphlets or single page newspapers? Consider how long it takes you to buy food from the store. Are you spending a couple hours walking to a market every day, and spending the rest of the day in front of your wood stove? Consider the length of your working day. Are you out on the fields sun-up to sun-down, or spending 14 hours 7 days a week laying a railroad?

Face it: people today have the most time and the most resources to make themselves informed. They would rather spend it taking advantage of the most entertainment ever available, but hey, seeing fat people and midgets get knocked around on "Hole in the Wall" looks pretty fucking hilarious so what do I care.