Esquire was more racey pre Playboy. In response to Playboy, Esquire tuned down it prurient appeal and survived. Nothing new here just the usual course of the revolutionary becoming established and being displaced by the new revolution. Playboy may or may not survive but it is wise to try to adapt.

In the global economy China competes by having "lax environmental and labor laws" to attract "these industries." The fault, if we are to assign fault and blame, lies with a political system in China that is not yet robust enough to protect the environment. The same conditions would exist and did exist in the United States until the political economy forced change. Look into the Copper Hills of Tennessee then and now. For a few years in the late '60s and early '70s I lived on Missionary Ridge in Chattanooga, TN. The air quality at the time was significantly worse than in LA. Both cities burdened by geography that traps air pollutants. Because its problem arose from fixed source pollution, as opposed to vehicular traffic, Chattanooga's problem is now virtually eliminated. The Copper Hills problem has been solved or the solutions are far enough advanced that alarm is not an appropriate response. Domestic not foreign political pressure cause the change and will see it through. I do not confuse domestic political pressure with government power. Government power is easily captured by economic interests if the political economy is not robust enough to respond to health and related concerns of the effected populations. If Government power was the solution, China would not have any environmental problems. The economy of the United States is no longer dominate enough to allow the United States to dictate environment policy to foreign markets, especially China. Only the people of China and their leaders can bring about the necessary reforms. As China's economy grows and allows more leisure to the masses pressure on leadership to address health and related concerns of the effected populations will grow a pace.

The value of the patents is the question. The definition of Fair Market Value is the price determined between a willing buyer and a willing seller. The proposition that all Google was ever really wanted from Moto was its IP seems self evident. Google was willing to buy the Home and Phone hardware operations to get the IP. Google was under no constraint or duress. Like other major players in the phone space it had a need to own enough IP not to be a target for constant demands. The financial press suggested for the outset that Google intended to sell both hardware operations. It delayed the sale of phone production to gain additional intangible value, IP. The price it paid for the IP after netting out the dollars received for the unwanted assets is the very definition of FMV.