Hydrogen peroxide powered rocket packs fly for around 30 seconds, because they have a specific impulse of around 125, meaning that one pound of propellant can make 125 pound-seconds of thrust, meaning that it takes about two pounds of propellant for every second you are in the air. Mass ratios are low for anything strapped to a human, so the exponential nature of the rocket equation can be safely ignored.

A pretty hot (both literally and figuratively) bipropellant rocket could manage about twice the specific impulse, and you could carry somewhat heavier tanks, but two minutes of flight on a rocket pack is probably about the upper limit with conventional propellants.

However, an actual jet pack that used atmospheric oxygen could have an Isp ten times higher, allowing theoretical flights of fifteen minutes or so. Here, it really is a matter of technical development, since jet engines have thrust to weight ratios too low to make it practical. There is movement on this technical front, but it will still take a while.

John Carmack

What strikes me about the current situation is that there are so many court cases that have have occurred or that are currently in process that deal with similar issues to this. However, what is odd about this is that sometimes the ruling goes in the favour of the content producers but other times goes in favour of those who facilitate what the content producers see as the 'theft' of their property.

This lack of clarity seems to be as dangerous to our rights as a one-sided view in favour of the content producers. I am particularly worried whether this lack of clarity is because the judges do not have enough experience and knowledge to determine what is right and what is wrong and are simply out of touch with the Internet age. Perhaps we need some more 'net-savvy' judges?