I have seen this my.mp3.com argument a lot since this story broke but this is an invalid argument as it is comparing apples to oranges. The problem with mp3.com was that it was a file sharing service. In my.mp3.com, not only could you put up your own files to listen to them, you were encouraged to share your files, letting other people enjoy the music you had up while listening to music that others had put up. The my.mp3.com case had nothing to do with the storage of music but of music sharing and therefore allowing somebody access to a product that someone else had paid for. The Amazon case has nothing to do with music sharing, but purely of storage. To exaggerate an example to prove a point... If this case should go through then I believe the next viable law suit should be against Western Digital, because their evil "external hard drives" allow people to store their files on a source outside of their computer which allows them access to it on an INFINATE number of computers....

I know its prob already been said and I am well aware I am a horrible person for saying this but does anyone else find it morbidly comical that the US Air Force is now flying over Japan to try and prevent a nuclear incident?

As an engineer I will have to agree with this. You can overcome all the technical challenges you want, but if people, the same people calling coal fired power plants evil and preaching about carbon footprints, take up this NIMBY, nothing will ever be accomplished. Take this NIMBY attitude to other forms of "green" ideas and it still holds true. Carbon emissions are supposedly "killing the earth" but will any of the people complaining about it ride a bike to work. and you got the prius for the gas mileage, get off your environmental high horse. NIMBY, and its more broad ideal of something should be done as long as it can't perceivably inconvenience me in any way.