If all my traffic goes via VPN to Sweden (or almost any other country around the world), what are they going to do?

Outlaw VPN usage?

On full manufactured typical items that are readily available and have competition. But what about when you want to replace/fix something that is simple, but costs a lot due to the manufacturer being the only one that supplies them?
An example? How about a bit of plastic on a BMW bumper that saves replacing the entire bumper? (which you can only get from BMW or, if you are very lucky, a scrap yard)

From his reply on http://frameworkdev.wordpress.com/2011/07/30/my-open-source-dilema/

" I have no such agreement. It was done on my own time with the company’s full support. They knew it was open source. I think now that I’m not at the company, they want to “control” it. As far as I understand it, they need to abide by the license. I think the tricky part is compelling them to abide by the license."

and

"I was not paid on W2, and I never signed the rights away. I think your right, that the code is GPL. It’s out there. It is what it is. I’m going to report this to GNU project and warn them that if they don’t bring to code back in-line with the license, that I will send a letter to their customers to make them aware of the situation."

Bandwidth costs money, an ISP has to have caps which realistically keeps overall usage to a level which the ISP can sustain with a given number of customers. If they don't and are offering "unlimited data" then they are over-subscribing their lines, lying or both. They can also over-subscribe their lines by simply selling their service to more customers than they can manage.

Obviously it can then be "managed" by traffic management, blocking protocols such as p2p etc but no-one likes these measures (especially here). I don't like them and I pay for an ISP that manages their data capacity honestly with caps and you buy bandwidth. It costs more, but it's worth it for me and they keep stats that show the number of unerrored seconds and buy capacity to keep up rather than traffic manage.

There is no such thing as "unlimited data" - period.

This.It wouldn't make a difference, as it would just mean everyone would continue doing nothing, and legitimate users would just pay more.

My ISP gives me a /27 for free on my home network and I enjoy not having to use NAT and I am using the addresses (well more than 16 of them). Now why should I have to pay an extra $30 for my net connection because the rest of the Internet providers haven't performed due diligence with this issue (and since my ISP has also been IPv6 ready since 2002 they are obviously doing their job properly)

That is kind of how it works in the UK (See how British Telecom has been split up).

BT Openreach was created to "Ensure that all rival operators have equality of access to BT's own local network" and it works pretty well, I have a BT line and BT Wholesale broadband, but provided by a different company with their own service levels, prices etc. And there are a lot of ISP's like this.

If an ISP doesn't want to use BT's infrastructure in the exchange, they can even install their own whilst still taking advantage of that piece of cable going from the exchange to the home, laid down by public money.

How is it not obvious to the US politicians that this is a sensible move? More to the point, how the hell did something sensible happen in a UK Parliament?

Oh what a shame, my ISP gave me a /27 last week included as part of the service - and I thought it was worth $337.50 according to this article. I wonder what my /48 is worth at these prices! If we move to IPv6 everyone can be billionaires! </sarcasm>

Seriously though, I was very surprised they handed out a /27 so easily though after my /28 ran out. Then perhaps because they have been IPv6 ready for 8 years and well aware of IPv4 exhaustion that they have been planning well and are perhaps a little more confident than most.

In my experience you can generally trace an IP address back to a given location (using RIPE and then contacting the ISP and I presume using legal means to find out who was using that IP address at that particular time).
But of course after that you have no idea what happens, is it an open Wifi point? Is it a closed one but has been cracked? Has the wifi key been given out to a neighbour? All of these options cast doubt on the exact person who committed whatever criminal or civil act that is under investigation.

Two Speed Internet
I would have thought it would be difficult in the UK as there is more competition. If Fred Bloggs finds his ISP slows down BBC iPlayer then he can change ISP pretty easily. What's the problem?

Now noting your low UID, I guess I missed a joke. I'd be surprised if you didn't know of it's existence.
I'll let myself out quietly... :)

That is your parents point (unless I've missed a joke that your smiley represented). iD released the Quake 3 source code, it's been improved and modified and supports amd64. Just use your original pak files with it (they aren't included as they weren't released and are still subject to iD's copyright)

ioquake3

If you don't have the pak files, there is always OpenArena

Unsurprisingly, this particular company Andrews and Arnold, do offer it (and have done for years)
http://aaisp.net.uk/kb-telecoms-sip.html (Under 'incoming features' - "ACR: You can set your number to reject calls where the calling number is withheld. The caller gets a suitable message and are not charged for the call.")
So all you need is a standard VoIP phone and their £1 a month VoIP service and you're off.
Their service is currently undergoing open beta trials with mobiles too - http://aaisp.net.uk/telecoms-mobile.html

IANAL, but the UK does not have "fair use", it has "fair dealing", which is a fair bit stricter as I understand it.
An interesting by-product of this is that it looks that accessing the Wikipedia in the UK can break UK's copyright laws simply as there are a lot of images which aren't Creative Commons, but are "fair use" under the US interpretation.
So I'm guessing it could be possible that the lords of copyright could accuse you of copyright infringement by reading Wikipedia. And cut you off after logging you accessing particular images a few times.

(An aside which irks me, these headlines in the press and the attacks expressly against "Downloading copyrighted material". Pretty much _all_ things "copyrighted" (except Public Domain and lapsed copyright). This post is copyrighted, that photo you publish to to Flickr is copyrighted, that audio file of your 3 year old singing "twinkle twinkle little star" and the Ubuntu CD ISO is copyrighted. Accessing the Nike website is also "downloading copyrighted material". Just please make it clear to friends/MP's etc that "Downloading copyrighted material is not illegal" in itself.)

Sorry, it shouldn't have to be said, but it winds me up
When software is pirated, it is not permanently depriving the original owner of the item.

In the UK - "A person shall be guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it." - Theft Act 1968
I'm not educated in such matters but it seems that the US and other countries take a similar view

(Right, I can breathe again)