After RTFA the one question I have is what's the difference between a civilian using a camera without the officers consent and it being a federal crime for wiretapping and the cameras used in police cars that show up on Cops and all the other out-of-control-crazy-driver videos? Does the same apply to network television such as to catch a predator? I just don't understand why it's okay for the police to do it, but when a civilian does it its a crime.

Interesting but my experience was quite different. Crossing over into Canada was actually harder then coming back into the states. Me and a few of my college buddies were heading to Toronto for spring break. Crossing into Canada we were heavily questioned for about 20 minutes (most of the time was spent while the border patrol agent checked out if our information was legit. She checked out college (because she never heard of it), checked to see if our hotel existed, and then rummaged through our trunk. Getting back into the US however just required our passports.

I thought the whole idea was that we were innocent until proven guilty?

It's kind of a convoluted, complicated, and misreported case. The EU commision is saying "Look, you can't hide these details about your desktop os just so nobody can make a (whatever server) as good as yours, you can make the whatever server, but your competitors need to have equal footing. SO tell them how (whatever) works."

Here's what I don't understand. I agree that Microsoft's business practices are wrong, but if they as a company design something that is of a higher quality of another company, why should they be forced to give over the details of their design? I bet the top restraunts of the world don't give away their recipees to competing restraunts that serve the same kind of food.