I think that arguing about transfer of whole accounts is the wrong approach. It would make more sense, at least to me, to argue for the transfer of games between accounts.
It could easily be set up so that Steam has an "in-house" used game market, but you don't HAVE to use it. You can sell your game outside of it, and transfer it for free on Steam. Only you loose the guarantee that you will actually get your game, if someone decides to screw you.
"If the Obama administration wants to look forward, not backwards, it needs to nominate a replacement who isn't in the legacy industry players' pockets, but who is dedicated to real transparency and who recognizes that innovation comes from new sources, not from overprotecting obsolete players."
Actually, all it would take is for the new head of USTR to remember who's the *beep* boss!
That's the part that always gets me when I read about how they were keeping Congress in the dark about TPP; in what other line of work could you treat your boss like that!?
Now I'm not a professional hunter, but I am of the impression that firearms such as handguns and assault rifles (to name the few I can think of) aren't very useful when hunting (animals).
But I'll give you that "guns" isn't properly defined. Personally I think of HANDguns when I hear "guns".
Second and thirdly doesn't apply, since the whole argument was that it doesn't matter (according to this case) if the item in question is used legally or not, just that it's primary use COULD be illegal.
I agree with the rest, except the part about guns. Guns primary function is to maim/kill people. According to the logic they are using, trying your best to make sure it's only used for legal purposes isn't a defense.