If memory serves me correctly (and it's false as often as it is true) then simple nudity in a non-sexual context is well protected by first amendment rights, having plenty of rulings, though none come to mind.
So, if allowing non-sexual nudity is fully protected by the first amendment, would that bring about a nudist "Renaissance"? could this be the beginnings of the all nudist channel? Will restaurants start having nude and non-nude sections? In the end, doubtful. But at least it's fun to think of the possibilities. It could be a burgeoning sector of the US economy, much like Marijuana is becoming.
The security concerns are why they are keeping the scans (though I can see little benefit from keeping the images). privacy is what they are brushing off when they are doing this, Admittedly a small difference in concept, but an important difference anyway.
Perhaps a good response for when someone argues about art for arts sake is that if the author slash creator is doing it for arts sake alone, then there is no need for them to make money off of it whatsoever.
First I'd like to congratulate you on the nice strawman you have there. It seem to work quite well for you.
Second, most of the arguments about someone taking a picture or viewing your house have to deal with the Streisand effect, not with how right or wrong it is. Drawing attention to the fact that you don't want people to know certain information that is already public will almost always draw more attention to the certain information as well.
third, There is a huge difference between standing in public - being in the line of sight of something and someone actively trying to dig up information on me. It has to do with expectation of privacy, not with the information itself. Example, I am standing naked in the middle of the street, no expectation of privacy. I am standing naked in my house, in the shower, much expected privacy.
I realize that you prefer beating on a strawman, but seeing as how that poor strawman of yours is getting a little worn, maybe you'd like a new one.
Until person A considers all the fetish porn on their hard drive, or the money that they are hiding from the IRS, or the recent affair that their wife had, or just the fact that their kid is failing several classes in school.
The understanding of the necessity privacy is not exclusive to race, sexual preference, or religious view point. It has everything to do with shame or pride. I seriously doubt that there is a person on earth who has nothing that they are ashamed of. It's mostly a matter of pointing this out to people and reminding them that "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." which is still a good quote, despite it's often overuse.
"They say it's a complete copy, but in reality it isn't. So therefore, it seems the whole argument fails.
No second languages, no extra content, no directors commentary. "
the language can sometimes be a draw to the pirated versions of the film or series. I'm a bit of a fan of fansub animes and I find that I enjoy the fansubs (usually) a lot better than the dubbed or industry subbed versions (there are exceptions).
Unfortunately, it's a bit of a debate about whether this is tranformative. I know I've noticed the difference in several animes.
a savvy company could theoretically set up a network primarily on wireless connections, thereby bypassing all of the current throttling going on in the copper medium. just set-up a series of towers that not only provide wireless Networking over a large area, but also act as routers and relay the traffic all the way to the border.