To be pedantic, NONE of them represent ME. The guys I voted for didn't win.
To be even more pedantic, that isn't how our system works. Your representative represents you in Congress, whether you voted for that person or not, or indeed whether you agree with him or her about anything at all. Your opinion of the adequacy of that representation is a different matter.
If you don't like what you get in, say, Sweden, don't subscribe.
The point is, everybody is worse off that way. The viewer doesn't get the product (though they may find another way to watch) and Netflix and the content providers don't get the money. It's a terrible solution, whereas "release everything everywhere at the same time" benefits everyone, and reduces piracy to boot.
You're the one who claimed "University technology transfer throughout the country -- from public schools alone -- is very lucrative and beneficial to the economics of our society." So, do you have evidence to back up the claim, or not?
I dream of a time when you'll get your phone clean and install whatever you want just like PCs.
I think the closest to that is the Google phones, like the Nexus 6. Pure stock Android, with nothing added. There are a bunch of apps preloaded of course, things like email, gmail, google maps, play store, clock, calculator, browser. But I would consider it just the basics of what a typical user would want to start with.
They had the two groups separated, with the people who actually knew what they were talking about going second so that the 'law enforcement' side could make up any claims they wanted with minimal ability for the tech side to point out how they were wrong.
Their oversight was in having the bullshit go first. If they had done it the other way around, the industry people wouldn't have had any opportunity to correct the lies (errors?).
The question is why do you think it's so obvious? You still have not provided any evidence that society or the economy is better off with these patent fees than without them. We're all aware of the theoretical justification for patents, which is all you've provided, but that doesn't mean it actually works that way in general, and certainly doesn't imply anything for any particular example.