Well, I don't know what happened on 9/11, BUT the official explanation is so full of holes, that it's quite clear that it's NOT the truth whatsoever. In fact, the official story reads like a conspiracy theory.
Read this and weep, section 5.4 http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf "To date, the U.S. government has not been able to determine the origin of the money used for the 9/11 attacks. Ultimately the question is of little practical significance."
And you're surprised that there are people wondering what exactly someone is trying to hide here?
It's not about "producing" a copy of something under copyright. This is legal.
It's about PUBLISHING which is restricted.
Really, even here on techdirt, where I would expect people to be a bit more educated about these things, the propaganda-induced idea that "copying" or "downloading" could be illegal is extremely widespread.
Conflating upload and download is of course the intention of the copyright MAFIAA which spreads this propaganda, and was of course helped by torrents and other peer2peer technology which uploads at the same time as it downloads.
But the truth is, copyright is about publishing, about uploads.
So you "Leia copy" is perfectly legal. You just can't publish her ;).
"At present, you can get well and truly bombed for much less than it would cost to eat at McDonald's. "
This costs SFR 11.70 here, 3dl beer in a restaurant or pub costs SFR 4.50, so no; but in a store, you can get 5dl beer for SFR 0.8 to SFR 2, so yes again.
But then, getting drunk is very much a question of speed. I can drink 6 liters of beer (SFR 9.60 to SFR 24) spread out over a day without getting drunk. But 3 liters spread over 3-4 hours will get me drunk.
"There's a case for a reasonable federal whiskey tax, say about fifty dollars a bottle ($250/gallon, $2/shot)."
"reasonable" only if you're a bloody puritan puke.
However, the idea that what "liberal" and "conservative" mean in Europe is different from what they mean in the United States is absolutely fact.
Yes. Here "liberal" usually refers to "corporatist", and "conservative" refers to "corporatist".
Whereas the usual (but of course also totally wrong) meaning of the US "liberal" would be called "socialist" here; whereas the usual US meaning of "conservative" would probably be called "reactionary". At least if you ask the others.
And "libertarian" refers to "anarchist", "green" to "green", and "pirate" to "liberal" (in the original sense).
Those 'indigenous communities are distressed about the commercial exploitation of their folklore and other forms of cultural expression by "outside" entities.' will be even more distressed if this comes through.
Because then, nobody else but them will be allowed to play around with their cultural heritage, leading to decline and finally extinction of their culture. In the end, all the cultural heritage of some group (let's say "Hopi") will be in the hand of some kind of "steward", most probably some kind of company, and nobody else will ever hear of it again, except when somebody uses some element by pure chance, in which case he will be sued.
.. hurts the MPAA/RIAA profits, as does all the legal content indexed by the search engines,
Yes, turns out there are people out there writing their own books, making their own music or even movies. And even giving them away under free licenses. And people might even learn such competing content exists by perusing search engines like google.
Clearly, there must be done something against this, otherwise people will NOT buy the things the MPAA or RIAA deigns to offer.