"I'm a dev and have gotten pre-release hardware and signed NDA's on them, and not a SINGLE ONE EVER said ANYTHING about not tearing the device apart."
Interesting. I am a dev as well and have obtained a lot of pre-release hardware. In every single case, the contract I signed contained a "no reverse engineering" clause. Teardowns are reverse engineering.
But the real issue isn't that. It's the NDA. If iFixit had done the teardown and not published until general release, Apple would not have had an issue (or, worst case, would never have known).
It's the disclosure that they have a problem with.
"That's what this game's DLC market is competing against."
I seriously doubt that. People who collect model trains want the actual, physical model trains. They may also enjoy a virtual representation of the same trains and they may not -- but the two things are not competing with each other at all.
" Thus, they believed, someone who invented something truly innovative should be temporarily guaranteed the exclusive right to make that invention."
That wasn't really the intent. The purpose of the patent system is less to encourage innovation (although that's a part) and more to offer an incentive for inventors to reveal what it is that they invented so that others can build on what they did.
I agree that a patent system can be a very good thing. I also agree that the patent system we have is broken and doesn't do much toward accomplishing its goal.
That doesn't offer any real value to other readers of the site, and we'd all wager that the scorched Earth nature of comments section just stifles real conversation.
Right, because nothing will increase the value of comments to other site readers like making commenting impossible.
No, Facebook, Twitter, etc. aren't even close to substitutions for a comment section for a bunch of reasons, starting with the fact that lots of people don't use those services and as a result are just locked out completely.