I also love how the tech-savvy community preserves the past so well. DOSBox, ZSNES, ScummVM, WINE, etc. grant us access to history and the great game creations of the past. So, even as platforms change, people build bridges to old platforms.
I recently completed The Curse of Monkey Island on my Galaxy S3.
Why stop there? I think your analogy is spot on with one minor change. You ALREADY, successfully, LEGALLY purchased stuff from Costco. Those door guards show up at your HOUSE, and THEN beat you to a pulp until you produce a receipt proving you purchased the stuff in your house.
I'll never understand this concept. If anyone deserves royalties/patents on the matter, it is whoever invented the original physical shopping cart. The concept is very simple: a container that queues items up for purchase all at once at a future time. It is very obvious to take that concept and apply it to online purchases. How were these patents granted in the first place? Because it was done "on the Internet"? The concept is still the same. From what I gather, the patents simply cover a particular style of implementation.
I like how politicians pretend to care about Internet freedoms. Government and big businesses are the reasons Internet freedoms were in danger in the first place. You want to help Internet freedom? Cease your own involvement. Back off. Let it govern itself.
You know what else cheapens IP? Making it inaccessible. IP has far less value to me if I am unable to even obtain it. I have $60 games I stopped playing ages ago, and I have $10 games I still play all the time. Heck, I'm a huge League of Legends fan. Is its IP worth nothing because the game is free?
I'm surprised even at the people who would pay $1 per month. Facebook is far from a necessity in my life. I love using it. I love seeing friends' updates. It's how I stay in touch with lots of friends and family, but I use precisely because it costs nothing. There is no guilt in using it ever (maybe my electric bill...?). The threshold between $0.00 and $0.01 is huge. The very requirement of money in any amount is deal breaker for such non-essentials. Going from $0.01 to $0.02 is a lot easier because it's a mere value proposition: we're offering more services, so we need to charge a bit more.
Since when is it a right to know who is behind an anonymous internet posting? If we're taken to TRIAL, yeah, you probably have some right to know who your accuser is... but an anonymous Internet posting? Sorry. That is not a right.
I find myself in an interesting position. I am a Christian husband and father. Given my religious background, I certainly oppose such vile literature. One could argue that I see this as a 'win' for me and my beliefs. However, this is exactly the wrong way to go about it. If I wanted to eliminate such literature, I'd seek to garner support from people in the community. I'd want the world to WANT to rid itself of such literature. Paypal should strive to be as neutral as possible as it is a tool for moving money around. What people do with their money is their own business.
Paypal, why stop at dirty books? Why not cut off funds to presidential campaigns (for candidates you do not like)? Why not cut off funds for anyone who refuses to detail what the transaction was for? Do you plan on reinstating Smashwords for transactions not involving dirty books?
It's such a slippery slope that this really is a victory for no one. It's just one more reason for me to move my assets away from Paypal.
Disliking does not *excuse* infringement. A more appropriate analogy would be that every time you go to pay for your nachos at the concession stand, the cashier slaps you after handing you your receipt. People want the nachos and want to support the people selling them, but if every purchase is accompanied by pain, people will start saying, "What's that over there?" *runs*
Is this guy seriously complaining about the variety of Android hardware? Has this guy never written a big application for the PC? There is so much more hardware variance on the desktop than in the phone market. The mark of a good engineer is his ability to write flexible, adaptable code that conforms to its environment. Frankly, if a team is coding an app and stopping the instant it runs smoothly on one device, I question the quality of code underneath: no effort to optimize, streamline, harden, etc.
It's really not THAT hard to support many Android devices.