Did you even bother to read the report, or just the hopelessly wrong post on HuffPo?
There is no "internet driver's license". The proposal is for people to have one or more digital identities, from 3rd party Identitty Providers, which can be used around the 'net. Things like Facebook ID, Google ID, Apple ID or that from any website willing to be a guarantor of that ID. It's all about Federated Identity (aka Web Single Signon).
Get your facts straight before attempting to inflame the masses.
I want my paper with all the stories at the breakfast table with my coffee. I might later go on-line to cut-n-paste parts of an article to send to someone, or to bookmark it for future reference, but in the AM I'm cranky - and I want all of the stories in the paper.
Someday a Kindle-like device might replace my morning paper. Someday. But that day isn't here yet.
If music were a commodity, or creating a blank tape an excersize in creativity, then there might be some amusement in the price disparity. There is commodity music, which would be much cheaper to license, but evidently the filmmaker chose not to go that route. His choice, but his choice determines the price he'll have to pay.
You gloss over the fact that the AP - no matter how they obtained the material - violated their agreement with S&S to embargo the story until the date of publication. Its not about reporting or copyright - its about ethics and contracts.
What "privacy"? The camera is shooting a public street, anything it saw could be seen by anyone walking by, driving by or standing on the street corner. There is no presumption of privacy on a public street!
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by dak3.