Your reading sounds reasonable, but 'reasonable' is not how these things work. In practice, it would go like this: * Nation mandates that gov't will ONLY use OS software, * Microsoft/Oracle/etc run crying to the international Arbitrator (run by them & other multinationals), crying 'Unfair!111!', * Arbitrator sues the crap out of Nation on the basis of this agreement, in a similar way to how Australia is being dragged through multiple international legal cases over its plain-packaging tobacco laws. * Nation recinds it's OSS laws, or loses gigabuck$$$.
The machine pumps very hot (~90C) water at high pressure through holes punched in the pods. While I've never heard of it happening, it's not at all implausible that thin, cheap plastic pods could deform or even burst. Of course, you'd expect the company to play up such dangers for marketing purposes, even if they're rare, or even theoretical.
The police shouldn't be handling it anyway, as copyright violations are a civil matter, not a criminal matter. It amazes me that Americans seem to be just fine with corporations using the cops as collection agents - if a private citizen asks the cops to bust someone who owes them money, the cops will laugh at them.
I agree completely. The people pushing this shit will never permit the exclusion of the IP or ISDS stuff, because that's what the TPP IS FOR. They don't care that much about the actual trade stuff, because its just a Trojan horse for subverting national sovereignty to the multinational corporations, as has nearly been completed in the uSA.
"there seems to be little anyone can do to prevent the device from being tracked and/or used as a listening device" Sure there is: Put the phone inside a Faraday Cage, eg; a wire mesh pouch, or for an ad hoc solution, inside a microwave oven, or metal box.
I'm probably being paranoid, but I can't help but wonder if a spook agency or criminal organisation (but I repeat myself) are behind Superfish. I'll be interested to see if Lenovo sue them; I certainly would if I were in their shoes, considering how expensive this is going to be for them in terms of mitigation & reputational costs.
"But the Tabasco Corp also profits from his work." So what? He's making tens of millions of dollars a year, so why would he care? It amazes me that so many people think that success alone isn't enough, as though it doesn't count unless you're bankrupting your competitors as well. It's a big market, there's enough room for everyone to do good business.
"Being for something with qualifications means you're not for it at all." Oh please. As much as I love this site, I despise those kinds of black & white, absolutist arguments. Translate this particular one into any other context, & it's obvious how childish it is, for example, saying: "I'm for sex, but against rape" is obvious common sense, & doesn't mean that I'm lying when I say I'm in favour of sex. Only spoiled children & Libertardians (but I repeat myself) think that absolute Freedom of Speech is an unalloyed good.