How many historical examples of civilians being misidentified as combatants does it take before we question whether these strikes have all been drug boats?
If I follow you correctly, you're saying that we should not investigate or prosecute crimes committed by politicians¹ because the CIA did something on a TV show? That's an interesting point of view.
I am skeptical that doing so would result in greater concentration of executive power constrained only by political optics—given that that's what we're seeing now—and it is hard to envision a scenario of executive harassment of the legislature more obvious than what we've already seen² happen.
I don't know what you mean by "good guys got the bad guys in the end": the subject of the indictment is currently the President of the United States and the charges were dropped as a result.
I don't know who that is or what that means. I'm referring to the actual indictment filed after the investigation that those phone records were subpoenaed during. It's unclear if you're trying to say that phone records should not be subject to court order or just those of politicians.
FYI, that investigation also resulted in an indictment—conspiracy to defraud the United States; conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding; obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding; and conspiracy against rights.
Not to pull the Godwin lever, but the German SS went from being security guards to overseeing the entire national police force to running gas chambers in about 10-15 years. The function of an organization can change over time. The purpose of a system is what it does.
When a domestic law enforcement agency is spending 600% more year-over-year on weapons to point at people in frog costumes it's reasonable to wonder if that may reflect a de facto change in that organization.
Maps looks like a swing at "library of real world immersive 3d content" that landed on "guy air-tapping his way through a slideshow of bridge pictures".
I'm not seeing how other phones are being held back by any of this. Google and Samsung have design patents, too, and my Pixel Watch also has a blood oxygen sensor.
You seem to be confusing Masimo's patent infringement case against Apple over Apple Watch with the notion that Apple has some kind of a patented blood oxygen sensor in the iPhone.
I don't think that supports your case that Apple's patent keeps other phones from being equivalent given that the sensor isn't in the iPhone and it's not even Apple's patent.
For what it's worth, I'm typing this on a Pixel which is also a rounded rectangle, so I'm skeptical that patent is really holding other phones back, either
I think what you're looking for is not "copyrighted material" but material that's both 1) used without permission and 2) outside the scope of fair use.
There's no easy answer there, hence New York Times v. OpenAI.