courts

A law is only a law as long as it can be enforced by courts and agencies.

Something tells me that courts will be able to draw a line between scraping data and copying an idea.

Your definition only refers to government agencies and courts.

So the courts are usually required to sort it out after many years and endless litigation.

Yes, but they don't just arrest everyone and let the courts figure it out.

Changing the situation will require Congress or courts to go in a different direction.

The users have a much quicker way to resolve these issues than the courts.

Can international courts be persuaded by these obvious artificial methods of establishing jurisdiction?

But it's altogether unclear until litigation happens, because only courts decide.

At that point, it's a matter for the courts to settle.

And as such, I'd highly doubt, at least until Chrome actively courts hardware manufacturers, that Chrome Ad click rates compare to IE.

Without advocacy, American courts do very little on their own.

Having litigated against adversaries who use the courts primarily to be a nuisance, with little or no regard to the actual strength or weakness of their claims, I've become convinced "loser pays costs and attorney's fees of prevailing party" is a better system than what we have in the U.