I wonder which will be more profitable...the movie or Facebook?

Value is ultimately dependent on profitability. On this basis (or even on the basis of revenue) Facebook is simply not in the same league as Google. In 2009 Google had profit of $6.5 BILLION off revenues of $23.6 BILLION. For the same period it has been estimated that Facebook had revenues of LESS than $1 billion, and profit measured in the tens of millions. (Facebook is a private company so the actual numbers are not available). Another way of putting that: in 2009 Google generated revenue equivalent to Facebook's ANNUAL revenue (based on generous estimates) in less than 16 days...or half a month! Facebook has some way to go before it is even remotely worth more than Google.

The address (I believe) of the site which upsets the Calgary police: http://www.rottenapples.info/

The DMCA is American...the last time I checked all of my electronics come from China (or Taiwan, Malaysia, etc)! For a non-American this means that sooner or later our devices will bypass this form of DRM "out of the box"...devices supporting the DRM will be (are) worth less than devices which just work.

RE: Question 1: “Cold call email” sounds like unsolicited commercial email (i.e.spam). Maybe the sender’s address has been spam listed?

I think that the Electronic Communication Privacy Act is probably more relevant - 18 U.S.C. § 2701 deals specifically with access to "stored communications" and covers people who exceed their authorization to access such data. [ http://www.justice.gov/criminal/cybercrime/ECPA2701_2712.htm] S502 of California Penal Code, quoted above makes many references to accessing information "without permission" - it could be argued that an employee who has been given sufficient access privileges to access data has in effect been permitted to do so by his employer.

In order to charge anyone with a criminal offense it is necessary for them to actually break the law - What specific law did the employee break, which would enable Google to lay charges? He DID have access to the information (as part of his job) after all.

Firstly, the world already has laws to prevent copying...if someone is copying your content send a take-down notice to their host. Secondly, most popular search engines will obey your robots.txt file. If you want to prevent all incoming links this is easy: 1. Build your page in flash; or 2. Use dynamically generated expiring links (the guys that sell e-books often use this approach). You can also delete your sitemap.xml file and make sure that you have no RSS feeds that link to your site (we wouldn't want these links showing up on a feed reader!) Ignorant?

...and while the idiots are at it they can pass a law, forcing people to get the news from newspapers, or force blogs to register with the "news police", ban 24-hour news networks...ban twitter or simply use your taxes to support the news media. Seriously newspapers can stop search engine linking right now by setting up a "robots.txt" file (5 minutes work). If they want to stop ALL incoming links they can build their pages in flash. As for solutions...there might not be any. Paper news is obsolete and old fashioned news gathering simply not competitive.

Aren't we lucky that Wikileaks is not dependent on US laws!