There is an article regarding Canada's ruling and laws for fair use, and statements by various people to the effect that theoretically, search engine page cache could be construed as a violation of copyright. Now, forgetting all about how much BS that is, as I was walking through my kitchen tonight, the following thought occurred to me: Given that search engines and their caches are common conduits for people to find web pages, sites, products and services, etc., wouldn't Adobe be liable for allowing (and even specifically designing) the Acrobat PDF format to store copyrighted fonts for the effective reproductive use by others who did not buy the fonts (print shops, etc.)? I mean, technically, if I sit down and design a font and sell a typical, standard software license to someone for it, technically they're the only one who should be using it or have access to it. But, when they make a PDF, the font is being embedded into it, someone with Acrobat Pro could actually modify the document while retaining the integrity of the font, etc., so technically that print shop "is a thief" for having my font, and the user violated copyright law and/or their license agreement by giving someone whom they were not authorized a copy of the font. I know this may seem like a stretch for some, and again please understand that I do not in any way advocate this diseased kind of thinking, but it seems to me like the Canadian courts have opened up a pandora's box. Thoughts, anyone?