1. Throughout the 21st century with a myriad of electronic communications, why shouldn't "use of the internet" be a primary determining factor for proof of access, "as it has not been suggested by the courts?

2. In summary judgment cases, if a litigant hasn't been granted due process as a constitutional right during the "discovery stage," and there exists a preponderance of evidence, why shouldn't the court hearing be remanded to that of a jury trial?

3. What should happen if any of the lower courts or superior courts fail to acknowledge "spoliation of evidence" in a federal court case as a matter of law? If there wasn't any sanction or dismissal, should the party at fault submit to a new trial?

4. How will the circuit courts decipher a way for establishing a specific 'rule of thumb' for denoting "substantial similarities" in copyright infringement cases for all courts? Notably, the guidelines in some cases are contingent upon intrinsic/extrinsic factors, and in others, the "ordinary observer test" or expression of ideas.

Use-of-the-internet-as-proof-of-access