As previously reported, Apple is holding a memorial service for Steve Jobs today at Stanford University, where Silicon Valley’s elite have been invited to attend.

Apple will hold another memorial event for the company’s employees on October 19.

Jobs passed away on October 5, and has been remembered around the web perhaps like no other before him, in terms of the amount of people expressing their condolences and paying tribute, from the tech elite to celebrities and the rest of us common folk. Here, we looked at 100 quotes from well-known people.

Jobs was laid to rest at a small private ceremony on October 7. More on the death of Steve Jobs here.

But California Governor Jerry Brown has vetoed the bill.

Here’s the veto message he sent back to the State Senate on Sunday:

I am returning Senate Bill 914 without my signature.

This measure would overturn a California Supreme Court decision that
held that police officers can lawfully search the cell phones of
people who they arrest.

The courts are better suited to resolve the complex and case-specific
issues relating to constitutional search-and-seizures protections.

That California Supreme Court decision that Brown references is the People v. Diaz, a case ruled upon by the supreme state body in January of this year.

In that case, the suspect Diaz was arrested for selling ecstasy to an officer during an undercover drug bust. Upon his arrest, his cellphone was seized and put into evidence. During the interview of Diaz when he was back at the station, an officer looked through his text messages and found texts about the selling of ecstasy. Diaz, naturally, moved to suppress that evidence as a violation of his 4th Amendment rights.

The California Supreme Court upheld that the evidence would remain admissible, because the mobile device was found to be “property incidental to the person” instead of a “pathway to personal data.” That means that it doesn’t require a warrant to be perused.

The Supreme Court of the United States upheld this ruling when they declined to hear the case.

California Senate Bill 914 would have in effect overturned that court decision and made that type of mobile search illegal. Brown’s veto will allow it to stand.

Wired suggests that Brown’s decision in this case could be tied to political gain, in that it “shores up support with police unions,” one in particular that donated $38K to his campaign.

Senate Bill 914 was supported by big name organizations like the ACLU as well as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, who asked Californians to take actions and petition the Governor to sign the bill. Here’s what they had to say about it:

Modern smartphones are a candid window into the intimate details of our lives carrying everything from text messages to emails, from webpages we’ve browsed to our real time location, from lists of contacts to photo albums. But under California law, an arresting officer can reach into your pocket, pull out your cell phone, and thumb through everything on it regardless of whether your phone has anything to do with the arrest itself.

SB 914 ensures that law enforcement officials can’t search your phone without a warrant. This law will also cover other forms of sensitive mobile devices, like tablets and organizers.

It doesn’t matter if you’re arrested at a street protest or pulled over for a traffic stop; the sensitive data on your mobile devices shouldn’t be subject to the idle curiosity of law enforcement officers.

The EFF paints a pretty frightening picture of what warrant-less mobile device searches could mean for the public. Just think about everything that a police officer has access to if they start browsing your iPhone – it’s not just your text messages.

It means emails, call history, location data as well as all your photos. Since most apps on smartphones keep you automatically logged in, that means that technically your Facebook and Twitter accounts would be open to a warrant-less search as well.

There’s no word on whether or not you are compelled to relinquish your passcode if your phone is passcode locked and if so, what the penalties would exist for refusal.

This surely feels like an unsettling path to be traveling down. What do you guys think? Let us know in the comments.

The suit names YourTravelBiz.com and its affiliates and alleges that its pyramid scheme only benefits members if they find enough new members to join the scam. Once enrolled, members earn money for each new person they recruit to join the scheme and not for selling travel packages. The company attracts new members by promising huge income opportunities via online travel agencies, but the average member makes nothing selling travel.

"YourTravelBiz.com operates a gigantic pyramid scheme that is immensely profitable to a few individuals on top and a complete rip-off for most everyone else," Attorney General Brown said. "Today’s lawsuit seeks to shut down the company’s unlawful operation before more people are exploited by the scam."

Company records show there were over 200,000 members in 2007 that paid $449 to set up an online travel agency with a monthly fee of $49. In 2007, only 38 percent of the company’s members made any travel commission. For a handful of members who made travel commission in 2007, the median income was $39, less than the monthly fee to keep the site. There are close to 140,000 of the company’s travel Web sites, all almost identical, on the Internet.

YourTraveBiz’s marketing materials include videos of people driving expensive sports cars, holding ten-thousand dollar checks, and claiming to be bringing in millions of dollars in profits. The company advertises through its Web site, and at conventions, workshops and nationwide sales meetings.

Brown charges the company, its affiliates, and the company’s founders J. Lloyd Tomer, J. Scott Tomer, Kim Sorensen and Andrew Cauthen with operating an "endless chain scheme."

Brown is also going after the company for unfair business practices and false advertising, which include deceptive claims that members can earn millions of dollars with the company.

The lawsuit seeks to get a court order against YourTravelBiz.com that will bar the company from making false or misleading statements. It also seeks a civil penalty of $15 million and $10 million in restitution for Californians who were ripped off by the company.

"Every year thousands of doctors try to check their patient’s prescription history information but California’s current database is difficult to access," Brown said.

"If California puts this information online, with real-time access, it will give authorized doctors and pharmacies the technology they need to fight prescription drug abuse which is burdening our healthcare system."

The database, called the Controlled Substance Utilization Review and Evaluation System, holds 86 million entries for prescription drugs dispensed in California.

By using a secure privately funded online database, Brown said health professionals would be able to access drug histories of patients rather than mailing or faxing written requests for the information. Each year more than 60,000 requests are made.

Brown is working with the Troy and Alana Pack Foundation, founded by Bob Pack whose 7 and 10 year-old children were killed by a driver under the influence of prescription drugs obtained from multiple doctors.

The foundation will work to enhance California’s current database prescription by providing real-time Internet access for law enforcement and medical personnel.

The online database will launch in 2009 and will cost $3.5 million over the next three years.

"If doctors can easily check their own patients’ prescription history, it will reduce the number of people who are able to obtain large quantities of narcotics from many different physicians," Brown said.

Kentucky was the first state to put all its prescription history information online for health professionals and law enforcement. California’s new database will be the largest online prescription drug database in the country.