<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_05_28_0149243</id>
	<title>EU Sues Sweden, Demands ISP Data Retention</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1243497900000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.anus.com/metal" rel="nofollow">Death Metal</a> writes <i>"The EU passed the Data Retention Directive years ago, a law that demands ISPs and search engines hold onto data long enough to help the cops (but not long enough to cause privacy problems). But Sweden never passed it into national law, and the European Commission has now <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/05/eu-sues-sweden-demands-law-requiring-isps-to-retain-data.ars">sued the country to make sure a bill appears</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Death Metal writes " The EU passed the Data Retention Directive years ago , a law that demands ISPs and search engines hold onto data long enough to help the cops ( but not long enough to cause privacy problems ) .
But Sweden never passed it into national law , and the European Commission has now sued the country to make sure a bill appears .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Death Metal writes "The EU passed the Data Retention Directive years ago, a law that demands ISPs and search engines hold onto data long enough to help the cops (but not long enough to cause privacy problems).
But Sweden never passed it into national law, and the European Commission has now sued the country to make sure a bill appears.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121043</id>
	<title>Re:But the same EU won't sue France for...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243508520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't talk about things you don't understand.</p><p>The EU suing countries happens all the time. It's just that you are not aware of it. As far as Sweden/France equality is concerned, is it so difficult for you to understant that they won't sue just after the fact but try to solve the matter by discussing it first? France will be sued after some years, if they don't adapt their legislation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't talk about things you do n't understand.The EU suing countries happens all the time .
It 's just that you are not aware of it .
As far as Sweden/France equality is concerned , is it so difficult for you to understant that they wo n't sue just after the fact but try to solve the matter by discussing it first ?
France will be sued after some years , if they do n't adapt their legislation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't talk about things you don't understand.The EU suing countries happens all the time.
It's just that you are not aware of it.
As far as Sweden/France equality is concerned, is it so difficult for you to understant that they won't sue just after the fact but try to solve the matter by discussing it first?
France will be sued after some years, if they don't adapt their legislation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120511</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28136461</id>
	<title>Re:So much for National (or State) Sovereignty</title>
	<author>hicksw</author>
	<datestamp>1243595820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>In the United States of America, the individual States are supposed to be "sovereign" and all rights not specifically granted to the Federal Government are the province of the individual States. Over the years "creeping Federalism" has undermined the individuality, power and authority of the individual States.</i> </p><p> <b>The American Civil War was not exactly <i>creeping<i>.</i></i></b> </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the United States of America , the individual States are supposed to be " sovereign " and all rights not specifically granted to the Federal Government are the province of the individual States .
Over the years " creeping Federalism " has undermined the individuality , power and authority of the individual States .
The American Civil War was not exactly creeping .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> In the United States of America, the individual States are supposed to be "sovereign" and all rights not specifically granted to the Federal Government are the province of the individual States.
Over the years "creeping Federalism" has undermined the individuality, power and authority of the individual States.
The American Civil War was not exactly creeping. </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121601</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120781</id>
	<title>Re:First time?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243505940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is default procedure if a nation doesn't comply with EU...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is default procedure if a nation does n't comply with EU.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is default procedure if a nation doesn't comply with EU...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120437</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120859</id>
	<title>European Directive (European Law 101)</title>
	<author>yogibaer</author>
	<datestamp>1243506720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Under the EU treaties a european directive has to be implemented as national law by all members to whom it is adressed, normally within a year after it has been passed, member countries can be excepted from this rule, so that they have more time to implement it as a national law. Bu they do not have a choice after that. The strange and noteworthy thing is, that a european directive as such has a direct effect  for all member countries (regardless of national implementation) and courts, especially the higher courts, should consider it in their rulings. The national implementation is only an integration in the respective national legal systems.What happens here is nothing unusual, its standard procedure "On 1 May 2008 1,298 such cases open before the Court" s.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European\_Directive So: nothing to see here, move on.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Under the EU treaties a european directive has to be implemented as national law by all members to whom it is adressed , normally within a year after it has been passed , member countries can be excepted from this rule , so that they have more time to implement it as a national law .
Bu they do not have a choice after that .
The strange and noteworthy thing is , that a european directive as such has a direct effect for all member countries ( regardless of national implementation ) and courts , especially the higher courts , should consider it in their rulings .
The national implementation is only an integration in the respective national legal systems.What happens here is nothing unusual , its standard procedure " On 1 May 2008 1,298 such cases open before the Court " s.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European \ _Directive So : nothing to see here , move on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Under the EU treaties a european directive has to be implemented as national law by all members to whom it is adressed, normally within a year after it has been passed, member countries can be excepted from this rule, so that they have more time to implement it as a national law.
Bu they do not have a choice after that.
The strange and noteworthy thing is, that a european directive as such has a direct effect  for all member countries (regardless of national implementation) and courts, especially the higher courts, should consider it in their rulings.
The national implementation is only an integration in the respective national legal systems.What happens here is nothing unusual, its standard procedure "On 1 May 2008 1,298 such cases open before the Court" s.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European\_Directive So: nothing to see here, move on.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28136391</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>lamare</author>
	<datestamp>1243594440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>Sues Sweden? And what if they don't obey?</p></div><p>That's a really good question. I'm guessing there's something for this in those 10000+ pages of international treaties that form the EU.</p></div><p>

You guessed wrong. That is: the current treaties do not establish a <b>legal supremacy</b> of the EU above the memberstates. Heck, the EU not even has law-making powers. All it can do, is make directives, <b>political agreements</b>. Therefore, Sweden might have a <b>political problem</b> if it ignores the EU or even the European Court of Justice, but there really is nothing anyone can do about that using <b>legal</b> means. All the EU and the other memberstates can do is to use <b>political</b> pressure, which can be all kinds of things, but there is no <b>legal</b> way the EU can enforce the Swedish Government or its parliament to do anything. Not until the Lisbon treaty is ratified in all EU memberstates, that is.

</p><p>

So, the Lisbon Treaty is not about more democracy in Europe, it's really about correcting this tiny little "error": for the first time, Europe will have <b>legal supremacy</b> over the member states. See my previous post: <a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1247565&amp;cid=28136179" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1247565&amp;cid=28136179</a> [slashdot.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sues Sweden ?
And what if they do n't obey ? That 's a really good question .
I 'm guessing there 's something for this in those 10000 + pages of international treaties that form the EU .
You guessed wrong .
That is : the current treaties do not establish a legal supremacy of the EU above the memberstates .
Heck , the EU not even has law-making powers .
All it can do , is make directives , political agreements .
Therefore , Sweden might have a political problem if it ignores the EU or even the European Court of Justice , but there really is nothing anyone can do about that using legal means .
All the EU and the other memberstates can do is to use political pressure , which can be all kinds of things , but there is no legal way the EU can enforce the Swedish Government or its parliament to do anything .
Not until the Lisbon treaty is ratified in all EU memberstates , that is .
So , the Lisbon Treaty is not about more democracy in Europe , it 's really about correcting this tiny little " error " : for the first time , Europe will have legal supremacy over the member states .
See my previous post : http : //slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1247565&amp;cid = 28136179 [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sues Sweden?
And what if they don't obey?That's a really good question.
I'm guessing there's something for this in those 10000+ pages of international treaties that form the EU.
You guessed wrong.
That is: the current treaties do not establish a legal supremacy of the EU above the memberstates.
Heck, the EU not even has law-making powers.
All it can do, is make directives, political agreements.
Therefore, Sweden might have a political problem if it ignores the EU or even the European Court of Justice, but there really is nothing anyone can do about that using legal means.
All the EU and the other memberstates can do is to use political pressure, which can be all kinds of things, but there is no legal way the EU can enforce the Swedish Government or its parliament to do anything.
Not until the Lisbon treaty is ratified in all EU memberstates, that is.
So, the Lisbon Treaty is not about more democracy in Europe, it's really about correcting this tiny little "error": for the first time, Europe will have legal supremacy over the member states.
See my previous post: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1247565&amp;cid=28136179 [slashdot.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120551</id>
	<title>Re:First time?</title>
	<author>Halo1</author>
	<datestamp>1243503720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Is this the first time the EU has sued a member state for not passing a law?</p></div><p>No. Not by a long shot.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this the first time the EU has sued a member state for not passing a law ? No .
Not by a long shot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this the first time the EU has sued a member state for not passing a law?No.
Not by a long shot.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120437</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28138289</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243609320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>None of the EU countries have implemented all of the European Directives. I think the closest one is Denmark with a little over 90\% of them.</p><p>Usually you don't get sued over not implementing them, except in this case...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>None of the EU countries have implemented all of the European Directives .
I think the closest one is Denmark with a little over 90 \ % of them.Usually you do n't get sued over not implementing them , except in this case.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>None of the EU countries have implemented all of the European Directives.
I think the closest one is Denmark with a little over 90\% of them.Usually you don't get sued over not implementing them, except in this case...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28135527</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>lordholm</author>
	<datestamp>1243540740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The commissioners have no power to make decrees in any way (they can regulate certain areas of the internal market, but that is about it). They make sure that decisions taken by the European council and parliament are implemented and followed.</p><p>This is pretty much what your local government does. If a municipality refuses to uphold the law that the national parliament made, the governments task is to ensure that it is followed. Usually, they don't involve themselves directly but ask some other branch of the government to look in to the matter.</p><p>The Commission is hardly the problem, they are just ensuring that the member states live up to the obligations in the treaties. They do not pass law or directives.</p><p>The people behind the laws are the Council and the Parliament. What happened with this law is a bit interesting.</p><p>The previous Swedish minister of justice (Bodstr&#195;m) wanted to ensure that this data was stored (he also wanted a number of other big-brotherish laws to be implemented). But, he realised that people use communications systems outside of Sweden, so he went to the Council to do this.</p><p>In principle, they masked this as an internal market thing that the Parliament would have a say about (it also contradicted previous internal market directives, so giving the EP the right to co-decide is only appropriate), but when it looked like the EP might say no to the law.</p><p>The Council said that if you don't approve this, we will treat it as a police and judicial cooperation issue, where the EP (before Lisbon is ratified anyway) does not have the right to co-decide. This ment that some of the MEPs swayed over to the yes-side and the law was passed, not because they liked the law, but because they would at least have the co-decision right and might sneak in some amendments making the law a bit more sane. MEP Alexander Alvaro was for example opposed to the directive, and even asked to have his name stricken from a EP report on the issue.</p><p>You might ask yourself whether these MEPs did the right thing  to value co-decision rights over clean and untainted hands (Alvaro certainly did do the right thing in the report); there is an EP election in one week, so I sugest you make your voice heard.</p><p>Now, back in Sweden, the previous minister of justice lost his job in the previous election, and the new government did actually not want that law. However, the law had already been approved in the EP and EC, so this means that it must be implemented. Obviously, it has not been a priority during the last year, but in principle the body responsible for formulating the final text going into Swedish law has been trying to make it so lenient that they can while still being in compliance with the directive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The commissioners have no power to make decrees in any way ( they can regulate certain areas of the internal market , but that is about it ) .
They make sure that decisions taken by the European council and parliament are implemented and followed.This is pretty much what your local government does .
If a municipality refuses to uphold the law that the national parliament made , the governments task is to ensure that it is followed .
Usually , they do n't involve themselves directly but ask some other branch of the government to look in to the matter.The Commission is hardly the problem , they are just ensuring that the member states live up to the obligations in the treaties .
They do not pass law or directives.The people behind the laws are the Council and the Parliament .
What happened with this law is a bit interesting.The previous Swedish minister of justice ( Bodstr   m ) wanted to ensure that this data was stored ( he also wanted a number of other big-brotherish laws to be implemented ) .
But , he realised that people use communications systems outside of Sweden , so he went to the Council to do this.In principle , they masked this as an internal market thing that the Parliament would have a say about ( it also contradicted previous internal market directives , so giving the EP the right to co-decide is only appropriate ) , but when it looked like the EP might say no to the law.The Council said that if you do n't approve this , we will treat it as a police and judicial cooperation issue , where the EP ( before Lisbon is ratified anyway ) does not have the right to co-decide .
This ment that some of the MEPs swayed over to the yes-side and the law was passed , not because they liked the law , but because they would at least have the co-decision right and might sneak in some amendments making the law a bit more sane .
MEP Alexander Alvaro was for example opposed to the directive , and even asked to have his name stricken from a EP report on the issue.You might ask yourself whether these MEPs did the right thing to value co-decision rights over clean and untainted hands ( Alvaro certainly did do the right thing in the report ) ; there is an EP election in one week , so I sugest you make your voice heard.Now , back in Sweden , the previous minister of justice lost his job in the previous election , and the new government did actually not want that law .
However , the law had already been approved in the EP and EC , so this means that it must be implemented .
Obviously , it has not been a priority during the last year , but in principle the body responsible for formulating the final text going into Swedish law has been trying to make it so lenient that they can while still being in compliance with the directive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The commissioners have no power to make decrees in any way (they can regulate certain areas of the internal market, but that is about it).
They make sure that decisions taken by the European council and parliament are implemented and followed.This is pretty much what your local government does.
If a municipality refuses to uphold the law that the national parliament made, the governments task is to ensure that it is followed.
Usually, they don't involve themselves directly but ask some other branch of the government to look in to the matter.The Commission is hardly the problem, they are just ensuring that the member states live up to the obligations in the treaties.
They do not pass law or directives.The people behind the laws are the Council and the Parliament.
What happened with this law is a bit interesting.The previous Swedish minister of justice (BodstrÃm) wanted to ensure that this data was stored (he also wanted a number of other big-brotherish laws to be implemented).
But, he realised that people use communications systems outside of Sweden, so he went to the Council to do this.In principle, they masked this as an internal market thing that the Parliament would have a say about (it also contradicted previous internal market directives, so giving the EP the right to co-decide is only appropriate), but when it looked like the EP might say no to the law.The Council said that if you don't approve this, we will treat it as a police and judicial cooperation issue, where the EP (before Lisbon is ratified anyway) does not have the right to co-decide.
This ment that some of the MEPs swayed over to the yes-side and the law was passed, not because they liked the law, but because they would at least have the co-decision right and might sneak in some amendments making the law a bit more sane.
MEP Alexander Alvaro was for example opposed to the directive, and even asked to have his name stricken from a EP report on the issue.You might ask yourself whether these MEPs did the right thing  to value co-decision rights over clean and untainted hands (Alvaro certainly did do the right thing in the report); there is an EP election in one week, so I sugest you make your voice heard.Now, back in Sweden, the previous minister of justice lost his job in the previous election, and the new government did actually not want that law.
However, the law had already been approved in the EP and EC, so this means that it must be implemented.
Obviously, it has not been a priority during the last year, but in principle the body responsible for formulating the final text going into Swedish law has been trying to make it so lenient that they can while still being in compliance with the directive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120769</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120449</id>
	<title>Haha</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243502700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hehe, a bit funny considering the background. This is because the EU now noticed that ISP's are actually now not wanting to do any retention in Sweden, in turn due to the new <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPRED" title="wikipedia.org">IPRED law</a> [wikipedia.org]. This is a way for them to partially dodge that law by getting less chances of being able to report users sharing copyright infringing work. The idea is that as their users are reported, they have hopefully already deleted the log entries. Why they are wanting to do <i>that</i> is in turn out of competition reasons. No ISP in Sweden want to be "the ISP where you can more easily get caught for copyright infringement when sharing files". You can read more about the case for one of those ISP's, Bahnhof, <a href="http://www.geek.com/articles/news/swedish-isp-bahnhof-renders-ipred-useless-by-destroying-ip-addresses-20090417/" title="geek.com">here</a> [geek.com].</p><p>OK, I went off on a tangent there. What I think is <i>funny</i> is that the EU is only now paying attention and noticing Sweden didn't adopt that law.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-p It's so apparent that this is in response to all the more ISP's not caring for it, not because they have a check on what Sweden is doing. Or maybe they just don't care until certain laws are dodged in practice out of minimizing bureaucracy. It's hard to tell if it's due to incompetence or bureaucracy, but it's either of them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hehe , a bit funny considering the background .
This is because the EU now noticed that ISP 's are actually now not wanting to do any retention in Sweden , in turn due to the new IPRED law [ wikipedia.org ] .
This is a way for them to partially dodge that law by getting less chances of being able to report users sharing copyright infringing work .
The idea is that as their users are reported , they have hopefully already deleted the log entries .
Why they are wanting to do that is in turn out of competition reasons .
No ISP in Sweden want to be " the ISP where you can more easily get caught for copyright infringement when sharing files " .
You can read more about the case for one of those ISP 's , Bahnhof , here [ geek.com ] .OK , I went off on a tangent there .
What I think is funny is that the EU is only now paying attention and noticing Sweden did n't adopt that law .
: -p It 's so apparent that this is in response to all the more ISP 's not caring for it , not because they have a check on what Sweden is doing .
Or maybe they just do n't care until certain laws are dodged in practice out of minimizing bureaucracy .
It 's hard to tell if it 's due to incompetence or bureaucracy , but it 's either of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hehe, a bit funny considering the background.
This is because the EU now noticed that ISP's are actually now not wanting to do any retention in Sweden, in turn due to the new IPRED law [wikipedia.org].
This is a way for them to partially dodge that law by getting less chances of being able to report users sharing copyright infringing work.
The idea is that as their users are reported, they have hopefully already deleted the log entries.
Why they are wanting to do that is in turn out of competition reasons.
No ISP in Sweden want to be "the ISP where you can more easily get caught for copyright infringement when sharing files".
You can read more about the case for one of those ISP's, Bahnhof, here [geek.com].OK, I went off on a tangent there.
What I think is funny is that the EU is only now paying attention and noticing Sweden didn't adopt that law.
:-p It's so apparent that this is in response to all the more ISP's not caring for it, not because they have a check on what Sweden is doing.
Or maybe they just don't care until certain laws are dodged in practice out of minimizing bureaucracy.
It's hard to tell if it's due to incompetence or bureaucracy, but it's either of them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121175</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243509780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>Sues Sweden? And what if they don't obey?</p></div><p>That's a really good question. I'm guessing there's something for this in those 10000+ pages of international treaties that form the EU.</p><p>What's interesting though, that this is the only law they react so harshly to. They usually warn a couple of times, prod gently, give deadlines, give more deadlines, and not take it to court without warning. Of course those are laws not directly related to their <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty\_of\_Lisbon" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">emerging police state</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></div><p>Sweden has recently passed the IPRED law where a copywrite holder can request from the court for the ISP to hand over IP information about their customers if they are suspected of illigal file sharing.  So basically Copyright holders are the police now. Or something like that.</p><p>so what happened.</p><p>http://www.thelocal.se/19478/20090515/</p><p>Several ISP's decided not to store their information about their customers because they did not want to hand over their customers information to 3rd parties.</p><p>So now Sweden is going to create a new law where they force ISP's to save the user's data (see article above).</p><p>So why is EU putting pressing the issue by sueing. Its because these copywrite lobbiests are trying to save their business model by getting involved in politics and changing laws everywhere.</p><p>EU elections are on june 7th. Im voting for the pirate party. Not because I necessarily want them to win but I would like them to get some seats in the parlement so they can question some of these issues that are invading on everyones privacy.</p><p>I could go on forever. And the funny thing is. Nobody is in favor of these laws. So why are they getting passed. I thought these were democratic nations.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sues Sweden ?
And what if they do n't obey ? That 's a really good question .
I 'm guessing there 's something for this in those 10000 + pages of international treaties that form the EU.What 's interesting though , that this is the only law they react so harshly to .
They usually warn a couple of times , prod gently , give deadlines , give more deadlines , and not take it to court without warning .
Of course those are laws not directly related to their emerging police state [ wikipedia.org ] .Sweden has recently passed the IPRED law where a copywrite holder can request from the court for the ISP to hand over IP information about their customers if they are suspected of illigal file sharing .
So basically Copyright holders are the police now .
Or something like that.so what happened.http : //www.thelocal.se/19478/20090515/Several ISP 's decided not to store their information about their customers because they did not want to hand over their customers information to 3rd parties.So now Sweden is going to create a new law where they force ISP 's to save the user 's data ( see article above ) .So why is EU putting pressing the issue by sueing .
Its because these copywrite lobbiests are trying to save their business model by getting involved in politics and changing laws everywhere.EU elections are on june 7th .
Im voting for the pirate party .
Not because I necessarily want them to win but I would like them to get some seats in the parlement so they can question some of these issues that are invading on everyones privacy.I could go on forever .
And the funny thing is .
Nobody is in favor of these laws .
So why are they getting passed .
I thought these were democratic nations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sues Sweden?
And what if they don't obey?That's a really good question.
I'm guessing there's something for this in those 10000+ pages of international treaties that form the EU.What's interesting though, that this is the only law they react so harshly to.
They usually warn a couple of times, prod gently, give deadlines, give more deadlines, and not take it to court without warning.
Of course those are laws not directly related to their emerging police state [wikipedia.org].Sweden has recently passed the IPRED law where a copywrite holder can request from the court for the ISP to hand over IP information about their customers if they are suspected of illigal file sharing.
So basically Copyright holders are the police now.
Or something like that.so what happened.http://www.thelocal.se/19478/20090515/Several ISP's decided not to store their information about their customers because they did not want to hand over their customers information to 3rd parties.So now Sweden is going to create a new law where they force ISP's to save the user's data (see article above).So why is EU putting pressing the issue by sueing.
Its because these copywrite lobbiests are trying to save their business model by getting involved in politics and changing laws everywhere.EU elections are on june 7th.
Im voting for the pirate party.
Not because I necessarily want them to win but I would like them to get some seats in the parlement so they can question some of these issues that are invading on everyones privacy.I could go on forever.
And the funny thing is.
Nobody is in favor of these laws.
So why are they getting passed.
I thought these were democratic nations.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120497</id>
	<title>Re:I never understood these policies...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243503120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ironically, cell phone companies do record all voice calls. In fact, they even automatically transcribe the voice calls into text form. For $100 anyone can grab your cell phone calls, already translated into text form for your perusal. Private investigators do just this on a daily basis for their clients. The FBI was recently investigating a number of companies, requesting records of everyone who purchased these logs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ironically , cell phone companies do record all voice calls .
In fact , they even automatically transcribe the voice calls into text form .
For $ 100 anyone can grab your cell phone calls , already translated into text form for your perusal .
Private investigators do just this on a daily basis for their clients .
The FBI was recently investigating a number of companies , requesting records of everyone who purchased these logs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ironically, cell phone companies do record all voice calls.
In fact, they even automatically transcribe the voice calls into text form.
For $100 anyone can grab your cell phone calls, already translated into text form for your perusal.
Private investigators do just this on a daily basis for their clients.
The FBI was recently investigating a number of companies, requesting records of everyone who purchased these logs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120419</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121863</id>
	<title>Re:That is how it has to be</title>
	<author>Teron</author>
	<datestamp>1243516440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If the people had been told that they signed over legislative power to Brussels before joining, I'm sure we wouldn't have joined.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the people had been told that they signed over legislative power to Brussels before joining , I 'm sure we would n't have joined .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the people had been told that they signed over legislative power to Brussels before joining, I'm sure we wouldn't have joined.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120419</id>
	<title>I never understood these policies...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243502460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I mean, does the government understand how much storage it would require to actually retain all the data that flows through a large ISP? Why not ask cell phone companies to record all voice calls, after all, terrorists and criminals use phones!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , does the government understand how much storage it would require to actually retain all the data that flows through a large ISP ?
Why not ask cell phone companies to record all voice calls , after all , terrorists and criminals use phones !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, does the government understand how much storage it would require to actually retain all the data that flows through a large ISP?
Why not ask cell phone companies to record all voice calls, after all, terrorists and criminals use phones!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121269</id>
	<title>How funny and ironic</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243510740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In addition to laws about data retention, the EU also has treaties regarding nice treatment of asylum seekers.</p><p>When not all countries were implementing those, Sweden was one of the countries pushing for the EU to use their stick to force them to.</p><p>Now Sweden gets sued themselves for noncompliance.</p><p>I guess you can't always have your cake and eat it too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In addition to laws about data retention , the EU also has treaties regarding nice treatment of asylum seekers.When not all countries were implementing those , Sweden was one of the countries pushing for the EU to use their stick to force them to.Now Sweden gets sued themselves for noncompliance.I guess you ca n't always have your cake and eat it too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In addition to laws about data retention, the EU also has treaties regarding nice treatment of asylum seekers.When not all countries were implementing those, Sweden was one of the countries pushing for the EU to use their stick to force them to.Now Sweden gets sued themselves for noncompliance.I guess you can't always have your cake and eat it too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28125375</id>
	<title>Re:But the same EU won't sue France for...</title>
	<author>AtomicJake</author>
	<datestamp>1243532700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Its a pity it doesn't have any Rush Limbaughs there,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div><p>Oh no.  One of the better things Europe (or at least France and Germany) has to offer, is that we don't have any Rush Limbaughs.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Its a pity it does n't have any Rush Limbaughs there , ...Oh no .
One of the better things Europe ( or at least France and Germany ) has to offer , is that we do n't have any Rush Limbaughs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its a pity it doesn't have any Rush Limbaughs there, ...Oh no.
One of the better things Europe (or at least France and Germany) has to offer, is that we don't have any Rush Limbaughs.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120511</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120511</id>
	<title>But the same EU won't sue France for...</title>
	<author>freedom\_india</author>
	<datestamp>1243503300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...the three strikes law!<br>Wow!<br>Equality was the name of EU, wasn't it?<br>Sweden should show the middle finger to EU.<br>Its a pity it doesn't have any Rush Limbaughs there, one would be enough to shout hoarse about swedish nationality and violation of the same.<br>If i were the PM, i would take EU's action under advisement and in Brussels directly question the French about 3-strikes law which violates EU laws...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...the three strikes law ! Wow ! Equality was the name of EU , was n't it ? Sweden should show the middle finger to EU.Its a pity it does n't have any Rush Limbaughs there , one would be enough to shout hoarse about swedish nationality and violation of the same.If i were the PM , i would take EU 's action under advisement and in Brussels directly question the French about 3-strikes law which violates EU laws.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...the three strikes law!Wow!Equality was the name of EU, wasn't it?Sweden should show the middle finger to EU.Its a pity it doesn't have any Rush Limbaughs there, one would be enough to shout hoarse about swedish nationality and violation of the same.If i were the PM, i would take EU's action under advisement and in Brussels directly question the French about 3-strikes law which violates EU laws...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28122615</id>
	<title>silly EU, that's not how you do it.....</title>
	<author>Shakrai</author>
	<datestamp>1243520580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That's a really good question. I'm guessing there's something for this in those 10000+ pages of international treaties that form the EU.</p></div><p>See, if the EU was smart, they would first use the power of the purse to ensure that the individual countries are completely dependent upon Brussels for funding.  Then when the individual countries refuse to do <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National\_Minimum\_Drinking\_Age\_Act\_of\_1984" title="wikipedia.org">what you want</a> [wikipedia.org] you just threaten to cut off their funding.
</p><p>And what do you know?  Eventually you've managed to completely destroy the sovereignty of your member states without firing a single bullet.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's a really good question .
I 'm guessing there 's something for this in those 10000 + pages of international treaties that form the EU.See , if the EU was smart , they would first use the power of the purse to ensure that the individual countries are completely dependent upon Brussels for funding .
Then when the individual countries refuse to do what you want [ wikipedia.org ] you just threaten to cut off their funding .
And what do you know ?
Eventually you 've managed to completely destroy the sovereignty of your member states without firing a single bullet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's a really good question.
I'm guessing there's something for this in those 10000+ pages of international treaties that form the EU.See, if the EU was smart, they would first use the power of the purse to ensure that the individual countries are completely dependent upon Brussels for funding.
Then when the individual countries refuse to do what you want [wikipedia.org] you just threaten to cut off their funding.
And what do you know?
Eventually you've managed to completely destroy the sovereignty of your member states without firing a single bullet.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28129439</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>crhylove</author>
	<datestamp>1243502220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is no democracy where private firms control the media.  The very notion of democracy is laughable if all media is run by corporations.  That is certainly the case across the entire planet now, with the exception of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/., reddit, and digg.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no democracy where private firms control the media .
The very notion of democracy is laughable if all media is run by corporations .
That is certainly the case across the entire planet now , with the exception of /. , reddit , and digg .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no democracy where private firms control the media.
The very notion of democracy is laughable if all media is run by corporations.
That is certainly the case across the entire planet now, with the exception of /., reddit, and digg.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28123273</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243523580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They really shouldn't need to switch away from the euro - mostly because they didn't implement it in the first place.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They really should n't need to switch away from the euro - mostly because they did n't implement it in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They really shouldn't need to switch away from the euro - mostly because they didn't implement it in the first place.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120769</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28126403</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>SwordsmanLuke</author>
	<datestamp>1243536420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was thinking recently about the state of the nations in the EU.  It seems to me that they are currently in a situation not dissimilar to that of the pre-Civil War United States.  You have a bunch of mostly independent nation-states who have ceded some authority to a central government, with an eye toward simplifying trade/travel.  The US Civil War was the result of such a central government attempting to exert forcible control over some of the states.  Before the war, the states were the ultimate authority within their boundaries, but ceded some authority to the federal government.  After the war, the federal government was the ultimate authority, but ceded some authority to the state governments.  Today, the member nations of the EU cede some authority to it in order to simplify trade/travel, but maintain they have ultimate authority within their boundaries.  Yet lately, the EU has been flexing its muscles.  A conflict seems likely.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was thinking recently about the state of the nations in the EU .
It seems to me that they are currently in a situation not dissimilar to that of the pre-Civil War United States .
You have a bunch of mostly independent nation-states who have ceded some authority to a central government , with an eye toward simplifying trade/travel .
The US Civil War was the result of such a central government attempting to exert forcible control over some of the states .
Before the war , the states were the ultimate authority within their boundaries , but ceded some authority to the federal government .
After the war , the federal government was the ultimate authority , but ceded some authority to the state governments .
Today , the member nations of the EU cede some authority to it in order to simplify trade/travel , but maintain they have ultimate authority within their boundaries .
Yet lately , the EU has been flexing its muscles .
A conflict seems likely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was thinking recently about the state of the nations in the EU.
It seems to me that they are currently in a situation not dissimilar to that of the pre-Civil War United States.
You have a bunch of mostly independent nation-states who have ceded some authority to a central government, with an eye toward simplifying trade/travel.
The US Civil War was the result of such a central government attempting to exert forcible control over some of the states.
Before the war, the states were the ultimate authority within their boundaries, but ceded some authority to the federal government.
After the war, the federal government was the ultimate authority, but ceded some authority to the state governments.
Today, the member nations of the EU cede some authority to it in order to simplify trade/travel, but maintain they have ultimate authority within their boundaries.
Yet lately, the EU has been flexing its muscles.
A conflict seems likely.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120769</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28123487</id>
	<title>Re:What does "help the police" mean?</title>
	<author>JesseMcDonald</author>
	<datestamp>1243524600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Morals are what we feel is right or wrong to do unto each other in our society.</p><p>20\% or more of us feel its their right to download entertainment content.</p></div><p>The problem with putting these two statements together is that downloading "entertainment content" isn't actually <em>doing</em> anything to anyone. There need not be any sort of positive right to download content; the position which requires (and lacks) hard justification is the one which seeks to declare non-aggressive behavior illegal.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>We are not against the system, we are against the abuse.</p></div><p>This is a distinction without a difference. The system is such that it cannot help <em>but</em> be abused.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Morals are what we feel is right or wrong to do unto each other in our society.20 \ % or more of us feel its their right to download entertainment content.The problem with putting these two statements together is that downloading " entertainment content " is n't actually doing anything to anyone .
There need not be any sort of positive right to download content ; the position which requires ( and lacks ) hard justification is the one which seeks to declare non-aggressive behavior illegal.We are not against the system , we are against the abuse.This is a distinction without a difference .
The system is such that it can not help but be abused .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Morals are what we feel is right or wrong to do unto each other in our society.20\% or more of us feel its their right to download entertainment content.The problem with putting these two statements together is that downloading "entertainment content" isn't actually doing anything to anyone.
There need not be any sort of positive right to download content; the position which requires (and lacks) hard justification is the one which seeks to declare non-aggressive behavior illegal.We are not against the system, we are against the abuse.This is a distinction without a difference.
The system is such that it cannot help but be abused.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120719</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28122927</id>
	<title>Re:What does "help the police" mean?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243522080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... it is poor civic hygiene to install technologies that could someday facilitate a police state." -- Bruce Schneierin in Secrets and Lies: Digital Security in a Networked World, 2000</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ... it is poor civic hygiene to install technologies that could someday facilitate a police state .
" -- Bruce Schneierin in Secrets and Lies : Digital Security in a Networked World , 2000</tokentext>
<sentencetext>" ... it is poor civic hygiene to install technologies that could someday facilitate a police state.
" -- Bruce Schneierin in Secrets and Lies: Digital Security in a Networked World, 2000</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120719</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121213</id>
	<title>That is how it has to be</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243510140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the actions taken by the EU are ok. What does the "U" in EU stand for if every country has it's own arrangements? If you do not agree with such stuff you should not be in the EU, and that is excaclty the reason why some European countries are actually not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the actions taken by the EU are ok. What does the " U " in EU stand for if every country has it 's own arrangements ?
If you do not agree with such stuff you should not be in the EU , and that is excaclty the reason why some European countries are actually not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the actions taken by the EU are ok. What does the "U" in EU stand for if every country has it's own arrangements?
If you do not agree with such stuff you should not be in the EU, and that is excaclty the reason why some European countries are actually not.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121619</id>
	<title>This is why "international governments" are bad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243514760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The EU, which is largely beyond the influence of individuals but not lobbies to influence, is passing laws that trump the laws of nations, and even their constitutions.</p><p>This is why we must NEVER allow the United States to end up in such a thing, which a lot of the internationalist statist types would like to see.</p><p>We must remain vigilant that we don't wake up one day and find that by treaty, the US Constitution and it's Bill of Rights can be overridden by a foreign bureaucracy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The EU , which is largely beyond the influence of individuals but not lobbies to influence , is passing laws that trump the laws of nations , and even their constitutions.This is why we must NEVER allow the United States to end up in such a thing , which a lot of the internationalist statist types would like to see.We must remain vigilant that we do n't wake up one day and find that by treaty , the US Constitution and it 's Bill of Rights can be overridden by a foreign bureaucracy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The EU, which is largely beyond the influence of individuals but not lobbies to influence, is passing laws that trump the laws of nations, and even their constitutions.This is why we must NEVER allow the United States to end up in such a thing, which a lot of the internationalist statist types would like to see.We must remain vigilant that we don't wake up one day and find that by treaty, the US Constitution and it's Bill of Rights can be overridden by a foreign bureaucracy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121103</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243509060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It just wouldn't be Slashdot without the paranoid wingnuts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It just would n't be Slashdot without the paranoid wingnuts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It just wouldn't be Slashdot without the paranoid wingnuts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120437</id>
	<title>First time?</title>
	<author>olddotter</author>
	<datestamp>1243502640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is this the first time the EU has sued a member state for not passing a law?  If so this will be an interesting case.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this the first time the EU has sued a member state for not passing a law ?
If so this will be an interesting case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this the first time the EU has sued a member state for not passing a law?
If so this will be an interesting case.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28130703</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243507320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I could go on forever. And the funny thing is. Nobody is in favor of these laws. So why are they getting passed. I thought these were democratic nations.</p></div><p>That's not true; a lot of politicians downright love these laws. You seem to have forgotten that the last swedish "minister of justice" (Bodstr&#195;m, part of the "red team") was the one to push this legislation through in the EU. And the new gal (from the "blue team") are very eager to get a whole new bunch of similiar laws into legislation, just as long as it aint the laws from the red team.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I could go on forever .
And the funny thing is .
Nobody is in favor of these laws .
So why are they getting passed .
I thought these were democratic nations.That 's not true ; a lot of politicians downright love these laws .
You seem to have forgotten that the last swedish " minister of justice " ( Bodstr   m , part of the " red team " ) was the one to push this legislation through in the EU .
And the new gal ( from the " blue team " ) are very eager to get a whole new bunch of similiar laws into legislation , just as long as it aint the laws from the red team .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I could go on forever.
And the funny thing is.
Nobody is in favor of these laws.
So why are they getting passed.
I thought these were democratic nations.That's not true; a lot of politicians downright love these laws.
You seem to have forgotten that the last swedish "minister of justice" (BodstrÃm, part of the "red team") was the one to push this legislation through in the EU.
And the new gal (from the "blue team") are very eager to get a whole new bunch of similiar laws into legislation, just as long as it aint the laws from the red team.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120585</id>
	<title>Re:First time?</title>
	<author>rbrausse</author>
	<datestamp>1243504080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>no, this is normal and happens often. I don't seeked for examples but one can read every time about EU commission actions againt member states for breaching/not implementing EU directives.</p><p>a famous one was a few years ago against Greece and Italy (not 100\% sure, just google it if you're interested<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P) because of the state debt (Maastricht Treaty was imo the legal base for this sueing)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>no , this is normal and happens often .
I do n't seeked for examples but one can read every time about EU commission actions againt member states for breaching/not implementing EU directives.a famous one was a few years ago against Greece and Italy ( not 100 \ % sure , just google it if you 're interested : P ) because of the state debt ( Maastricht Treaty was imo the legal base for this sueing )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no, this is normal and happens often.
I don't seeked for examples but one can read every time about EU commission actions againt member states for breaching/not implementing EU directives.a famous one was a few years ago against Greece and Italy (not 100\% sure, just google it if you're interested :P) because of the state debt (Maastricht Treaty was imo the legal base for this sueing)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120437</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28123593</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Alinabi</author>
	<datestamp>1243525080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>yes they're appointed -indirectly- by an elected body, I know. Still it's not the same as a real democracy.</p></div><p>I cannot think of any country in this world we inhabit where the minister of foreign affairs is elected by direct vote. Not even Switzerland.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>yes they 're appointed -indirectly- by an elected body , I know .
Still it 's not the same as a real democracy.I can not think of any country in this world we inhabit where the minister of foreign affairs is elected by direct vote .
Not even Switzerland .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yes they're appointed -indirectly- by an elected body, I know.
Still it's not the same as a real democracy.I cannot think of any country in this world we inhabit where the minister of foreign affairs is elected by direct vote.
Not even Switzerland.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120769</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120921</id>
	<title>Re:Haha</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243507320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even more funny is that it was the Swedish minster of justice, Thomas Bodstr&#195;m, in the previous goverment who was one of the chief instigators and proponents for this in the EU...</p><p>The same man who then more or less ordered the Policeraid on the Pirte Bay. And yes, it is illegal for a member of the goverment to give direct orders to govermental agencies on how they should do their job.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even more funny is that it was the Swedish minster of justice , Thomas Bodstr   m , in the previous goverment who was one of the chief instigators and proponents for this in the EU...The same man who then more or less ordered the Policeraid on the Pirte Bay .
And yes , it is illegal for a member of the goverment to give direct orders to govermental agencies on how they should do their job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even more funny is that it was the Swedish minster of justice, Thomas BodstrÃm, in the previous goverment who was one of the chief instigators and proponents for this in the EU...The same man who then more or less ordered the Policeraid on the Pirte Bay.
And yes, it is illegal for a member of the goverment to give direct orders to govermental agencies on how they should do their job.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120449</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28122119</id>
	<title>Re:What does "help the police" mean?</title>
	<author>UnderCoverPenguin</author>
	<datestamp>1243518000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Is something wrong when 100\% of the people do it?</p></div><p>Yes. "Everyone else is doing it" does not make a wrong, right.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is something wrong when 100 \ % of the people do it ? Yes .
" Everyone else is doing it " does not make a wrong , right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is something wrong when 100\% of the people do it?Yes.
"Everyone else is doing it" does not make a wrong, right.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120719</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120743</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243505520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unless we start missing some of our friends and some of us get problems feeding our families because our views do not fit into accepted political/economical/security dogma nothing will happen and that is good so.
<p>I am afraid however this time around (if it really comes to that) it may be much more difficult to fight for freedoms than it used to be - modern technology makes it easy not only to organize protests but also to suppress them efficiently. The main problem with the new measures/technology is  that hardly anybody understands consequences and issues became so complex that this complexity becomes another bump on the road to freedom. This complexity issue becomes especially visible on pan EU level where laws get written nobody understand but fortunately for authors nobody cares - at the end however these laws are translated into national law. I wonder only why our overlords make it so difficult for  themselves - after all nobody seems to care anyway - Brussels is so far away...</p><p>
I must say I do not miss the old regime of my ol' country but the atmosphere of civic activity and interest in common good is something that I have never seen since fall of communism in eastern part of our continent. Maybe it is a sign of progress or maybe it is a sign of our dumbness and naivety.  I hope for  the former but I fear the later is true.
</p><p>This may change if the financial crisis starts really to bite on the continent too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless we start missing some of our friends and some of us get problems feeding our families because our views do not fit into accepted political/economical/security dogma nothing will happen and that is good so .
I am afraid however this time around ( if it really comes to that ) it may be much more difficult to fight for freedoms than it used to be - modern technology makes it easy not only to organize protests but also to suppress them efficiently .
The main problem with the new measures/technology is that hardly anybody understands consequences and issues became so complex that this complexity becomes another bump on the road to freedom .
This complexity issue becomes especially visible on pan EU level where laws get written nobody understand but fortunately for authors nobody cares - at the end however these laws are translated into national law .
I wonder only why our overlords make it so difficult for themselves - after all nobody seems to care anyway - Brussels is so far away.. . I must say I do not miss the old regime of my ol ' country but the atmosphere of civic activity and interest in common good is something that I have never seen since fall of communism in eastern part of our continent .
Maybe it is a sign of progress or maybe it is a sign of our dumbness and naivety .
I hope for the former but I fear the later is true .
This may change if the financial crisis starts really to bite on the continent too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless we start missing some of our friends and some of us get problems feeding our families because our views do not fit into accepted political/economical/security dogma nothing will happen and that is good so.
I am afraid however this time around (if it really comes to that) it may be much more difficult to fight for freedoms than it used to be - modern technology makes it easy not only to organize protests but also to suppress them efficiently.
The main problem with the new measures/technology is  that hardly anybody understands consequences and issues became so complex that this complexity becomes another bump on the road to freedom.
This complexity issue becomes especially visible on pan EU level where laws get written nobody understand but fortunately for authors nobody cares - at the end however these laws are translated into national law.
I wonder only why our overlords make it so difficult for  themselves - after all nobody seems to care anyway - Brussels is so far away...
I must say I do not miss the old regime of my ol' country but the atmosphere of civic activity and interest in common good is something that I have never seen since fall of communism in eastern part of our continent.
Maybe it is a sign of progress or maybe it is a sign of our dumbness and naivety.
I hope for  the former but I fear the later is true.
This may change if the financial crisis starts really to bite on the continent too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120451</id>
	<title>What does "help the police" mean?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243502700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In an ideal world, we wouldn't need police. People would be nice to each other and crime wouldn't happen.</p><p>But we don't live in an ideal world. We live in a world with walls and those walls need to be guarded by men with guns. Who's going to do it? They have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You have the luxury of not knowing what they know. Their existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don't want to know the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at Piratpartiet you want them on that wall, you need them on that wall. They use words like honor, code, loyalty. They use them as the backbone of a life trying to defend something. You use them as a punchline.</p><p>So enjoy your freedom to cry about the police, but realize that these men are the thin blue line between freedom and anarchy. Freedom entails risk. The law and police mitigate that risk. Hobble them at your own risk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In an ideal world , we would n't need police .
People would be nice to each other and crime would n't happen.But we do n't live in an ideal world .
We live in a world with walls and those walls need to be guarded by men with guns .
Who 's going to do it ?
They have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom .
You have the luxury of not knowing what they know .
Their existence , while grotesque and incomprehensible to you , saves lives .
You do n't want to know the truth because deep down in places you do n't talk about at Piratpartiet you want them on that wall , you need them on that wall .
They use words like honor , code , loyalty .
They use them as the backbone of a life trying to defend something .
You use them as a punchline.So enjoy your freedom to cry about the police , but realize that these men are the thin blue line between freedom and anarchy .
Freedom entails risk .
The law and police mitigate that risk .
Hobble them at your own risk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In an ideal world, we wouldn't need police.
People would be nice to each other and crime wouldn't happen.But we don't live in an ideal world.
We live in a world with walls and those walls need to be guarded by men with guns.
Who's going to do it?
They have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom.
You have the luxury of not knowing what they know.
Their existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives.
You don't want to know the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at Piratpartiet you want them on that wall, you need them on that wall.
They use words like honor, code, loyalty.
They use them as the backbone of a life trying to defend something.
You use them as a punchline.So enjoy your freedom to cry about the police, but realize that these men are the thin blue line between freedom and anarchy.
Freedom entails risk.
The law and police mitigate that risk.
Hobble them at your own risk.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28127069</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>blitzkrieg3</author>
	<datestamp>1243538520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Since the EU is very "democratic" (meaning the -mostly appointed- ministers of foreign affairs of the EU countries make the real decisions*), Sweden has a choice : pass the law, or leave the EU (meaning switching away from the euro, no more free trade,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...)</p></div><p>Would be tough for them to stop using the euro since Sweden uses the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish\_krona" title="wikipedia.org">Krona</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since the EU is very " democratic " ( meaning the -mostly appointed- ministers of foreign affairs of the EU countries make the real decisions * ) , Sweden has a choice : pass the law , or leave the EU ( meaning switching away from the euro , no more free trade , ... ) Would be tough for them to stop using the euro since Sweden uses the Krona [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since the EU is very "democratic" (meaning the -mostly appointed- ministers of foreign affairs of the EU countries make the real decisions*), Sweden has a choice : pass the law, or leave the EU (meaning switching away from the euro, no more free trade, ...)Would be tough for them to stop using the euro since Sweden uses the Krona [wikipedia.org].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120769</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28123503</id>
	<title>Re:What does "help the police" mean?</title>
	<author>Panseh</author>
	<datestamp>1243524660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>20\% or more of us feel its their right to download entertainment content. At what point will moral conform to public opinion? Is something wrong when 100\% of the people do it? Is it wrong when 50\% do it? 49\%? When?</p></div><p>With that logic, if 99\% of the population supported laws that discriminate based on race, it would be OK. What about if 20\% or more of us felt it was OK to kill another person?</p><p>You cannot expect a majority infringing on a minority's liberty to decide it is wrong. This also does not mean the minority has free reign to do anything it pleases.</p><p>Having said that, I agree that intellectual property laws are too strong, and perhaps should not even exist. However, abolishing particular regulations only happens in a libertarian's wet dream. Therefore, a compromise must be made that weighs the economic impact of copyright, patents, and other IP laws with the natural right to share information.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>20 \ % or more of us feel its their right to download entertainment content .
At what point will moral conform to public opinion ?
Is something wrong when 100 \ % of the people do it ?
Is it wrong when 50 \ % do it ?
49 \ % ? When ? With that logic , if 99 \ % of the population supported laws that discriminate based on race , it would be OK. What about if 20 \ % or more of us felt it was OK to kill another person ? You can not expect a majority infringing on a minority 's liberty to decide it is wrong .
This also does not mean the minority has free reign to do anything it pleases.Having said that , I agree that intellectual property laws are too strong , and perhaps should not even exist .
However , abolishing particular regulations only happens in a libertarian 's wet dream .
Therefore , a compromise must be made that weighs the economic impact of copyright , patents , and other IP laws with the natural right to share information .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>20\% or more of us feel its their right to download entertainment content.
At what point will moral conform to public opinion?
Is something wrong when 100\% of the people do it?
Is it wrong when 50\% do it?
49\%? When?With that logic, if 99\% of the population supported laws that discriminate based on race, it would be OK. What about if 20\% or more of us felt it was OK to kill another person?You cannot expect a majority infringing on a minority's liberty to decide it is wrong.
This also does not mean the minority has free reign to do anything it pleases.Having said that, I agree that intellectual property laws are too strong, and perhaps should not even exist.
However, abolishing particular regulations only happens in a libertarian's wet dream.
Therefore, a compromise must be made that weighs the economic impact of copyright, patents, and other IP laws with the natural right to share information.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120719</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121369</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243511940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perfect example of why the US, Canada and Mexico citizens need to rise up against the NAU.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perfect example of why the US , Canada and Mexico citizens need to rise up against the NAU .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perfect example of why the US, Canada and Mexico citizens need to rise up against the NAU.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120523</id>
	<title>sue a country?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243503360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>isn't sweden a soviergn country which can make it's own laws? i guess they would have made agreements when joining the EU and possibly face being kicked out if they don't comply, short of that whats the EU going to do besides cry? you can't invade sweden, they are just as nuts as the swiss.</htmltext>
<tokenext>is n't sweden a soviergn country which can make it 's own laws ?
i guess they would have made agreements when joining the EU and possibly face being kicked out if they do n't comply , short of that whats the EU going to do besides cry ?
you ca n't invade sweden , they are just as nuts as the swiss .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>isn't sweden a soviergn country which can make it's own laws?
i guess they would have made agreements when joining the EU and possibly face being kicked out if they don't comply, short of that whats the EU going to do besides cry?
you can't invade sweden, they are just as nuts as the swiss.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28129649</id>
	<title>Re:What does "help the police" mean?</title>
	<author>crhylove</author>
	<datestamp>1243502940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I will say we don't need law enforcement.  If we truly had the right to bear arms, as described in the US constitution, there would be MUCH less crime.  At least serious crime.  The statistics on this have been proven in both small and large communities.</p><p>I am CERTAINLY against the system.  I'm against the corporate monopolies that run all our governments, media, and elections.  I'm also against the law enforcement and military that support this conglomerate junta.  I'm for civil liberty and self determination, both at the state and personal level.</p><p>Where I live, in southern California, law enforcement is little more than a tax-subsidized street gang.  Thugs wearing a uniform peddling narcotics, and doing their best to harass and molest the common individual for revenue and power.  I think if the average American was strapped (as they should be according to the second amendment), at least a substantial amount of the corruption and criminality would be cut down within our "law enforcement" agencies.</p><p>I believe Ez E said it best, "FUCK THE POLICE!"</p><p>That may not be the most eloquent of dialogs, but in our current corporate media fascism, I could not agree more heartedly and vehemently.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I will say we do n't need law enforcement .
If we truly had the right to bear arms , as described in the US constitution , there would be MUCH less crime .
At least serious crime .
The statistics on this have been proven in both small and large communities.I am CERTAINLY against the system .
I 'm against the corporate monopolies that run all our governments , media , and elections .
I 'm also against the law enforcement and military that support this conglomerate junta .
I 'm for civil liberty and self determination , both at the state and personal level.Where I live , in southern California , law enforcement is little more than a tax-subsidized street gang .
Thugs wearing a uniform peddling narcotics , and doing their best to harass and molest the common individual for revenue and power .
I think if the average American was strapped ( as they should be according to the second amendment ) , at least a substantial amount of the corruption and criminality would be cut down within our " law enforcement " agencies.I believe Ez E said it best , " FUCK THE POLICE !
" That may not be the most eloquent of dialogs , but in our current corporate media fascism , I could not agree more heartedly and vehemently .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I will say we don't need law enforcement.
If we truly had the right to bear arms, as described in the US constitution, there would be MUCH less crime.
At least serious crime.
The statistics on this have been proven in both small and large communities.I am CERTAINLY against the system.
I'm against the corporate monopolies that run all our governments, media, and elections.
I'm also against the law enforcement and military that support this conglomerate junta.
I'm for civil liberty and self determination, both at the state and personal level.Where I live, in southern California, law enforcement is little more than a tax-subsidized street gang.
Thugs wearing a uniform peddling narcotics, and doing their best to harass and molest the common individual for revenue and power.
I think if the average American was strapped (as they should be according to the second amendment), at least a substantial amount of the corruption and criminality would be cut down within our "law enforcement" agencies.I believe Ez E said it best, "FUCK THE POLICE!
"That may not be the most eloquent of dialogs, but in our current corporate media fascism, I could not agree more heartedly and vehemently.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120719</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121901</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>mpcooke3</author>
	<datestamp>1243516680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>Sues Sweden? And what if they don't obey?</p></div><p>That's a really good question. I'm guessing there's something for this in those 10000+ pages of international treaties</p> </div><p>If it's similar to other cases I've read about I believe Sweden can ignore the ruling almost indefinitely, they are a sovereign country and their supreme court has ultimate jurisdiction and decisions can not be overruled by an EU court.</p><p>If the court rules against Sweden it will probably fine them. If they still don't comply with the ruling they will probably continue to fine them until they come into line with their obligations. I don't know how large the fines can get, but I think it's normal for the offending country to change their law to bring it in line with their EU obligations fairly quickly after they lose the EU case. It's worth noting however that it's rare for changes in a legal system to be enacted retrospectively in a member state even if it was shown that they were in breach of their EU obligations.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sues Sweden ?
And what if they do n't obey ? That 's a really good question .
I 'm guessing there 's something for this in those 10000 + pages of international treaties If it 's similar to other cases I 've read about I believe Sweden can ignore the ruling almost indefinitely , they are a sovereign country and their supreme court has ultimate jurisdiction and decisions can not be overruled by an EU court.If the court rules against Sweden it will probably fine them .
If they still do n't comply with the ruling they will probably continue to fine them until they come into line with their obligations .
I do n't know how large the fines can get , but I think it 's normal for the offending country to change their law to bring it in line with their EU obligations fairly quickly after they lose the EU case .
It 's worth noting however that it 's rare for changes in a legal system to be enacted retrospectively in a member state even if it was shown that they were in breach of their EU obligations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sues Sweden?
And what if they don't obey?That's a really good question.
I'm guessing there's something for this in those 10000+ pages of international treaties If it's similar to other cases I've read about I believe Sweden can ignore the ruling almost indefinitely, they are a sovereign country and their supreme court has ultimate jurisdiction and decisions can not be overruled by an EU court.If the court rules against Sweden it will probably fine them.
If they still don't comply with the ruling they will probably continue to fine them until they come into line with their obligations.
I don't know how large the fines can get, but I think it's normal for the offending country to change their law to bring it in line with their EU obligations fairly quickly after they lose the EU case.
It's worth noting however that it's rare for changes in a legal system to be enacted retrospectively in a member state even if it was shown that they were in breach of their EU obligations.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121171</id>
	<title>various options</title>
	<author>Weezul</author>
	<datestamp>1243509780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can the ISPs protest this during the trial?  I suspect there are numerous thugs in the Swedish parliament may want to pass this bill anyway.  So maybe the ISPs can fight this one for Sweden?</p><p>Can Sweden implement a toothless version of this bill?  A single exception for protecting say users engaged in civil disobedience would nullify the directive.  A similar line saying the ISP may charge extortionate prices for their logs might effectively nullify it.</p><p>If Sweden implements the directive, ISP still have technical recourses :</p><p>1) Build two sql tables (IP,IP\_rid) and (user\_id,user\_rid) which associate the ID address and user with a random identifier number (rid).  All long term logging is preformed using only IP\_rid and user\_rid.  We change each IP's IP\_rid and each user's user\_rid a couple times per hour/day/etc.  After changing them, the old one is printed on a printer and erased from disk.  So the information is available, but only by humans doing a manual table join over thousands of rows.  You might throw some OCR prevention tricks into the printer too.  A problem here is you can selectively release your logs.</p><p>2) Just encrypt the logs using pgp but rotate the key every hour and destroy the old private keys.  So anyone accessing the logs must first crack one pgp key per hour of logs viewed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can the ISPs protest this during the trial ?
I suspect there are numerous thugs in the Swedish parliament may want to pass this bill anyway .
So maybe the ISPs can fight this one for Sweden ? Can Sweden implement a toothless version of this bill ?
A single exception for protecting say users engaged in civil disobedience would nullify the directive .
A similar line saying the ISP may charge extortionate prices for their logs might effectively nullify it.If Sweden implements the directive , ISP still have technical recourses : 1 ) Build two sql tables ( IP,IP \ _rid ) and ( user \ _id,user \ _rid ) which associate the ID address and user with a random identifier number ( rid ) .
All long term logging is preformed using only IP \ _rid and user \ _rid .
We change each IP 's IP \ _rid and each user 's user \ _rid a couple times per hour/day/etc .
After changing them , the old one is printed on a printer and erased from disk .
So the information is available , but only by humans doing a manual table join over thousands of rows .
You might throw some OCR prevention tricks into the printer too .
A problem here is you can selectively release your logs.2 ) Just encrypt the logs using pgp but rotate the key every hour and destroy the old private keys .
So anyone accessing the logs must first crack one pgp key per hour of logs viewed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can the ISPs protest this during the trial?
I suspect there are numerous thugs in the Swedish parliament may want to pass this bill anyway.
So maybe the ISPs can fight this one for Sweden?Can Sweden implement a toothless version of this bill?
A single exception for protecting say users engaged in civil disobedience would nullify the directive.
A similar line saying the ISP may charge extortionate prices for their logs might effectively nullify it.If Sweden implements the directive, ISP still have technical recourses :1) Build two sql tables (IP,IP\_rid) and (user\_id,user\_rid) which associate the ID address and user with a random identifier number (rid).
All long term logging is preformed using only IP\_rid and user\_rid.
We change each IP's IP\_rid and each user's user\_rid a couple times per hour/day/etc.
After changing them, the old one is printed on a printer and erased from disk.
So the information is available, but only by humans doing a manual table join over thousands of rows.
You might throw some OCR prevention tricks into the printer too.
A problem here is you can selectively release your logs.2) Just encrypt the logs using pgp but rotate the key every hour and destroy the old private keys.
So anyone accessing the logs must first crack one pgp key per hour of logs viewed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120435</id>
	<title>Why sue now?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243502580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The data retention directive is to be implemented in law on January 1, 2010.<br>
It was supposed to be implemented on March 1, 2009 but was postponed.<br>
<br>
So why sue now when it's coming anyway?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The data retention directive is to be implemented in law on January 1 , 2010 .
It was supposed to be implemented on March 1 , 2009 but was postponed .
So why sue now when it 's coming anyway ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The data retention directive is to be implemented in law on January 1, 2010.
It was supposed to be implemented on March 1, 2009 but was postponed.
So why sue now when it's coming anyway?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120607</id>
	<title>Re:I never understood these policies...</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1243504260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nope, governments are just here to create solutions. Not to check whether they are possible.</p><p>There's this old parable from good ol' soviet times. A mouse is being chased by a cat and runs up to the wise owl that everyone considered the wisest and most informed animals of the woods (let's ignore for a moment that owls eat mice, ok?). So the mouse desperately pleaded "Wise owl, the cat is chasing me and I have to escape, please tell me what to do!" The owl pondered long and hard and told the mouse "Spread your wings and fly away".</p><p>"But owl, I have no wings!" the mouse complained.<br>"Sorry", said the owl, "I can only offer you general solutions. And the solution works for me."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nope , governments are just here to create solutions .
Not to check whether they are possible.There 's this old parable from good ol ' soviet times .
A mouse is being chased by a cat and runs up to the wise owl that everyone considered the wisest and most informed animals of the woods ( let 's ignore for a moment that owls eat mice , ok ? ) .
So the mouse desperately pleaded " Wise owl , the cat is chasing me and I have to escape , please tell me what to do !
" The owl pondered long and hard and told the mouse " Spread your wings and fly away " .
" But owl , I have no wings !
" the mouse complained .
" Sorry " , said the owl , " I can only offer you general solutions .
And the solution works for me .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nope, governments are just here to create solutions.
Not to check whether they are possible.There's this old parable from good ol' soviet times.
A mouse is being chased by a cat and runs up to the wise owl that everyone considered the wisest and most informed animals of the woods (let's ignore for a moment that owls eat mice, ok?).
So the mouse desperately pleaded "Wise owl, the cat is chasing me and I have to escape, please tell me what to do!
" The owl pondered long and hard and told the mouse "Spread your wings and fly away".
"But owl, I have no wings!
" the mouse complained.
"Sorry", said the owl, "I can only offer you general solutions.
And the solution works for me.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120419</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121311</id>
	<title>Re:And Sweden was the one that proposed the law</title>
	<author>nosound</author>
	<datestamp>1243511160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, that's true and people are well aware of that. It was the former minister of justice, Bodstr&#246;m, who pushed for it. In Sweden we no longer talk about 1984, but rather the "Bodstr&#246;m society" ever since an influential blogger coined this expression.</p><p>That's why lots of people find that they can neither vote for the parties that supported the former government nor the current government parties, and instead give their votes to the Pirate Party.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , that 's true and people are well aware of that .
It was the former minister of justice , Bodstr   m , who pushed for it .
In Sweden we no longer talk about 1984 , but rather the " Bodstr   m society " ever since an influential blogger coined this expression.That 's why lots of people find that they can neither vote for the parties that supported the former government nor the current government parties , and instead give their votes to the Pirate Party .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, that's true and people are well aware of that.
It was the former minister of justice, Bodström, who pushed for it.
In Sweden we no longer talk about 1984, but rather the "Bodström society" ever since an influential blogger coined this expression.That's why lots of people find that they can neither vote for the parties that supported the former government nor the current government parties, and instead give their votes to the Pirate Party.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120547</id>
	<title>Normal procedure</title>
	<author>pinky99</author>
	<datestamp>1243503720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>As an European citizen I just want to point out to all non-EU friends of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. that this is just a completely normal and standard procedure - it doesn't depend on which law or which country, but if a European law directive is not formed into national laws by the governments/parliaments, the EU automatically sues the non-conforming member states. Happens all the times, on all issues, punishment is normally the fine for each more day passing by.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As an European citizen I just want to point out to all non-EU friends of / .
that this is just a completely normal and standard procedure - it does n't depend on which law or which country , but if a European law directive is not formed into national laws by the governments/parliaments , the EU automatically sues the non-conforming member states .
Happens all the times , on all issues , punishment is normally the fine for each more day passing by .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As an European citizen I just want to point out to all non-EU friends of /.
that this is just a completely normal and standard procedure - it doesn't depend on which law or which country, but if a European law directive is not formed into national laws by the governments/parliaments, the EU automatically sues the non-conforming member states.
Happens all the times, on all issues, punishment is normally the fine for each more day passing by.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28126025</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Reziac</author>
	<datestamp>1243535160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And there you have in a nutshell why some of us Americans are very much against joining any uber-national group that can then dictate policy within our own country.</p><p>I say to Sweden -- have the balls to resist. You are Sweden first, Europe second, and no one is going to defend your right to govern your own country if you don't first do it yourself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And there you have in a nutshell why some of us Americans are very much against joining any uber-national group that can then dictate policy within our own country.I say to Sweden -- have the balls to resist .
You are Sweden first , Europe second , and no one is going to defend your right to govern your own country if you do n't first do it yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And there you have in a nutshell why some of us Americans are very much against joining any uber-national group that can then dictate policy within our own country.I say to Sweden -- have the balls to resist.
You are Sweden first, Europe second, and no one is going to defend your right to govern your own country if you don't first do it yourself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120769</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28123899</id>
	<title>Re:What does "help the police" mean?</title>
	<author>geminidomino</author>
	<datestamp>1243526640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're no Jack Nicholson, and you're full of shit.</p><p>When laws are for sale to the highest bidder, police are just hired thugs with the added bonus of government protection.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're no Jack Nicholson , and you 're full of shit.When laws are for sale to the highest bidder , police are just hired thugs with the added bonus of government protection .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're no Jack Nicholson, and you're full of shit.When laws are for sale to the highest bidder, police are just hired thugs with the added bonus of government protection.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120451</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28122467</id>
	<title>Re:What does "help the police" mean?</title>
	<author>Krneki</author>
	<datestamp>1243519860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's wrong when the pope says it's wrong.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/sarcasm off</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's wrong when the pope says it 's wrong .
/sarcasm off</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's wrong when the pope says it's wrong.
/sarcasm off</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120719</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121587</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>SwedishPenguin</author>
	<datestamp>1243514400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While the governing of the EU is bad, it can't quite turn into a dictatorship by convincing the commisioners. The commissioners don't make the decisions, they propose legislation. The Council (one minister per country) makes the decisions, although nowadays the parliament (the only elected body in the EU) has to agree. The parliament tends to be very weak-willed though, and when they say no, the council makes some minor modifications and sends it back to parliament, most of the time it goes through.</p><p>If the EU is going to have as much power as it currently does, we need to scrap the council and reform the commission. Of course I would prefer the EU having very little power and essentially being relegated to actual cross-border issues, not stuff like data retention, IPRED and the telecoms package.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While the governing of the EU is bad , it ca n't quite turn into a dictatorship by convincing the commisioners .
The commissioners do n't make the decisions , they propose legislation .
The Council ( one minister per country ) makes the decisions , although nowadays the parliament ( the only elected body in the EU ) has to agree .
The parliament tends to be very weak-willed though , and when they say no , the council makes some minor modifications and sends it back to parliament , most of the time it goes through.If the EU is going to have as much power as it currently does , we need to scrap the council and reform the commission .
Of course I would prefer the EU having very little power and essentially being relegated to actual cross-border issues , not stuff like data retention , IPRED and the telecoms package .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While the governing of the EU is bad, it can't quite turn into a dictatorship by convincing the commisioners.
The commissioners don't make the decisions, they propose legislation.
The Council (one minister per country) makes the decisions, although nowadays the parliament (the only elected body in the EU) has to agree.
The parliament tends to be very weak-willed though, and when they say no, the council makes some minor modifications and sends it back to parliament, most of the time it goes through.If the EU is going to have as much power as it currently does, we need to scrap the council and reform the commission.
Of course I would prefer the EU having very little power and essentially being relegated to actual cross-border issues, not stuff like data retention, IPRED and the telecoms package.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120769</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120359</id>
	<title>Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243501620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sues Sweden? And what if they don't obey?<br>
Data retention is just a Big Brother tool.<br>
You don't catch terrorists with this, nor pedophiles.<br>
And yes, I emailed Osama. Now what? They don't log the contents of an email.<br>
And if I gpg/pgp the email, what then?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sues Sweden ?
And what if they do n't obey ?
Data retention is just a Big Brother tool .
You do n't catch terrorists with this , nor pedophiles .
And yes , I emailed Osama .
Now what ?
They do n't log the contents of an email .
And if I gpg/pgp the email , what then ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sues Sweden?
And what if they don't obey?
Data retention is just a Big Brother tool.
You don't catch terrorists with this, nor pedophiles.
And yes, I emailed Osama.
Now what?
They don't log the contents of an email.
And if I gpg/pgp the email, what then?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120719</id>
	<title>Re:What does "help the police" mean?</title>
	<author>Kokuyo</author>
	<datestamp>1243505220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You seem to be under the impression that law enforcement agents are infallible and not susceptible to your average human's woes.</p><p>Of course we need law enforcement. Please point out to me who said we didn't. The problem lies in the mechanics that are supposed to make sure that nobody the police is supposed to 'catch' manages to actually become a member of the police.</p><p>In my opinion, management, be it of a corporation, a state or law enforcement, is more often than not corrupt. Such laws give these people more power over the people making law enforcement just another tool for the criminals to use.</p><p>THIS is the real danger of a police state. They are using our best weapon against us. THIS is what we must be sure to never allow.</p><p>The RIAA is a good example of how this whole thing is going wrong. Remember, all our laws are built upon a set of morals. We say it is wrong to kill. Therefore, manslaughter, murder and the like are covered by our laws. Yet quite a few 'modern' societies think its okay to have a death penalty.</p><p>In RIAA's case they argue that copying their products and making them available for free is theft. Many people might agree with that sentiment at first glance. Without wanting to get into semantics, the real problem her elies in the fact that an estimated 20\% or more of our nations' populations participate in breaking this law.</p><p>The question now is thus: Morals are what we feel is right or wrong to do unto each other in our society. 20\% or more of us feel its their right to download entertainment content. At what point will moral conform to public opinion? Is something wrong when 100\% of the people do it? Is it wrong when 50\% do it? 49\%? When?</p><p>The whole system is fucked up. The system is being abused. That's just a hard fact. We are not against the system, we are against the abuse.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You seem to be under the impression that law enforcement agents are infallible and not susceptible to your average human 's woes.Of course we need law enforcement .
Please point out to me who said we did n't .
The problem lies in the mechanics that are supposed to make sure that nobody the police is supposed to 'catch ' manages to actually become a member of the police.In my opinion , management , be it of a corporation , a state or law enforcement , is more often than not corrupt .
Such laws give these people more power over the people making law enforcement just another tool for the criminals to use.THIS is the real danger of a police state .
They are using our best weapon against us .
THIS is what we must be sure to never allow.The RIAA is a good example of how this whole thing is going wrong .
Remember , all our laws are built upon a set of morals .
We say it is wrong to kill .
Therefore , manslaughter , murder and the like are covered by our laws .
Yet quite a few 'modern ' societies think its okay to have a death penalty.In RIAA 's case they argue that copying their products and making them available for free is theft .
Many people might agree with that sentiment at first glance .
Without wanting to get into semantics , the real problem her elies in the fact that an estimated 20 \ % or more of our nations ' populations participate in breaking this law.The question now is thus : Morals are what we feel is right or wrong to do unto each other in our society .
20 \ % or more of us feel its their right to download entertainment content .
At what point will moral conform to public opinion ?
Is something wrong when 100 \ % of the people do it ?
Is it wrong when 50 \ % do it ?
49 \ % ? When ? The whole system is fucked up .
The system is being abused .
That 's just a hard fact .
We are not against the system , we are against the abuse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You seem to be under the impression that law enforcement agents are infallible and not susceptible to your average human's woes.Of course we need law enforcement.
Please point out to me who said we didn't.
The problem lies in the mechanics that are supposed to make sure that nobody the police is supposed to 'catch' manages to actually become a member of the police.In my opinion, management, be it of a corporation, a state or law enforcement, is more often than not corrupt.
Such laws give these people more power over the people making law enforcement just another tool for the criminals to use.THIS is the real danger of a police state.
They are using our best weapon against us.
THIS is what we must be sure to never allow.The RIAA is a good example of how this whole thing is going wrong.
Remember, all our laws are built upon a set of morals.
We say it is wrong to kill.
Therefore, manslaughter, murder and the like are covered by our laws.
Yet quite a few 'modern' societies think its okay to have a death penalty.In RIAA's case they argue that copying their products and making them available for free is theft.
Many people might agree with that sentiment at first glance.
Without wanting to get into semantics, the real problem her elies in the fact that an estimated 20\% or more of our nations' populations participate in breaking this law.The question now is thus: Morals are what we feel is right or wrong to do unto each other in our society.
20\% or more of us feel its their right to download entertainment content.
At what point will moral conform to public opinion?
Is something wrong when 100\% of the people do it?
Is it wrong when 50\% do it?
49\%? When?The whole system is fucked up.
The system is being abused.
That's just a hard fact.
We are not against the system, we are against the abuse.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120451</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120741</id>
	<title>Re:sue a country?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243505460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The swiss have so much jewish gold they can do anything they please. See <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incest" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">incest</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The swiss have so much jewish gold they can do anything they please .
See incest [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The swiss have so much jewish gold they can do anything they please.
See incest [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120523</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120769</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243505820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since the EU is very "democratic" (meaning the -mostly appointed- ministers of foreign affairs of the EU countries make the real decisions*), Sweden has a choice : pass the law, or leave the EU (meaning switching away from the euro, no more free trade,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...)</p><p>In the EU, you only have to convince 12 non-elected commisioners to create a dictatorship. Individual member countries have long lost control over both their own law and their territorial sovereignty. They cannot legally say no to the EU.</p><p>Many Europeans (imho rightly) fear what's going to happen with this body. It's already created a segregated society in the locations where it's located : Brussels, Strasbourg, Luxenburg and Frankfurt. There is zero contact between the fonctionnaires and the local population, which is logical in a way, since they're an unelected body.</p><p>* yes they're appointed -indirectly- by an elected body, I know. Still it's not the same as a real democracy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since the EU is very " democratic " ( meaning the -mostly appointed- ministers of foreign affairs of the EU countries make the real decisions * ) , Sweden has a choice : pass the law , or leave the EU ( meaning switching away from the euro , no more free trade , ... ) In the EU , you only have to convince 12 non-elected commisioners to create a dictatorship .
Individual member countries have long lost control over both their own law and their territorial sovereignty .
They can not legally say no to the EU.Many Europeans ( imho rightly ) fear what 's going to happen with this body .
It 's already created a segregated society in the locations where it 's located : Brussels , Strasbourg , Luxenburg and Frankfurt .
There is zero contact between the fonctionnaires and the local population , which is logical in a way , since they 're an unelected body .
* yes they 're appointed -indirectly- by an elected body , I know .
Still it 's not the same as a real democracy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since the EU is very "democratic" (meaning the -mostly appointed- ministers of foreign affairs of the EU countries make the real decisions*), Sweden has a choice : pass the law, or leave the EU (meaning switching away from the euro, no more free trade, ...)In the EU, you only have to convince 12 non-elected commisioners to create a dictatorship.
Individual member countries have long lost control over both their own law and their territorial sovereignty.
They cannot legally say no to the EU.Many Europeans (imho rightly) fear what's going to happen with this body.
It's already created a segregated society in the locations where it's located : Brussels, Strasbourg, Luxenburg and Frankfurt.
There is zero contact between the fonctionnaires and the local population, which is logical in a way, since they're an unelected body.
* yes they're appointed -indirectly- by an elected body, I know.
Still it's not the same as a real democracy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121553</id>
	<title>errr, you crazy?</title>
	<author>Tom</author>
	<datestamp>1243514100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>a law that demands ISPs and search engines hold onto data long enough to help the cops (but not long enough to cause privacy problems).</p></div><p>Whatever you're smoking, it deserves to be illegal, if it isn't already. "not long enough to cause privacy problems" - excuse me? Storing my <b>entire</b> browsing and search history for six months does not cause privacy problems?</p><p>Privacy is <b>not</b> a question of storage durations, never has and never will be. If you keep a record of me visiting, say, "www.alcoholicsanonymous.com" <b>at all</b>, then that's a privacy problem right there. Six months or six hours doesn't make any difference to the <b>fact</b> that there's a privacy problem, only to the <b>size</b> of the problem - with six months you'll probably see more "interesting" URLs than with, say, one month.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>a law that demands ISPs and search engines hold onto data long enough to help the cops ( but not long enough to cause privacy problems ) .Whatever you 're smoking , it deserves to be illegal , if it is n't already .
" not long enough to cause privacy problems " - excuse me ?
Storing my entire browsing and search history for six months does not cause privacy problems ? Privacy is not a question of storage durations , never has and never will be .
If you keep a record of me visiting , say , " www.alcoholicsanonymous.com " at all , then that 's a privacy problem right there .
Six months or six hours does n't make any difference to the fact that there 's a privacy problem , only to the size of the problem - with six months you 'll probably see more " interesting " URLs than with , say , one month .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a law that demands ISPs and search engines hold onto data long enough to help the cops (but not long enough to cause privacy problems).Whatever you're smoking, it deserves to be illegal, if it isn't already.
"not long enough to cause privacy problems" - excuse me?
Storing my entire browsing and search history for six months does not cause privacy problems?Privacy is not a question of storage durations, never has and never will be.
If you keep a record of me visiting, say, "www.alcoholicsanonymous.com" at all, then that's a privacy problem right there.
Six months or six hours doesn't make any difference to the fact that there's a privacy problem, only to the size of the problem - with six months you'll probably see more "interesting" URLs than with, say, one month.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120803</id>
	<title>mod dowN</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243506060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>do, or indeed what LUBE OR WE SELL 7he bottoms butt development. BSD do, or indeed what volume of NetBSD</htmltext>
<tokenext>do , or indeed what LUBE OR WE SELL 7he bottoms butt development .
BSD do , or indeed what volume of NetBSD</tokentext>
<sentencetext>do, or indeed what LUBE OR WE SELL 7he bottoms butt development.
BSD do, or indeed what volume of NetBSD</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120849</id>
	<title>Re:Haha</title>
	<author>ckret</author>
	<datestamp>1243506660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's even more funny when you take into consideration that Sweden was one of the nations proposing this directive.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's even more funny when you take into consideration that Sweden was one of the nations proposing this directive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's even more funny when you take into consideration that Sweden was one of the nations proposing this directive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120449</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120629</id>
	<title>Re:First time?</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1243504440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nope. Austria was on the chopping block <a href="http://futurezone.orf.at/stories/1602327/" title="futurezone.orf.at">for the same reason</a> [futurezone.orf.at] a month ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nope .
Austria was on the chopping block for the same reason [ futurezone.orf.at ] a month ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nope.
Austria was on the chopping block for the same reason [futurezone.orf.at] a month ago.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120437</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121601</id>
	<title>So much for National (or State) Sovereignty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243514580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This was a big area of debate before the EU formed: Just how much of autonomy and national identity must a country give up to be a member of the EU? What happens when an EU member (say, France, for instance), or a small coalition of countries, have a major influence on the EU Parliament and try to impose their values in conflict with the national traditional values? What happens if Turkey tries to impose it's values concerning drug use on the Netherlands? Why should France's or GB's values on privacy (or lack thereof) be imposed on Sweden?</p><p>In the United States of America, the individual States are supposed to be "sovereign" and all rights not specifically granted to the Federal Government are the province of the individual States. Over the years "creeping Federalism" has undermined the individuality, power and authority of the individual States. This has also been happening in in the EU. Sweden is technically a "Constitutional Monarchy". Did Swedes know that by joining the EU they gave away their Constitution?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This was a big area of debate before the EU formed : Just how much of autonomy and national identity must a country give up to be a member of the EU ?
What happens when an EU member ( say , France , for instance ) , or a small coalition of countries , have a major influence on the EU Parliament and try to impose their values in conflict with the national traditional values ?
What happens if Turkey tries to impose it 's values concerning drug use on the Netherlands ?
Why should France 's or GB 's values on privacy ( or lack thereof ) be imposed on Sweden ? In the United States of America , the individual States are supposed to be " sovereign " and all rights not specifically granted to the Federal Government are the province of the individual States .
Over the years " creeping Federalism " has undermined the individuality , power and authority of the individual States .
This has also been happening in in the EU .
Sweden is technically a " Constitutional Monarchy " .
Did Swedes know that by joining the EU they gave away their Constitution ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This was a big area of debate before the EU formed: Just how much of autonomy and national identity must a country give up to be a member of the EU?
What happens when an EU member (say, France, for instance), or a small coalition of countries, have a major influence on the EU Parliament and try to impose their values in conflict with the national traditional values?
What happens if Turkey tries to impose it's values concerning drug use on the Netherlands?
Why should France's or GB's values on privacy (or lack thereof) be imposed on Sweden?In the United States of America, the individual States are supposed to be "sovereign" and all rights not specifically granted to the Federal Government are the province of the individual States.
Over the years "creeping Federalism" has undermined the individuality, power and authority of the individual States.
This has also been happening in in the EU.
Sweden is technically a "Constitutional Monarchy".
Did Swedes know that by joining the EU they gave away their Constitution?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120839</id>
	<title>Re:sue a country?</title>
	<author>x2A</author>
	<datestamp>1243506600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Err, yeah, because that's what a 'union' is; a group of discrete and disparate entities all doing their own things with no overall direction or commonalities and without joining forces on issues...</p><p>(hint: the 'U' in 'EU' stands for 'Union')</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Err , yeah , because that 's what a 'union ' is ; a group of discrete and disparate entities all doing their own things with no overall direction or commonalities and without joining forces on issues... ( hint : the 'U ' in 'EU ' stands for 'Union ' )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Err, yeah, because that's what a 'union' is; a group of discrete and disparate entities all doing their own things with no overall direction or commonalities and without joining forces on issues...(hint: the 'U' in 'EU' stands for 'Union')</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120523</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120531</id>
	<title>I want Prozak to write an article on this</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243503540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In his customary wordy and circular style.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In his customary wordy and circular style .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In his customary wordy and circular style.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28124129</id>
	<title>Re:So much for National (or State) Sovereignty</title>
	<author>Teron</author>
	<datestamp>1243527660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Please note that the Swedish constitution is not anything like the American one, it's fairly easy to change the Swedish constitution and regular courts aren't allowed to determine if laws violate the constitution. As such, it was probably given away without anyone raising an eyebrow, since no one cared about our constitution in the first place.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Please note that the Swedish constitution is not anything like the American one , it 's fairly easy to change the Swedish constitution and regular courts are n't allowed to determine if laws violate the constitution .
As such , it was probably given away without anyone raising an eyebrow , since no one cared about our constitution in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please note that the Swedish constitution is not anything like the American one, it's fairly easy to change the Swedish constitution and regular courts aren't allowed to determine if laws violate the constitution.
As such, it was probably given away without anyone raising an eyebrow, since no one cared about our constitution in the first place.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121601</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120763</id>
	<title>Re:I never understood these policies...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243505760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well I'm going to put aside everything I know about how difficult voice recognition, esp without any pre-training of the software for your voice, apply that to all the different accents everyone has, and the difficulty even a human ear can have at understanding them all... and believe your claims... because that's the kind of stupidity I feel like exercising today.</p><p>Wow, can you really?!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well I 'm going to put aside everything I know about how difficult voice recognition , esp without any pre-training of the software for your voice , apply that to all the different accents everyone has , and the difficulty even a human ear can have at understanding them all... and believe your claims... because that 's the kind of stupidity I feel like exercising today.Wow , can you really ? ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well I'm going to put aside everything I know about how difficult voice recognition, esp without any pre-training of the software for your voice, apply that to all the different accents everyone has, and the difficulty even a human ear can have at understanding them all... and believe your claims... because that's the kind of stupidity I feel like exercising today.Wow, can you really?!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120497</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28122115</id>
	<title>Re:But the same EU won't sue France for...</title>
	<author>jez9999</author>
	<datestamp>1243518000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Its a pity it doesn't have any Rush Limbaughs there</i></p><p>Mmmm, I'm not completely sure most Swedes would be bothered about that fact.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its a pity it does n't have any Rush Limbaughs thereMmmm , I 'm not completely sure most Swedes would be bothered about that fact .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its a pity it doesn't have any Rush Limbaughs thereMmmm, I'm not completely sure most Swedes would be bothered about that fact.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120511</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121945</id>
	<title>Re:What does "help the police" mean?</title>
	<author>Kavorkian\_scarf</author>
	<datestamp>1243516920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Fuck freedom as a whole, our freedom has to come first. Oppress them before they can oppress us!
Also, how the fuck does a rant by Jack Nicholson(sp?) have to do with policy regarding freedom of the internet?
In an ideal world Police wouldn't abuse their power, and we could trust them absolutely. But this is far from an ideal world, and the police are just another form of school-yard monitor. They are ignorant of circumstance, and naive towards the actual goings on of their little slice of stomping ground.
People want to say that if you aren't doing anything wrong then you should have nothing to hide and therefore nothing to fear.
I say I have everything to hide from people that will scrutinize it looking for anything I might have done wrong, and I have everything to fear from a legal system that always seems open to interpretation and closed to circumstance.
And if you want to tell me that police do not abuse their power, you can talk to my brothers ex classmate who got shot and killed by police after getting into a scuffle for resisting arrest.
<a href="http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2009/03/18/cgy-carwash-police-shooting.html" title="www.cbc.ca" rel="nofollow">http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2009/03/18/cgy-carwash-police-shooting.html</a> [www.cbc.ca]
Yeah lets just fucking shoot the guy, it's easier that way. This fucking city is becoming more American by the week</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fuck freedom as a whole , our freedom has to come first .
Oppress them before they can oppress us !
Also , how the fuck does a rant by Jack Nicholson ( sp ?
) have to do with policy regarding freedom of the internet ?
In an ideal world Police would n't abuse their power , and we could trust them absolutely .
But this is far from an ideal world , and the police are just another form of school-yard monitor .
They are ignorant of circumstance , and naive towards the actual goings on of their little slice of stomping ground .
People want to say that if you are n't doing anything wrong then you should have nothing to hide and therefore nothing to fear .
I say I have everything to hide from people that will scrutinize it looking for anything I might have done wrong , and I have everything to fear from a legal system that always seems open to interpretation and closed to circumstance .
And if you want to tell me that police do not abuse their power , you can talk to my brothers ex classmate who got shot and killed by police after getting into a scuffle for resisting arrest .
http : //www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2009/03/18/cgy-carwash-police-shooting.html [ www.cbc.ca ] Yeah lets just fucking shoot the guy , it 's easier that way .
This fucking city is becoming more American by the week</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fuck freedom as a whole, our freedom has to come first.
Oppress them before they can oppress us!
Also, how the fuck does a rant by Jack Nicholson(sp?
) have to do with policy regarding freedom of the internet?
In an ideal world Police wouldn't abuse their power, and we could trust them absolutely.
But this is far from an ideal world, and the police are just another form of school-yard monitor.
They are ignorant of circumstance, and naive towards the actual goings on of their little slice of stomping ground.
People want to say that if you aren't doing anything wrong then you should have nothing to hide and therefore nothing to fear.
I say I have everything to hide from people that will scrutinize it looking for anything I might have done wrong, and I have everything to fear from a legal system that always seems open to interpretation and closed to circumstance.
And if you want to tell me that police do not abuse their power, you can talk to my brothers ex classmate who got shot and killed by police after getting into a scuffle for resisting arrest.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2009/03/18/cgy-carwash-police-shooting.html [www.cbc.ca]
Yeah lets just fucking shoot the guy, it's easier that way.
This fucking city is becoming more American by the week</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120451</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120797</id>
	<title>Re:What does "help the police" mean?</title>
	<author>cowbutt</author>
	<datestamp>1243506000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>In an ideal world, we wouldn't need police. People would be nice to each other and crime wouldn't happen.</i> </p><p>...and in those circumstances, we wouldn't need laws or governments to enforce them which is... <i>anarchy</i>.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In an ideal world , we would n't need police .
People would be nice to each other and crime would n't happen .
...and in those circumstances , we would n't need laws or governments to enforce them which is... anarchy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> In an ideal world, we wouldn't need police.
People would be nice to each other and crime wouldn't happen.
...and in those circumstances, we wouldn't need laws or governments to enforce them which is... anarchy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120451</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28122357</id>
	<title>the power behind EU</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243519200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I knew it... the hidden hand/hook behind EU is finally making its presence known.  Arrrrr!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I knew it... the hidden hand/hook behind EU is finally making its presence known .
Arrrrr !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I knew it... the hidden hand/hook behind EU is finally making its presence known.
Arrrrr!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28132975</id>
	<title>EU elections</title>
	<author>forgoil</author>
	<datestamp>1243518540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I voted for "piratpartiet" (The Pirate Party). Who did you vote for?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I voted for " piratpartiet " ( The Pirate Party ) .
Who did you vote for ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I voted for "piratpartiet" (The Pirate Party).
Who did you vote for?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28135881</id>
	<title>Re:Don't worry it'll be passed soon</title>
	<author>plasmacutter</author>
	<datestamp>1243587720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Note, other comments note this directive also directly forbids ISP's to hand over this data to anyone outside the law enforcement or military community.</p><p>In other words, it nullifies IPRED.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Note , other comments note this directive also directly forbids ISP 's to hand over this data to anyone outside the law enforcement or military community.In other words , it nullifies IPRED .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Note, other comments note this directive also directly forbids ISP's to hand over this data to anyone outside the law enforcement or military community.In other words, it nullifies IPRED.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121671</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120815</id>
	<title>Re:What does "help the police" mean?</title>
	<author>x2A</author>
	<datestamp>1243506240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"the thin blue line between <b>freedom</b> and <b>anarchy</b>"</i></p><p>Are you sure you meant to pick those two words?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" the thin blue line between freedom and anarchy " Are you sure you meant to pick those two words ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"the thin blue line between freedom and anarchy"Are you sure you meant to pick those two words?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120451</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121067</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243508640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Sweden loses, fines would be imposed.</p><p>What would be interesting is if Sweden would refuse on grounds that it is unconstitutional. Even if the ruling coalition wanted to,  two separate parliaments and a referendum has to approve a change to the constitution. I think that lagradet objected to the radio surveillance agency law (FRA-lagen) on those grounds.</p><p>Someone who has some questions to answer is Thomas Bodstrom of the previous Labour govt, who pushed for this quite aggressively and actually managed to get the ball rolling despite no popular support.</p><p>Anyway, I'm out of there, watching the debacle from the outside. Wait, I'm in the UK. Oh noes! I will have to move countries again!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Sweden loses , fines would be imposed.What would be interesting is if Sweden would refuse on grounds that it is unconstitutional .
Even if the ruling coalition wanted to , two separate parliaments and a referendum has to approve a change to the constitution .
I think that lagradet objected to the radio surveillance agency law ( FRA-lagen ) on those grounds.Someone who has some questions to answer is Thomas Bodstrom of the previous Labour govt , who pushed for this quite aggressively and actually managed to get the ball rolling despite no popular support.Anyway , I 'm out of there , watching the debacle from the outside .
Wait , I 'm in the UK .
Oh noes !
I will have to move countries again !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Sweden loses, fines would be imposed.What would be interesting is if Sweden would refuse on grounds that it is unconstitutional.
Even if the ruling coalition wanted to,  two separate parliaments and a referendum has to approve a change to the constitution.
I think that lagradet objected to the radio surveillance agency law (FRA-lagen) on those grounds.Someone who has some questions to answer is Thomas Bodstrom of the previous Labour govt, who pushed for this quite aggressively and actually managed to get the ball rolling despite no popular support.Anyway, I'm out of there, watching the debacle from the outside.
Wait, I'm in the UK.
Oh noes!
I will have to move countries again!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120553</id>
	<title>Re:But the same EU won't sue France for...</title>
	<author>master5o1</author>
	<datestamp>1243503720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Pirate Party!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pirate Party !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pirate Party!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120511</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121671</id>
	<title>Don't worry it'll be passed soon</title>
	<author>castrox</author>
	<datestamp>1243515360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IAAS (I Am A Swede)</p><p>This directive will soon be passed. The reason this has taken so long is because it's an initiative taken by the previous party in lower (Social Democrats) and the current part(y|ies) (AKA The Alliance, moderates) in power doesn't like the leftists and the head of the judicial branch has been wining over this directive ever since day one. Nonetheless she is obligated to enforce the directive and says so herself. Even though she proclaims herself to be a integrity watchdog she's just as bad as the leftists.</p><p>Battle lost on that front.</p><p>The Pirate Party will however make it to the EU parliament this year and we can hope for some real change on these integrity issues.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IAAS ( I Am A Swede ) This directive will soon be passed .
The reason this has taken so long is because it 's an initiative taken by the previous party in lower ( Social Democrats ) and the current part ( y | ies ) ( AKA The Alliance , moderates ) in power does n't like the leftists and the head of the judicial branch has been wining over this directive ever since day one .
Nonetheless she is obligated to enforce the directive and says so herself .
Even though she proclaims herself to be a integrity watchdog she 's just as bad as the leftists.Battle lost on that front.The Pirate Party will however make it to the EU parliament this year and we can hope for some real change on these integrity issues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IAAS (I Am A Swede)This directive will soon be passed.
The reason this has taken so long is because it's an initiative taken by the previous party in lower (Social Democrats) and the current part(y|ies) (AKA The Alliance, moderates) in power doesn't like the leftists and the head of the judicial branch has been wining over this directive ever since day one.
Nonetheless she is obligated to enforce the directive and says so herself.
Even though she proclaims herself to be a integrity watchdog she's just as bad as the leftists.Battle lost on that front.The Pirate Party will however make it to the EU parliament this year and we can hope for some real change on these integrity issues.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120567</id>
	<title>And Sweden was the one that proposed the law</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243503900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The interesting thing is that Sweden was one of the 4 countries that proposed the law (together with Ireland, France and the UK). It really drove its adoption hard, even though the first drafts of the text proposed by these countries were completely unworkable.</p><p>It took almost two years before the final text was drafted. The current version is much more readable and understandable than the first version. In the end a couple of unlikely countries took the lead in drafting the text. Even though some of these countries weren't very positive on the idea of having a data retention law, the civil servants sat down to create something that was what their political masters wanted and was technically realizable in practice.</p><p>Things that were for instance excluded were the requirements to log on a per packet basis the source and destination or to identify for http which adresses were visited.</p><p>How do I know? I was there and took part in the negotiations in the EU Council Working Group from day one to day last.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The interesting thing is that Sweden was one of the 4 countries that proposed the law ( together with Ireland , France and the UK ) .
It really drove its adoption hard , even though the first drafts of the text proposed by these countries were completely unworkable.It took almost two years before the final text was drafted .
The current version is much more readable and understandable than the first version .
In the end a couple of unlikely countries took the lead in drafting the text .
Even though some of these countries were n't very positive on the idea of having a data retention law , the civil servants sat down to create something that was what their political masters wanted and was technically realizable in practice.Things that were for instance excluded were the requirements to log on a per packet basis the source and destination or to identify for http which adresses were visited.How do I know ?
I was there and took part in the negotiations in the EU Council Working Group from day one to day last .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The interesting thing is that Sweden was one of the 4 countries that proposed the law (together with Ireland, France and the UK).
It really drove its adoption hard, even though the first drafts of the text proposed by these countries were completely unworkable.It took almost two years before the final text was drafted.
The current version is much more readable and understandable than the first version.
In the end a couple of unlikely countries took the lead in drafting the text.
Even though some of these countries weren't very positive on the idea of having a data retention law, the civil servants sat down to create something that was what their political masters wanted and was technically realizable in practice.Things that were for instance excluded were the requirements to log on a per packet basis the source and destination or to identify for http which adresses were visited.How do I know?
I was there and took part in the negotiations in the EU Council Working Group from day one to day last.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28125027</id>
	<title>Thanks EU - one more reason for voting pirate!</title>
	<author>jools33</author>
	<datestamp>1243531320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>one more reason to vote pirate in Sweden in the upcoming EU elections.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>one more reason to vote pirate in Sweden in the upcoming EU elections .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>one more reason to vote pirate in Sweden in the upcoming EU elections.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121403</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>smallfries</author>
	<datestamp>1243512360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wouldn't Sweden have to start using the Euro before they could switch away from it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Would n't Sweden have to start using the Euro before they could switch away from it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wouldn't Sweden have to start using the Euro before they could switch away from it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120769</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28128213</id>
	<title>Re:First time?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243541760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No.  EU law 101: Regulations are directly effective in all member states.  Directives have a limited form of effect, but the overarching obligation is for the member state to implement the directive.  Member States get sued *all the time* for failing to implement directives, such as here.  Italy is notoriously bad for actually getting anything done.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
EU law 101 : Regulations are directly effective in all member states .
Directives have a limited form of effect , but the overarching obligation is for the member state to implement the directive .
Member States get sued * all the time * for failing to implement directives , such as here .
Italy is notoriously bad for actually getting anything done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
EU law 101: Regulations are directly effective in all member states.
Directives have a limited form of effect, but the overarching obligation is for the member state to implement the directive.
Member States get sued *all the time* for failing to implement directives, such as here.
Italy is notoriously bad for actually getting anything done.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120437</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120841</id>
	<title>Re:</title>
	<author>clint999</author>
	<datestamp>1243506600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>isn't sweden a soviergn country which can make it's own laws? i guess they would have made agreements when joining the EU and possibly face being kicked out if they don't comply, short of that whats the EU going to do besides cry? you can't invade sweden, they are just as nuts as the swiss.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is n't sweden a soviergn country which can make it 's own laws ?
i guess they would have made agreements when joining the EU and possibly face being kicked out if they do n't comply , short of that whats the EU going to do besides cry ?
you ca n't invade sweden , they are just as nuts as the swiss .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>isn't sweden a soviergn country which can make it's own laws?
i guess they would have made agreements when joining the EU and possibly face being kicked out if they don't comply, short of that whats the EU going to do besides cry?
you can't invade sweden, they are just as nuts as the swiss.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28122589</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>martin-boundary</author>
	<datestamp>1243520460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>  If Sweden loses, fines would be imposed.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Bah, Sweden has a central bank. They could just print money and pay the fine<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If Sweden loses , fines would be imposed .
Bah , Sweden has a central bank .
They could just print money and pay the fine : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>  If Sweden loses, fines would be imposed.
Bah, Sweden has a central bank.
They could just print money and pay the fine :)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121067</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Jurily</author>
	<datestamp>1243503240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sues Sweden? And what if they don't obey?</p></div><p>That's a really good question. I'm guessing there's something for this in those 10000+ pages of international treaties that form the EU.</p><p>What's interesting though, that this is the only law they react so harshly to. They usually warn a couple of times, prod gently, give deadlines, give more deadlines, and not take it to court without warning. Of course those are laws not directly related to their <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty\_of\_Lisbon" title="wikipedia.org">emerging police state</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sues Sweden ?
And what if they do n't obey ? That 's a really good question .
I 'm guessing there 's something for this in those 10000 + pages of international treaties that form the EU.What 's interesting though , that this is the only law they react so harshly to .
They usually warn a couple of times , prod gently , give deadlines , give more deadlines , and not take it to court without warning .
Of course those are laws not directly related to their emerging police state [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sues Sweden?
And what if they don't obey?That's a really good question.
I'm guessing there's something for this in those 10000+ pages of international treaties that form the EU.What's interesting though, that this is the only law they react so harshly to.
They usually warn a couple of times, prod gently, give deadlines, give more deadlines, and not take it to court without warning.
Of course those are laws not directly related to their emerging police state [wikipedia.org].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120359</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28126509</id>
	<title>Re:sue a country?</title>
	<author>Stevecrox</author>
	<datestamp>1243536780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you want to be a member you can't have laws which go against EU Directives. Its kinda the point of being part of the EU (many trade agreements aren't contigent on membership).<br> <br>
An example a few years back with the UK was safety standards. For example there used to be three standards of motorcycle helmet you could buy. British (BSA), EU and American. If you could afford it you bought a BSA helmet since they were the best. Unfortunatly an EU directive stated that standards had to match accross the EU. While this was a very good thing for many countries it meant the British standards had to be reduced to match the EU standards. As a result it became much harder to find the best lids.<br> <br>
On a side note and I'm not sure if it is still true but American lid standards were considerably lower than EU ones. It is something you might want to pester your government about.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to be a member you ca n't have laws which go against EU Directives .
Its kinda the point of being part of the EU ( many trade agreements are n't contigent on membership ) .
An example a few years back with the UK was safety standards .
For example there used to be three standards of motorcycle helmet you could buy .
British ( BSA ) , EU and American .
If you could afford it you bought a BSA helmet since they were the best .
Unfortunatly an EU directive stated that standards had to match accross the EU .
While this was a very good thing for many countries it meant the British standards had to be reduced to match the EU standards .
As a result it became much harder to find the best lids .
On a side note and I 'm not sure if it is still true but American lid standards were considerably lower than EU ones .
It is something you might want to pester your government about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to be a member you can't have laws which go against EU Directives.
Its kinda the point of being part of the EU (many trade agreements aren't contigent on membership).
An example a few years back with the UK was safety standards.
For example there used to be three standards of motorcycle helmet you could buy.
British (BSA), EU and American.
If you could afford it you bought a BSA helmet since they were the best.
Unfortunatly an EU directive stated that standards had to match accross the EU.
While this was a very good thing for many countries it meant the British standards had to be reduced to match the EU standards.
As a result it became much harder to find the best lids.
On a side note and I'm not sure if it is still true but American lid standards were considerably lower than EU ones.
It is something you might want to pester your government about.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120523</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120959</id>
	<title>Re:What does "help the police" mean?</title>
	<author>stjobe</author>
	<datestamp>1243507740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"You can't handle the truth!"</p><p>Good one, Colonel Jessep!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" You ca n't handle the truth !
" Good one , Colonel Jessep !
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"You can't handle the truth!
"Good one, Colonel Jessep!
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120451</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120607
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120419
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28122119
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120719
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120959
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120523
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28136391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28126025
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120769
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120763
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120419
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120553
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120511
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28127069
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120769
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120551
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120437
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120815
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28123899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28123273
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120769
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120781
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120437
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28128213
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120437
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121103
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120585
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120437
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28122115
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120511
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28130703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120921
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120449
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28135881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121671
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28122927
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120719
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28122615
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28125375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120511
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28135527
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120769
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28123503
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120719
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121587
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120769
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28136461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121601
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28126509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120523
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28124129
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121601
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28129439
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28129649
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120719
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120797
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28122467
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120719
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28122589
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121067
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121043
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120511
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28123593
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120769
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120629
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120437
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28126403
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120769
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121901
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120839
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120523
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28123487
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120719
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121403
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120769
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120449
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_0149243_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28138289
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_0149243.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121619
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_0149243.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120841
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_0149243.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120449
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120849
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120921
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_0149243.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120547
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_0149243.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120523
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120839
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28126509
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120741
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_0149243.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120437
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120551
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120585
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120629
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28128213
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120781
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_0149243.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120435
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_0149243.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121213
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121863
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_0149243.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120567
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121311
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_0149243.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121601
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28124129
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28136461
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_0149243.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120451
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120797
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120719
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28122467
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28122927
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28129649
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28122119
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28123503
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28123487
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121945
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120959
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120815
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28123899
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_0149243.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121171
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_0149243.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120511
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28125375
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121043
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120553
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28122115
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_0149243.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120359
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120509
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121067
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28122589
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120769
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28126403
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28123273
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28135527
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28126025
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121403
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28123593
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121587
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28127069
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120743
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121103
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28122615
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121901
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28138289
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28136391
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121175
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28130703
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28129439
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_0149243.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120419
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120607
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120497
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28120763
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_0149243.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28121671
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_0149243.28135881
</commentlist>
</conversation>
