<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_05_29_045233</id>
	<title>Xbox To Get Live TV and Massive VOD Update</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1243624800000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://reviews.cnet.co.uk/natelanxon/" rel="nofollow">CNETNate</a> writes <i>"It's a global first for Microsoft, and massive news for Xbox owners. Redmond and the largest pay TV service in the UK &mdash; Sky, owned in part by Rupert Murdoch's News Corp &mdash; has tied a deal that <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idUSTRE54R7GP20090528?feedType=RSS&amp;feedName=technologyNews">brings simulcast TV, sports, entertainment shows</a>, pay-per-view movies and back catalogue television to the Xbox 360. It's an entirely streamed service, offering no download-to-own content, and <a href="http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/sky-high-article">partly rivals the BBC iPlayer</a>, which is available on UK PlayStation consoles and the Nintendo Wii. The service will go live later in the year at no cost to existing subscribers, and screenshots show it <a href="http://crave.cnet.co.uk/gamesgear/0,39029441,49302415,00.htm">fits in seamlessly with the Xbox Live interface</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>CNETNate writes " It 's a global first for Microsoft , and massive news for Xbox owners .
Redmond and the largest pay TV service in the UK    Sky , owned in part by Rupert Murdoch 's News Corp    has tied a deal that brings simulcast TV , sports , entertainment shows , pay-per-view movies and back catalogue television to the Xbox 360 .
It 's an entirely streamed service , offering no download-to-own content , and partly rivals the BBC iPlayer , which is available on UK PlayStation consoles and the Nintendo Wii .
The service will go live later in the year at no cost to existing subscribers , and screenshots show it fits in seamlessly with the Xbox Live interface .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CNETNate writes "It's a global first for Microsoft, and massive news for Xbox owners.
Redmond and the largest pay TV service in the UK — Sky, owned in part by Rupert Murdoch's News Corp — has tied a deal that brings simulcast TV, sports, entertainment shows, pay-per-view movies and back catalogue television to the Xbox 360.
It's an entirely streamed service, offering no download-to-own content, and partly rivals the BBC iPlayer, which is available on UK PlayStation consoles and the Nintendo Wii.
The service will go live later in the year at no cost to existing subscribers, and screenshots show it fits in seamlessly with the Xbox Live interface.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136527</id>
	<title>Such badly flawed news.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243596360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Firstly, it's no additional cost to those already paying SKY and XBOX subscriptions.   Everyone else needs to buy both subscriptions (not cheap).</p><p>Secondly, this is no different to the deal that Sony have had in place for the PSP and PS3 for several years.  (and with PSN being free, only a Sky Subscrption is required).</p><p>http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2008/04/24/go\_view\_sony\_sky\_psp/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Firstly , it 's no additional cost to those already paying SKY and XBOX subscriptions .
Everyone else needs to buy both subscriptions ( not cheap ) .Secondly , this is no different to the deal that Sony have had in place for the PSP and PS3 for several years .
( and with PSN being free , only a Sky Subscrption is required ) .http : //www.reghardware.co.uk/2008/04/24/go \ _view \ _sony \ _sky \ _psp/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Firstly, it's no additional cost to those already paying SKY and XBOX subscriptions.
Everyone else needs to buy both subscriptions (not cheap).Secondly, this is no different to the deal that Sony have had in place for the PSP and PS3 for several years.
(and with PSN being free, only a Sky Subscrption is required).http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2008/04/24/go\_view\_sony\_sky\_psp/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136839</id>
	<title>waiting for falling shoes to impact earth.</title>
	<author>senorpoco</author>
	<datestamp>1243600560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Neither Sky not Microsoft have ever given away for free what they could charge people for.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Neither Sky not Microsoft have ever given away for free what they could charge people for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Neither Sky not Microsoft have ever given away for free what they could charge people for.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28138537</id>
	<title>Re:Global or just UK only?</title>
	<author>sricetx</author>
	<datestamp>1243610460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So don't pay a yearly fee to Microsoft to watch Netflix then.  Buy MediaMall's Playon server for a one-time $40 fee and stream Netflix, Hulu, CBS, etc. content to the xbox.  It's windows-only, but it does run fine in a VBOX Windows XP virtual machine on a linux host.  To hell with Xbox Live. Who needs it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So do n't pay a yearly fee to Microsoft to watch Netflix then .
Buy MediaMall 's Playon server for a one-time $ 40 fee and stream Netflix , Hulu , CBS , etc .
content to the xbox .
It 's windows-only , but it does run fine in a VBOX Windows XP virtual machine on a linux host .
To hell with Xbox Live .
Who needs it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So don't pay a yearly fee to Microsoft to watch Netflix then.
Buy MediaMall's Playon server for a one-time $40 fee and stream Netflix, Hulu, CBS, etc.
content to the xbox.
It's windows-only, but it does run fine in a VBOX Windows XP virtual machine on a linux host.
To hell with Xbox Live.
Who needs it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28137273</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135845</id>
	<title>Xbox v.s. Xbox360</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243630560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Xbox is a gaming console first announced 2000, discontinued 2005-2006... Why does everybody call Xbox360 for Xbox?</p><p>It's a heck to find information about the regular xbox theese days... Everything called just "xbox" is the new one...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Xbox is a gaming console first announced 2000 , discontinued 2005-2006... Why does everybody call Xbox360 for Xbox ? It 's a heck to find information about the regular xbox theese days... Everything called just " xbox " is the new one.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Xbox is a gaming console first announced 2000, discontinued 2005-2006... Why does everybody call Xbox360 for Xbox?It's a heck to find information about the regular xbox theese days... Everything called just "xbox" is the new one...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28143251</id>
	<title>Re:Really! You have to admire their optimism!</title>
	<author>Trojan35</author>
	<datestamp>1243588980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because most Xbox's still have the craptastic 20GB HD. Rolling out saving support is additional legal/engineering work and would be a nightmare on a system that probably has less than 3gb free anyways. They'd rather have their customers downloading demos and buying games than watching streaming TV.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because most Xbox 's still have the craptastic 20GB HD .
Rolling out saving support is additional legal/engineering work and would be a nightmare on a system that probably has less than 3gb free anyways .
They 'd rather have their customers downloading demos and buying games than watching streaming TV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because most Xbox's still have the craptastic 20GB HD.
Rolling out saving support is additional legal/engineering work and would be a nightmare on a system that probably has less than 3gb free anyways.
They'd rather have their customers downloading demos and buying games than watching streaming TV.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136231</id>
	<title>Price..?</title>
	<author>bhunachchicken</author>
	<datestamp>1243592400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Any mention of the price anywhere? Because if I need to sign up to Sky to use this service, then it's not really solving anything. Personally I want access to a massive library of films and TV shows to watch on a pay-per-play basis, without any ties.</p><p>The thing that is still stunning me is that you'd think Sony, being the huge entertainment conglomerate that it is, would've been offering this already with the PS3. Yes; I know that you can rent movies from the Playstation Network, but there are two major flaws with that service,</p><p>
1) It's not available outside of the US (I mean, why? Seriously, why? Is it European law or something?!)<br>
2) It's too expensive.
</p><p>I'm sure they'll do it eventually, but to be honest you'd be hard pressed to believe we're living in the 21st century sometimes...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Any mention of the price anywhere ?
Because if I need to sign up to Sky to use this service , then it 's not really solving anything .
Personally I want access to a massive library of films and TV shows to watch on a pay-per-play basis , without any ties.The thing that is still stunning me is that you 'd think Sony , being the huge entertainment conglomerate that it is , would 've been offering this already with the PS3 .
Yes ; I know that you can rent movies from the Playstation Network , but there are two major flaws with that service , 1 ) It 's not available outside of the US ( I mean , why ?
Seriously , why ?
Is it European law or something ? !
) 2 ) It 's too expensive .
I 'm sure they 'll do it eventually , but to be honest you 'd be hard pressed to believe we 're living in the 21st century sometimes.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any mention of the price anywhere?
Because if I need to sign up to Sky to use this service, then it's not really solving anything.
Personally I want access to a massive library of films and TV shows to watch on a pay-per-play basis, without any ties.The thing that is still stunning me is that you'd think Sony, being the huge entertainment conglomerate that it is, would've been offering this already with the PS3.
Yes; I know that you can rent movies from the Playstation Network, but there are two major flaws with that service,
1) It's not available outside of the US (I mean, why?
Seriously, why?
Is it European law or something?!
)
2) It's too expensive.
I'm sure they'll do it eventually, but to be honest you'd be hard pressed to believe we're living in the 21st century sometimes...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135887</id>
	<title>i dont trust</title>
	<author>WaldoXX</author>
	<datestamp>1243587780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>i dont trust Rupert Murdoch with my TV programming</htmltext>
<tokenext>i dont trust Rupert Murdoch with my TV programming</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i dont trust Rupert Murdoch with my TV programming</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135693</id>
	<title>For the record, Sky is evil</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243628880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you take all the evil US megacorps and add them together, that's the kind of evil we have in Sky.</p><p>Nothing good can come from this.  Xbox owners beware.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you take all the evil US megacorps and add them together , that 's the kind of evil we have in Sky.Nothing good can come from this .
Xbox owners beware .
: - (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you take all the evil US megacorps and add them together, that's the kind of evil we have in Sky.Nothing good can come from this.
Xbox owners beware.
:-(</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136371</id>
	<title>Re:Availability?</title>
	<author>Fred\_A</author>
	<datestamp>1243594260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Is this UK only?  Seems that way from the articles, but the summary doesn't mention anything.  If it is, that's good news for them, but kinda useless for the rest of us.</p></div><p>I don't believe this thing will cross the Channel any time soon. Beyond the strange idea of "connect your XBox to your TV to watch TV" (huh ?), all French ISPs already offer this as part as their standard plan. And you need Internet access to use the XBox thing. So it's kind of pointless (unless you're *really* fond of the XBox interface). Especially since it'll presumably be streaming from outside the ISP's network instead of (currently) from its own servers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this UK only ?
Seems that way from the articles , but the summary does n't mention anything .
If it is , that 's good news for them , but kinda useless for the rest of us.I do n't believe this thing will cross the Channel any time soon .
Beyond the strange idea of " connect your XBox to your TV to watch TV " ( huh ?
) , all French ISPs already offer this as part as their standard plan .
And you need Internet access to use the XBox thing .
So it 's kind of pointless ( unless you 're * really * fond of the XBox interface ) .
Especially since it 'll presumably be streaming from outside the ISP 's network instead of ( currently ) from its own servers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this UK only?
Seems that way from the articles, but the summary doesn't mention anything.
If it is, that's good news for them, but kinda useless for the rest of us.I don't believe this thing will cross the Channel any time soon.
Beyond the strange idea of "connect your XBox to your TV to watch TV" (huh ?
), all French ISPs already offer this as part as their standard plan.
And you need Internet access to use the XBox thing.
So it's kind of pointless (unless you're *really* fond of the XBox interface).
Especially since it'll presumably be streaming from outside the ISP's network instead of (currently) from its own servers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135687</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135907</id>
	<title>RROD Not Included!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243588020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This seems to me to be a very dumb idea.</p><p>I don't know about others, but I for one avoid services tied to hardware that has a high likelihood of failure.</p><p>Anyone else remember Time Warner Cable's early digital / DVR boxes? The horribly twitchy ones made by Scientific Atlanta? Or Verizon's FiOS routers from hell / shitty set top boxes?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This seems to me to be a very dumb idea.I do n't know about others , but I for one avoid services tied to hardware that has a high likelihood of failure.Anyone else remember Time Warner Cable 's early digital / DVR boxes ?
The horribly twitchy ones made by Scientific Atlanta ?
Or Verizon 's FiOS routers from hell / shitty set top boxes ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This seems to me to be a very dumb idea.I don't know about others, but I for one avoid services tied to hardware that has a high likelihood of failure.Anyone else remember Time Warner Cable's early digital / DVR boxes?
The horribly twitchy ones made by Scientific Atlanta?
Or Verizon's FiOS routers from hell / shitty set top boxes?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135957</id>
	<title>So, in other words</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243588800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can now use an Xbox 360 as a really expensive, loud, and fragile cable box?  Woohoo!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can now use an Xbox 360 as a really expensive , loud , and fragile cable box ?
Woohoo !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can now use an Xbox 360 as a really expensive, loud, and fragile cable box?
Woohoo!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136117</id>
	<title>Re:Global or just UK only?</title>
	<author>Richard\_at\_work</author>
	<datestamp>1243590960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>What about the billions of computer users outside the US that would like access to Netflix, Hulu and every other VoD solution that seems to be geographically limited...?<br> <br>

In short - the reason you can't have the Sky content is the same reason we can't have Hulu content, and that is that Sky doesn't have the distribution license outside of its particular viewership area.  Premier League TV rights are a huge huge business...</htmltext>
<tokenext>What about the billions of computer users outside the US that would like access to Netflix , Hulu and every other VoD solution that seems to be geographically limited... ?
In short - the reason you ca n't have the Sky content is the same reason we ca n't have Hulu content , and that is that Sky does n't have the distribution license outside of its particular viewership area .
Premier League TV rights are a huge huge business.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about the billions of computer users outside the US that would like access to Netflix, Hulu and every other VoD solution that seems to be geographically limited...?
In short - the reason you can't have the Sky content is the same reason we can't have Hulu content, and that is that Sky doesn't have the distribution license outside of its particular viewership area.
Premier League TV rights are a huge huge business...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135917</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135677</id>
	<title>Also getting live TV</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243628760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Launching soon, live <a href="http://goatse.fr/" title="goatse.fr" rel="nofollow">goatse</a> [goatse.fr] TV channel, and goatse on "demand".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Launching soon , live goatse [ goatse.fr ] TV channel , and goatse on " demand " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Launching soon, live goatse [goatse.fr] TV channel, and goatse on "demand".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136157</id>
	<title>Re:Global or just UK only?</title>
	<author>jools33</author>
	<datestamp>1243591320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Skys content - particularly the sport is bound up with a ton of licensing restrictions - Sports tv rights are still bound by licensing deals that arose in the 1980s - and don't seem to be changing anytime soon. I currently live in Sweden - if you wanna watch a game of rugby in Sweden on TV - you basically have 3 choices:</p><p>1) Buy  a big satellite dish and put it in your back yard... (not an option for me - I live in an appartment that frowns on big dishes...<br>2) Find a dodgy internet stream - quality is pretty crappy - often laggy - I watched one game where the commentry was 3 minutes ahead of the picture - which makes for some really frustrating viewing - I can tell you<br>3) Find an Irish pub with a big satellite dish. - This is my preffered option - whenever I get the chance.</p><p>For rugby - there appears to be very little drive to get the rights of the sports more widely available - the unions aren't interested - and the BBC / SKY certainly aren't either - they do everything to ensure that the existing UK based licensing rules dreamt up in the 80s are enforced for all eternity.</p><p>I would love to be able to purchase the games that I want to watch when I want to watch them... maybe in another 20 years...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Skys content - particularly the sport is bound up with a ton of licensing restrictions - Sports tv rights are still bound by licensing deals that arose in the 1980s - and do n't seem to be changing anytime soon .
I currently live in Sweden - if you wan na watch a game of rugby in Sweden on TV - you basically have 3 choices : 1 ) Buy a big satellite dish and put it in your back yard... ( not an option for me - I live in an appartment that frowns on big dishes...2 ) Find a dodgy internet stream - quality is pretty crappy - often laggy - I watched one game where the commentry was 3 minutes ahead of the picture - which makes for some really frustrating viewing - I can tell you3 ) Find an Irish pub with a big satellite dish .
- This is my preffered option - whenever I get the chance.For rugby - there appears to be very little drive to get the rights of the sports more widely available - the unions are n't interested - and the BBC / SKY certainly are n't either - they do everything to ensure that the existing UK based licensing rules dreamt up in the 80s are enforced for all eternity.I would love to be able to purchase the games that I want to watch when I want to watch them... maybe in another 20 years.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Skys content - particularly the sport is bound up with a ton of licensing restrictions - Sports tv rights are still bound by licensing deals that arose in the 1980s - and don't seem to be changing anytime soon.
I currently live in Sweden - if you wanna watch a game of rugby in Sweden on TV - you basically have 3 choices:1) Buy  a big satellite dish and put it in your back yard... (not an option for me - I live in an appartment that frowns on big dishes...2) Find a dodgy internet stream - quality is pretty crappy - often laggy - I watched one game where the commentry was 3 minutes ahead of the picture - which makes for some really frustrating viewing - I can tell you3) Find an Irish pub with a big satellite dish.
- This is my preffered option - whenever I get the chance.For rugby - there appears to be very little drive to get the rights of the sports more widely available - the unions aren't interested - and the BBC / SKY certainly aren't either - they do everything to ensure that the existing UK based licensing rules dreamt up in the 80s are enforced for all eternity.I would love to be able to purchase the games that I want to watch when I want to watch them... maybe in another 20 years...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135917</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136193</id>
	<title>Really! You have to admire their optimism!</title>
	<author>Chris Tucker</author>
	<datestamp>1243591800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"<i>It's an entirely streamed service, offering no download-to-own content</i>"</p><p>Anyone remember the first series of The IT Crowd, streamed online <b>only to the UK</b>, WMV DRMed up one side and down the other. And on The Pirate Bay as a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.avi file within minutes after each streamed episode was over?</p><p>Good times, good times!</p><p>Really, why do they bother? The stream will be intercepted somewhere inside the XBox, or fed from the XBox into a digital recorder or computer, converted to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.avi and upped to TPB. all automatically.</p><p>Assuming, of course, the programming is worth it and is unavailable elsewhere.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" It 's an entirely streamed service , offering no download-to-own content " Anyone remember the first series of The IT Crowd , streamed online only to the UK , WMV DRMed up one side and down the other .
And on The Pirate Bay as a .avi file within minutes after each streamed episode was over ? Good times , good times ! Really , why do they bother ?
The stream will be intercepted somewhere inside the XBox , or fed from the XBox into a digital recorder or computer , converted to .avi and upped to TPB .
all automatically.Assuming , of course , the programming is worth it and is unavailable elsewhere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"It's an entirely streamed service, offering no download-to-own content"Anyone remember the first series of The IT Crowd, streamed online only to the UK, WMV DRMed up one side and down the other.
And on The Pirate Bay as a .avi file within minutes after each streamed episode was over?Good times, good times!Really, why do they bother?
The stream will be intercepted somewhere inside the XBox, or fed from the XBox into a digital recorder or computer, converted to .avi and upped to TPB.
all automatically.Assuming, of course, the programming is worth it and is unavailable elsewhere.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28139459</id>
	<title>Re:Really! You have to admire their optimism!</title>
	<author>MrNemesis</author>
	<datestamp>1243615140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Assuming, of course, the programming is worth it and is unavailable elsewhere.</i></p><p>Your comment made me think of today's Daily Mash<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><blockquote><div><p>SEVEN million people in the UK are illegally downloading the sort of music and films you wouldn't pay for even as you heard the ominous click of a gun being cocked.<br>According to the Strategic Advisory Board for Intellectual Property, illegal downloaders are accessing material that could be worth up to &pound;120bn a year if it was any good.</p></div></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/arts-\%26-entertainment/seven-million-people-downloading-stuff-you-wouldn't-pay-for-if-there-was-a-gun-to-your-head-200905291790/" title="thedailymash.co.uk">http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/arts-\%26-entertainment/seven-million-people-downloading-stuff-you-wouldn't-pay-for-if-there-was-a-gun-to-your-head-200905291790/</a> [thedailymash.co.uk]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Assuming , of course , the programming is worth it and is unavailable elsewhere.Your comment made me think of today 's Daily Mash : ) SEVEN million people in the UK are illegally downloading the sort of music and films you would n't pay for even as you heard the ominous click of a gun being cocked.According to the Strategic Advisory Board for Intellectual Property , illegal downloaders are accessing material that could be worth up to   120bn a year if it was any good.http : //www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/arts- \ % 26-entertainment/seven-million-people-downloading-stuff-you-would n't-pay-for-if-there-was-a-gun-to-your-head-200905291790/ [ thedailymash.co.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Assuming, of course, the programming is worth it and is unavailable elsewhere.Your comment made me think of today's Daily Mash :)SEVEN million people in the UK are illegally downloading the sort of music and films you wouldn't pay for even as you heard the ominous click of a gun being cocked.According to the Strategic Advisory Board for Intellectual Property, illegal downloaders are accessing material that could be worth up to £120bn a year if it was any good.http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/arts-\%26-entertainment/seven-million-people-downloading-stuff-you-wouldn't-pay-for-if-there-was-a-gun-to-your-head-200905291790/ [thedailymash.co.uk]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28138531</id>
	<title>Re:Global or just UK only?</title>
	<author>CopaceticOpus</author>
	<datestamp>1243610400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When is someone going to figure this out? Suppose Media Company X has some recorded shows and live sports coverage they'd like to put online, and make a profit from it. They want to make it available globally, but advertisers are only interested in targeting specific regions.</p><p>The solution is to allow any website or company to broadcast this content to any end user for a fee, on a per-minute or per-segment basis. The content will have programmed commercial breaks which the broadcasting website can use any way they see fit. The broadcasting website might accept the stream from X and rebroadcast it themselves, or they might give the end user a unique key which gives their browser permission to receive the stream directly from X.</p><p>This creates an environment in which there is profit to be made, and so there will be competition to set up the best service which shows content from X. If I run a website in France, I can set up some deals with local advertisers. If I pay X 30 cents for the right to send a show to a user, and I can collect 60 cents from advertisers, I can make a nice profit. Alternatively, I might allow users to buy credit and simply pay 50 cents per show to watch ad-free.</p><p>Meanwhile, X makes a profit without needing to figure out how to deal with advertisers in each country. They also avoid tying their service to a specific type of hardware. Geographic and technological limitations are avoided, so that the largest possible audience can be reached.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When is someone going to figure this out ?
Suppose Media Company X has some recorded shows and live sports coverage they 'd like to put online , and make a profit from it .
They want to make it available globally , but advertisers are only interested in targeting specific regions.The solution is to allow any website or company to broadcast this content to any end user for a fee , on a per-minute or per-segment basis .
The content will have programmed commercial breaks which the broadcasting website can use any way they see fit .
The broadcasting website might accept the stream from X and rebroadcast it themselves , or they might give the end user a unique key which gives their browser permission to receive the stream directly from X.This creates an environment in which there is profit to be made , and so there will be competition to set up the best service which shows content from X. If I run a website in France , I can set up some deals with local advertisers .
If I pay X 30 cents for the right to send a show to a user , and I can collect 60 cents from advertisers , I can make a nice profit .
Alternatively , I might allow users to buy credit and simply pay 50 cents per show to watch ad-free.Meanwhile , X makes a profit without needing to figure out how to deal with advertisers in each country .
They also avoid tying their service to a specific type of hardware .
Geographic and technological limitations are avoided , so that the largest possible audience can be reached .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When is someone going to figure this out?
Suppose Media Company X has some recorded shows and live sports coverage they'd like to put online, and make a profit from it.
They want to make it available globally, but advertisers are only interested in targeting specific regions.The solution is to allow any website or company to broadcast this content to any end user for a fee, on a per-minute or per-segment basis.
The content will have programmed commercial breaks which the broadcasting website can use any way they see fit.
The broadcasting website might accept the stream from X and rebroadcast it themselves, or they might give the end user a unique key which gives their browser permission to receive the stream directly from X.This creates an environment in which there is profit to be made, and so there will be competition to set up the best service which shows content from X. If I run a website in France, I can set up some deals with local advertisers.
If I pay X 30 cents for the right to send a show to a user, and I can collect 60 cents from advertisers, I can make a nice profit.
Alternatively, I might allow users to buy credit and simply pay 50 cents per show to watch ad-free.Meanwhile, X makes a profit without needing to figure out how to deal with advertisers in each country.
They also avoid tying their service to a specific type of hardware.
Geographic and technological limitations are avoided, so that the largest possible audience can be reached.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136117</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136333</id>
	<title>Re:Simulcast?</title>
	<author>ThatGuyJon</author>
	<datestamp>1243593720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Simultaneous broadcast? Seemed pretty intuitive to me...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Simultaneous broadcast ?
Seemed pretty intuitive to me.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Simultaneous broadcast?
Seemed pretty intuitive to me...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136039</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135807</id>
	<title>Re:Availability?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243630200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>From the article "Millions of Xbox 360 owners in Britain and Ireland" Pretty sure this means it's just us in the UK.  Bare in mind that the US only has had access to netflix for quite a while now.

Personally I'm more interested in the pricing of this service, the post says "no cost to existing subscribers" but I can't find any evidence of this anywhere.  As an existing subscriber I think it should be free but I doubt it will go that way.</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the article " Millions of Xbox 360 owners in Britain and Ireland " Pretty sure this means it 's just us in the UK .
Bare in mind that the US only has had access to netflix for quite a while now .
Personally I 'm more interested in the pricing of this service , the post says " no cost to existing subscribers " but I ca n't find any evidence of this anywhere .
As an existing subscriber I think it should be free but I doubt it will go that way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the article "Millions of Xbox 360 owners in Britain and Ireland" Pretty sure this means it's just us in the UK.
Bare in mind that the US only has had access to netflix for quite a while now.
Personally I'm more interested in the pricing of this service, the post says "no cost to existing subscribers" but I can't find any evidence of this anywhere.
As an existing subscriber I think it should be free but I doubt it will go that way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135687</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28140803</id>
	<title>Cable TV</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243622100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So Microsoft takes on the cable providers and now all the content you want comes over X-Box with Sky. So the cable companies go under, and suddenly no one can connect with X-Box Live. Whoops!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So Microsoft takes on the cable providers and now all the content you want comes over X-Box with Sky .
So the cable companies go under , and suddenly no one can connect with X-Box Live .
Whoops !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So Microsoft takes on the cable providers and now all the content you want comes over X-Box with Sky.
So the cable companies go under, and suddenly no one can connect with X-Box Live.
Whoops!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28141311</id>
	<title>Re:Global or just UK only?</title>
	<author>MikeBabcock</author>
	<datestamp>1243624200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's a reason we Playstation users have always said the PS3 is cheaper in the long term.</p><p>Most of these features already exist on the PS3 as well, although admittedly not Netflix.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a reason we Playstation users have always said the PS3 is cheaper in the long term.Most of these features already exist on the PS3 as well , although admittedly not Netflix .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a reason we Playstation users have always said the PS3 is cheaper in the long term.Most of these features already exist on the PS3 as well, although admittedly not Netflix.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28137273</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135987</id>
	<title>mod -1k for defending MS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243589220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have to admit, even thought I am not a fan of microsoft corporation, they did get it right with the 360. It's a fantastic console. Even though I hate Windows and other microsoft software, I have to commend them for the 360.</p><p>And although not related to the 360, I find their mice and keyboards fantastic also. The intellimouse 1.1 I think is the best mouse I have ever had...</p><p>Maybe they should just quit software and move to hardware only because that seems to be a strength of theirs (except the Zune...)</p><p> <i>cue trolls replying 'linux&gt;windows' without having read my post properly</i> </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to admit , even thought I am not a fan of microsoft corporation , they did get it right with the 360 .
It 's a fantastic console .
Even though I hate Windows and other microsoft software , I have to commend them for the 360.And although not related to the 360 , I find their mice and keyboards fantastic also .
The intellimouse 1.1 I think is the best mouse I have ever had...Maybe they should just quit software and move to hardware only because that seems to be a strength of theirs ( except the Zune... ) cue trolls replying 'linux &gt; windows ' without having read my post properly</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to admit, even thought I am not a fan of microsoft corporation, they did get it right with the 360.
It's a fantastic console.
Even though I hate Windows and other microsoft software, I have to commend them for the 360.And although not related to the 360, I find their mice and keyboards fantastic also.
The intellimouse 1.1 I think is the best mouse I have ever had...Maybe they should just quit software and move to hardware only because that seems to be a strength of theirs (except the Zune...) cue trolls replying 'linux&gt;windows' without having read my post properly </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28137117</id>
	<title>Re:Price..?</title>
	<author>rAiNsT0rm</author>
	<datestamp>1243603140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>E3 this year, my prediction is that one of them will offer something like this service in the U.S. it may just be DVR/ATSC tuner, it may be something more full-blown like this... but one of the big two will do it and it will be the sales generator.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>E3 this year , my prediction is that one of them will offer something like this service in the U.S. it may just be DVR/ATSC tuner , it may be something more full-blown like this... but one of the big two will do it and it will be the sales generator .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>E3 this year, my prediction is that one of them will offer something like this service in the U.S. it may just be DVR/ATSC tuner, it may be something more full-blown like this... but one of the big two will do it and it will be the sales generator.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136231</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136039</id>
	<title>Simulcast?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243589880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Simulcast?  Really?  I'm a person that believes that speech evolves and there's a natural progression in language... but that doesn't excuse terrible marketing words.  This neither flows off the tongue nor is intuitive.  I mean, how do you even say it?  Sim you'll cast?  Sy mule cast?  Sim ool cast? And what does it mean?  Simulated broadcasting?</p><p>I know this is listed in some online dictionaries (I just checked), but really, words really ought to be meaningful before being accepted as "language."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Simulcast ?
Really ? I 'm a person that believes that speech evolves and there 's a natural progression in language... but that does n't excuse terrible marketing words .
This neither flows off the tongue nor is intuitive .
I mean , how do you even say it ?
Sim you 'll cast ?
Sy mule cast ?
Sim ool cast ?
And what does it mean ?
Simulated broadcasting ? I know this is listed in some online dictionaries ( I just checked ) , but really , words really ought to be meaningful before being accepted as " language .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Simulcast?
Really?  I'm a person that believes that speech evolves and there's a natural progression in language... but that doesn't excuse terrible marketing words.
This neither flows off the tongue nor is intuitive.
I mean, how do you even say it?
Sim you'll cast?
Sy mule cast?
Sim ool cast?
And what does it mean?
Simulated broadcasting?I know this is listed in some online dictionaries (I just checked), but really, words really ought to be meaningful before being accepted as "language.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28137273</id>
	<title>Re:Global or just UK only?</title>
	<author>Lumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1243604100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about the Trillions of US people that want to watch the netflix they PAY FOR without paying a "fee" to microsoft as well?</p><p>Jeebus, the Xbox live system is the largest scam I have ever seen.  they snag $60.00 a year out of every owner because they cripple the boxes online capabilities if you dont.</p><p>Yes I love my Xbox360, no I dont think that having to have a "gold" account is fair for netflix or basic online play.  Make me pay for ranked and the big events as well as some value added stuff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about the Trillions of US people that want to watch the netflix they PAY FOR without paying a " fee " to microsoft as well ? Jeebus , the Xbox live system is the largest scam I have ever seen .
they snag $ 60.00 a year out of every owner because they cripple the boxes online capabilities if you dont.Yes I love my Xbox360 , no I dont think that having to have a " gold " account is fair for netflix or basic online play .
Make me pay for ranked and the big events as well as some value added stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about the Trillions of US people that want to watch the netflix they PAY FOR without paying a "fee" to microsoft as well?Jeebus, the Xbox live system is the largest scam I have ever seen.
they snag $60.00 a year out of every owner because they cripple the boxes online capabilities if you dont.Yes I love my Xbox360, no I dont think that having to have a "gold" account is fair for netflix or basic online play.
Make me pay for ranked and the big events as well as some value added stuff.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136117</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136001</id>
	<title>Whats the catch?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243589340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm waiting for more details before I start even considering this a good idea; my monies on it requiring a Sky Broadband ADSL connection...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm waiting for more details before I start even considering this a good idea ; my monies on it requiring a Sky Broadband ADSL connection.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm waiting for more details before I start even considering this a good idea; my monies on it requiring a Sky Broadband ADSL connection...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28137765</id>
	<title>based on Microsoft Mediaroom middleware?</title>
	<author>Mulder3</author>
	<datestamp>1243607040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am pretty sure this will be based on that stupid Microsoft iptv middleware named Microsoft Mediaroom(formerly known as Microsoft TV IPTV edition) witch is already ported to Xbox360.
Mediaroom is full of DRM, not based on OpenIPTV Forum standards, doesn't scale well(while it is based on multicast, it uses unicast heavily) and is a real PITA for developers( you have three choices to develop apps on the platform: XHTML/JS/CSS running on Tasman rendering engine, with was the renderer used in IE for Mac witch is real slow and very limited, you can also use a stupid XML declarative language(called Mediaroom Presentation Foundation) and RDP on a remote terminal server (yes, remote desktop)!

With better choices in middlewares, i just don't know how operators keep choosing this piece of crap middleware</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am pretty sure this will be based on that stupid Microsoft iptv middleware named Microsoft Mediaroom ( formerly known as Microsoft TV IPTV edition ) witch is already ported to Xbox360 .
Mediaroom is full of DRM , not based on OpenIPTV Forum standards , does n't scale well ( while it is based on multicast , it uses unicast heavily ) and is a real PITA for developers ( you have three choices to develop apps on the platform : XHTML/JS/CSS running on Tasman rendering engine , with was the renderer used in IE for Mac witch is real slow and very limited , you can also use a stupid XML declarative language ( called Mediaroom Presentation Foundation ) and RDP on a remote terminal server ( yes , remote desktop ) !
With better choices in middlewares , i just do n't know how operators keep choosing this piece of crap middleware</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am pretty sure this will be based on that stupid Microsoft iptv middleware named Microsoft Mediaroom(formerly known as Microsoft TV IPTV edition) witch is already ported to Xbox360.
Mediaroom is full of DRM, not based on OpenIPTV Forum standards, doesn't scale well(while it is based on multicast, it uses unicast heavily) and is a real PITA for developers( you have three choices to develop apps on the platform: XHTML/JS/CSS running on Tasman rendering engine, with was the renderer used in IE for Mac witch is real slow and very limited, you can also use a stupid XML declarative language(called Mediaroom Presentation Foundation) and RDP on a remote terminal server (yes, remote desktop)!
With better choices in middlewares, i just don't know how operators keep choosing this piece of crap middleware</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28138809</id>
	<title>Really?</title>
	<author>MadKatAlpha</author>
	<datestamp>1243611720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can't believe that this has not been tagged as skynet yet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't believe that this has not been tagged as skynet yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't believe that this has not been tagged as skynet yet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136791</id>
	<title>UK and Ireland first?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243600080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, something is actually coming to Europe before the US? *Admires the winged swine passing by the window*</p><p>Seriously though, I find it extremely amusing that every USian commenting on this thread is up in arms about that. If you had any idea how many cool services don't make it past your borders because of stupid licensing agreements... Hulu, Pandora, Rhapsody, Amazon MP3 (some of them did make it to the UK, but not Ireland or the rest of Europe)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , something is actually coming to Europe before the US ?
* Admires the winged swine passing by the window * Seriously though , I find it extremely amusing that every USian commenting on this thread is up in arms about that .
If you had any idea how many cool services do n't make it past your borders because of stupid licensing agreements... Hulu , Pandora , Rhapsody , Amazon MP3 ( some of them did make it to the UK , but not Ireland or the rest of Europe )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, something is actually coming to Europe before the US?
*Admires the winged swine passing by the window*Seriously though, I find it extremely amusing that every USian commenting on this thread is up in arms about that.
If you had any idea how many cool services don't make it past your borders because of stupid licensing agreements... Hulu, Pandora, Rhapsody, Amazon MP3 (some of them did make it to the UK, but not Ireland or the rest of Europe)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136601</id>
	<title>Re:Price..?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243597260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Errm, the PS3 can already get all of this (for less $$$)</p><p>Skyplayer (the Sky service) is already viewable in the PS3 browser, as is iPlayer, and the soon to be launched Euro Hulu service.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Errm , the PS3 can already get all of this ( for less $ $ $ ) Skyplayer ( the Sky service ) is already viewable in the PS3 browser , as is iPlayer , and the soon to be launched Euro Hulu service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Errm, the PS3 can already get all of this (for less $$$)Skyplayer (the Sky service) is already viewable in the PS3 browser, as is iPlayer, and the soon to be launched Euro Hulu service.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136231</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28144237</id>
	<title>How about support for subtexts?</title>
	<author>dr\_dracula</author>
	<datestamp>1243593240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is there any improvement in the area of support for subtexts in streaming media?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is there any improvement in the area of support for subtexts in streaming media ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is there any improvement in the area of support for subtexts in streaming media?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135829</id>
	<title>Where's the US in that article?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243630380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unlike in American Football/Handball, there's more to the world than the US. I assume ur a yank 'cos only a yank would say someting like that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unlike in American Football/Handball , there 's more to the world than the US .
I assume ur a yank 'cos only a yank would say someting like that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unlike in American Football/Handball, there's more to the world than the US.
I assume ur a yank 'cos only a yank would say someting like that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136145</id>
	<title>Price</title>
	<author>Inda</author>
	<datestamp>1243591320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And Sky and MS will probably want a week's wages to watch a half-hour programme.<br><br>Why do the likes of Sky, Virgin and the other online providers think I'll spend a fiver on a streamed, low quality DVD, when I can get the same content in the bargin bin in Tescos? The same content that I can lend, resell, rip,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</htmltext>
<tokenext>And Sky and MS will probably want a week 's wages to watch a half-hour programme.Why do the likes of Sky , Virgin and the other online providers think I 'll spend a fiver on a streamed , low quality DVD , when I can get the same content in the bargin bin in Tescos ?
The same content that I can lend , resell , rip , .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And Sky and MS will probably want a week's wages to watch a half-hour programme.Why do the likes of Sky, Virgin and the other online providers think I'll spend a fiver on a streamed, low quality DVD, when I can get the same content in the bargin bin in Tescos?
The same content that I can lend, resell, rip, ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135895</id>
	<title>International</title>
	<author>s1lverl0rd</author>
	<datestamp>1243587840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are there any plans for getting it out of the Kingdom?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are there any plans for getting it out of the Kingdom ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are there any plans for getting it out of the Kingdom?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28142297</id>
	<title>Canvas</title>
	<author>gbjbaanb</author>
	<datestamp>1243628100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was watching Channel4 news just a moment ago and they mentioned the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7932278.stm" title="bbc.co.uk">BBC's Canvas platform</a> [bbc.co.uk] that rivals this setup. The interesting thing though - they mentioned open source. On the tele! Wow.</p><p>Ahem, it might not be open source, but it is an open standard, they specifically mentioned it being used for BC and ITV programmes, but also for any content provider - like newspapers or, well anyone. This is not the same as the Project Kangaroo that would broadcast programmes from the 3 main UK broadcasters, this is a content-delivery platform, not the content.</p><p><a href="http://commonplatform.co.uk/index.php/2008/12/18/count-them-three-iptv-platforms/" title="commonplatform.co.uk">This blog</a> [commonplatform.co.uk] talks about it in a bit more detail.</p><p><a href="http://informitv.com/articles/2008/10/14/bbcopenscanvas/" title="informitv.com">http://informitv.com/articles/2008/10/14/bbcopenscanvas/</a> [informitv.com]</p><p>Unusually BskyB has <a href="http://www.rapidtvnews.com/index.php/200905123824/bskyb-objects-over-bbcs-canvas-plan.html" title="rapidtvnews.com">complained</a> [rapidtvnews.com] about having to suffer from competition!.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was watching Channel4 news just a moment ago and they mentioned the BBC 's Canvas platform [ bbc.co.uk ] that rivals this setup .
The interesting thing though - they mentioned open source .
On the tele !
Wow.Ahem , it might not be open source , but it is an open standard , they specifically mentioned it being used for BC and ITV programmes , but also for any content provider - like newspapers or , well anyone .
This is not the same as the Project Kangaroo that would broadcast programmes from the 3 main UK broadcasters , this is a content-delivery platform , not the content.This blog [ commonplatform.co.uk ] talks about it in a bit more detail.http : //informitv.com/articles/2008/10/14/bbcopenscanvas/ [ informitv.com ] Unusually BskyB has complained [ rapidtvnews.com ] about having to suffer from competition ! .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was watching Channel4 news just a moment ago and they mentioned the BBC's Canvas platform [bbc.co.uk] that rivals this setup.
The interesting thing though - they mentioned open source.
On the tele!
Wow.Ahem, it might not be open source, but it is an open standard, they specifically mentioned it being used for BC and ITV programmes, but also for any content provider - like newspapers or, well anyone.
This is not the same as the Project Kangaroo that would broadcast programmes from the 3 main UK broadcasters, this is a content-delivery platform, not the content.This blog [commonplatform.co.uk] talks about it in a bit more detail.http://informitv.com/articles/2008/10/14/bbcopenscanvas/ [informitv.com]Unusually BskyB has complained [rapidtvnews.com] about having to suffer from competition!.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28139171</id>
	<title>How about a US release for AT&amp;T UVerse?</title>
	<author>assassinator42</author>
	<datestamp>1243613640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They've been promising IPTV support for a while, I'm surprised they actually implemented it somewhere. Now how about releasing for everyone cursed to use Microsoft's IPTV software?</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 've been promising IPTV support for a while , I 'm surprised they actually implemented it somewhere .
Now how about releasing for everyone cursed to use Microsoft 's IPTV software ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They've been promising IPTV support for a while, I'm surprised they actually implemented it somewhere.
Now how about releasing for everyone cursed to use Microsoft's IPTV software?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135917</id>
	<title>Global or just UK only?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243588140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From TFA: "Millions of Xbox 360 owners in Britain and Ireland will be able to watch live programing such as Premier League soccer and movies following a deal with pay-TV group BSkyB"</p><p>That's not very "global" to me - what about the millions of Xbox users outside UK who'd also want to pay and see Premier League and other stuff on their Xbox? And yeah, that was rhetorical question, I know we're hosed until the "global" train arrives on our little local station.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA : " Millions of Xbox 360 owners in Britain and Ireland will be able to watch live programing such as Premier League soccer and movies following a deal with pay-TV group BSkyB " That 's not very " global " to me - what about the millions of Xbox users outside UK who 'd also want to pay and see Premier League and other stuff on their Xbox ?
And yeah , that was rhetorical question , I know we 're hosed until the " global " train arrives on our little local station .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA: "Millions of Xbox 360 owners in Britain and Ireland will be able to watch live programing such as Premier League soccer and movies following a deal with pay-TV group BSkyB"That's not very "global" to me - what about the millions of Xbox users outside UK who'd also want to pay and see Premier League and other stuff on their Xbox?
And yeah, that was rhetorical question, I know we're hosed until the "global" train arrives on our little local station.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135799</id>
	<title>Wow!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243630080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>My computer can do the same thing already!</htmltext>
<tokenext>My computer can do the same thing already !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My computer can do the same thing already!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136493</id>
	<title>Re:Global or just UK only?</title>
	<author>cb95amc</author>
	<datestamp>1243596060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't imagine the various broadcasters around the globe that licence the Premier League from Sky being too happy with them allowing the deal with Microsoft to expand globally...Would have thought there would some fairly detailed contract terms around certain broadcasters having exclusivity on the Premier League rights in their country.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't imagine the various broadcasters around the globe that licence the Premier League from Sky being too happy with them allowing the deal with Microsoft to expand globally...Would have thought there would some fairly detailed contract terms around certain broadcasters having exclusivity on the Premier League rights in their country .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't imagine the various broadcasters around the globe that licence the Premier League from Sky being too happy with them allowing the deal with Microsoft to expand globally...Would have thought there would some fairly detailed contract terms around certain broadcasters having exclusivity on the Premier League rights in their country.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135917</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28137197</id>
	<title>Re:Xbox v.s. Xbox360</title>
	<author>Rude Turnip</author>
	<datestamp>1243603800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because most people aren't as pedantic as the typical Slashdot reader.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because most people are n't as pedantic as the typical Slashdot reader .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because most people aren't as pedantic as the typical Slashdot reader.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135845</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136397</id>
	<title>Re:Price..?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243594500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Price guide for SkyPlayer, which the service will be based upon:</p><p><a href="http://corporate.sky.com/documents/pdf/press\_releases/SkyPlayerTV" title="sky.com" rel="nofollow">http://corporate.sky.com/documents/pdf/press\_releases/SkyPlayerTV</a> [sky.com]</p><p>If you want sport (particularly football) you'd need the &#194;&pound;26 package I guess</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Price guide for SkyPlayer , which the service will be based upon : http : //corporate.sky.com/documents/pdf/press \ _releases/SkyPlayerTV [ sky.com ] If you want sport ( particularly football ) you 'd need the     26 package I guess</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Price guide for SkyPlayer, which the service will be based upon:http://corporate.sky.com/documents/pdf/press\_releases/SkyPlayerTV [sky.com]If you want sport (particularly football) you'd need the Â£26 package I guess</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136231</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28137085</id>
	<title>Re:Global or just UK only?</title>
	<author>NoobHunter</author>
	<datestamp>1243602960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So...I wonder when everyone will remember that Canada still exists. Nice of the US to offer all those wonderful Xbox services. Nice of the UK to get this wonderful little service too.

Hulu, Netflix, etc. Hell, even Apple and Itunes shaft us on a continual basis.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So...I wonder when everyone will remember that Canada still exists .
Nice of the US to offer all those wonderful Xbox services .
Nice of the UK to get this wonderful little service too .
Hulu , Netflix , etc .
Hell , even Apple and Itunes shaft us on a continual basis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So...I wonder when everyone will remember that Canada still exists.
Nice of the US to offer all those wonderful Xbox services.
Nice of the UK to get this wonderful little service too.
Hulu, Netflix, etc.
Hell, even Apple and Itunes shaft us on a continual basis.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135917</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28137479</id>
	<title>Re:Global or just UK only?</title>
	<author>elrous0</author>
	<datestamp>1243605420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just when we had solved the "getting first run of some great new BBC show years before everyone else" problem with good old Pirate Bay, now we have a new reason to be jealous of the Brits.
</p><p>
You guys had better be careful. You keep getting stuff like this and people will begin to resent you as much as the Americans.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just when we had solved the " getting first run of some great new BBC show years before everyone else " problem with good old Pirate Bay , now we have a new reason to be jealous of the Brits .
You guys had better be careful .
You keep getting stuff like this and people will begin to resent you as much as the Americans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just when we had solved the "getting first run of some great new BBC show years before everyone else" problem with good old Pirate Bay, now we have a new reason to be jealous of the Brits.
You guys had better be careful.
You keep getting stuff like this and people will begin to resent you as much as the Americans.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135917</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136007</id>
	<title>Another Layer of DRM! Hoorah!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243589460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
So for all the folks who can't watch the TV because the XBox is plugged into it,  now  have a slution. They can watch the TV through the XBox,
with an added layer of DRM, customer profiling and what have you added in, I have no doubt.
</p><p>
Can't really see this one changing the world, somehow...
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So for all the folks who ca n't watch the TV because the XBox is plugged into it , now have a slution .
They can watch the TV through the XBox , with an added layer of DRM , customer profiling and what have you added in , I have no doubt .
Ca n't really see this one changing the world , somehow.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
So for all the folks who can't watch the TV because the XBox is plugged into it,  now  have a slution.
They can watch the TV through the XBox,
with an added layer of DRM, customer profiling and what have you added in, I have no doubt.
Can't really see this one changing the world, somehow...
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28139007</id>
	<title>Re:Xbox v.s. Xbox360</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1243612800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wholeheartedly agreed. we pedants should make an organized drive to tag all stories about the Xbox 360 with "!Xbox Xbox360". I'm dismayed but not surprised that the public at large will do this; I'm saddened by the fact that the Slashdot community will, because it suggests to me that lots of the people commenting in games aren't nerds, they're just gamers. That doesn't make them better or worse people in any way, but it's Slashdot's nerdliness that makes it special.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wholeheartedly agreed .
we pedants should make an organized drive to tag all stories about the Xbox 360 with " ! Xbox Xbox360 " .
I 'm dismayed but not surprised that the public at large will do this ; I 'm saddened by the fact that the Slashdot community will , because it suggests to me that lots of the people commenting in games are n't nerds , they 're just gamers .
That does n't make them better or worse people in any way , but it 's Slashdot 's nerdliness that makes it special .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wholeheartedly agreed.
we pedants should make an organized drive to tag all stories about the Xbox 360 with "!Xbox Xbox360".
I'm dismayed but not surprised that the public at large will do this; I'm saddened by the fact that the Slashdot community will, because it suggests to me that lots of the people commenting in games aren't nerds, they're just gamers.
That doesn't make them better or worse people in any way, but it's Slashdot's nerdliness that makes it special.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135845</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136265</id>
	<title>It looks like SkyPlayer</title>
	<author>briggsl</author>
	<datestamp>1243592820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>From what I can tell from the screenshots, it looks like it utilizes <a href="http://skyplayer.sky.com/vod/page/default/home.do" title="sky.com" rel="nofollow">SkyPlayer</a> [sky.com], which is available in the UK for &pound;10 per month, and you get Sky One, Sky Sports and a few other flagshiip sky channels (32 in total) If you already have a Sky subscription, it is free to use.</htmltext>
<tokenext>From what I can tell from the screenshots , it looks like it utilizes SkyPlayer [ sky.com ] , which is available in the UK for   10 per month , and you get Sky One , Sky Sports and a few other flagshiip sky channels ( 32 in total ) If you already have a Sky subscription , it is free to use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From what I can tell from the screenshots, it looks like it utilizes SkyPlayer [sky.com], which is available in the UK for £10 per month, and you get Sky One, Sky Sports and a few other flagshiip sky channels (32 in total) If you already have a Sky subscription, it is free to use.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136455</id>
	<title>Re:Simulcast?</title>
	<author>\_Shad0w\_</author>
	<datestamp>1243595700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's in the OED with the earliest cited usage dated from 1948:<blockquote><div><p>1948 Amer. N. &amp; Q. May 26/2 To simulcast, to broadcast by radio and television simultaneously. 1948 N.Y. Herald Tribune 15 June 16/6 A press agent at WCAU-TV in Philadelphia has rather timorously launched the verb 'simulcast' into the uneasy seas of the English language.</p></div></blockquote><p>

See, now you even know who to blame.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's in the OED with the earliest cited usage dated from 1948 : 1948 Amer .
N. &amp; Q. May 26/2 To simulcast , to broadcast by radio and television simultaneously .
1948 N.Y. Herald Tribune 15 June 16/6 A press agent at WCAU-TV in Philadelphia has rather timorously launched the verb 'simulcast ' into the uneasy seas of the English language .
See , now you even know who to blame .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's in the OED with the earliest cited usage dated from 1948:1948 Amer.
N. &amp; Q. May 26/2 To simulcast, to broadcast by radio and television simultaneously.
1948 N.Y. Herald Tribune 15 June 16/6 A press agent at WCAU-TV in Philadelphia has rather timorously launched the verb 'simulcast' into the uneasy seas of the English language.
See, now you even know who to blame.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136039</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28138983</id>
	<title>Re:Another Layer of DRM! Hoorah!</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1243612680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Can't really see this one changing the world, somehow...</p> </div><p>Then <em>wake up</em> because more IP streaming means less power in the hands of traditional broadcasters.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ca n't really see this one changing the world , somehow... Then wake up because more IP streaming means less power in the hands of traditional broadcasters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can't really see this one changing the world, somehow... Then wake up because more IP streaming means less power in the hands of traditional broadcasters.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136007</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136011</id>
	<title>Sounds good.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243589460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's no way that "at no cost to existing subscribers" means this is going to be free to use; why would Sky undercut themselves?</p><p>I think it means that you won't have to pay anything to access the service (unlike, say, PlayTV which requires an outlay for the kit). Same as the downloadable films; any Live user can browse the service without having to pay, but it costs to actually download them.</p><p>I suppose it's too much to ask that MS sort out the constant.......... pauses........... when.........  trying.......... to........... navigate........... NXE menus.......... as well?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's no way that " at no cost to existing subscribers " means this is going to be free to use ; why would Sky undercut themselves ? I think it means that you wo n't have to pay anything to access the service ( unlike , say , PlayTV which requires an outlay for the kit ) .
Same as the downloadable films ; any Live user can browse the service without having to pay , but it costs to actually download them.I suppose it 's too much to ask that MS sort out the constant.......... pauses........... when......... trying.......... to........... navigate........... NXE menus.......... as well ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's no way that "at no cost to existing subscribers" means this is going to be free to use; why would Sky undercut themselves?I think it means that you won't have to pay anything to access the service (unlike, say, PlayTV which requires an outlay for the kit).
Same as the downloadable films; any Live user can browse the service without having to pay, but it costs to actually download them.I suppose it's too much to ask that MS sort out the constant.......... pauses........... when.........  trying.......... to........... navigate........... NXE menus.......... as well?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135863</id>
	<title>Re:Wow!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243630740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>but it is mostly (if not all) pirated. the internet's economic model doesnt allow for widespread legal availability of tv shows.</htmltext>
<tokenext>but it is mostly ( if not all ) pirated .
the internet 's economic model doesnt allow for widespread legal availability of tv shows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but it is mostly (if not all) pirated.
the internet's economic model doesnt allow for widespread legal availability of tv shows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28139551</id>
	<title>Re:Xbox v.s. Xbox360</title>
	<author>interkin3tic</author>
	<datestamp>1243615560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I remember back in the day it was worse.  Anything videogame related back in the day was called "Nintendo," by the uncool adults in my life.</p><p>Mom:"You've been playing too much nintendo dear, it's time for bed"<br>Me: "I'm not playing any nintendo, this is a sega genesis.  I haven't touched the NES at all today."<br>Mom:" I can SEE you playing nintendo RIGHT NOW!"<br>Me: "Gosh darnit mom!  You're so unfair!  You don't know anything!  I wish I was dead!"</p><p>I think she may have referred to the PS1 as nintendo as well.  Parents just don't understand.  I'm really looking forward to doing similar things to my kids.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember back in the day it was worse .
Anything videogame related back in the day was called " Nintendo , " by the uncool adults in my life.Mom : " You 've been playing too much nintendo dear , it 's time for bed " Me : " I 'm not playing any nintendo , this is a sega genesis .
I have n't touched the NES at all today .
" Mom : " I can SEE you playing nintendo RIGHT NOW !
" Me : " Gosh darnit mom !
You 're so unfair !
You do n't know anything !
I wish I was dead !
" I think she may have referred to the PS1 as nintendo as well .
Parents just do n't understand .
I 'm really looking forward to doing similar things to my kids .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember back in the day it was worse.
Anything videogame related back in the day was called "Nintendo," by the uncool adults in my life.Mom:"You've been playing too much nintendo dear, it's time for bed"Me: "I'm not playing any nintendo, this is a sega genesis.
I haven't touched the NES at all today.
"Mom:" I can SEE you playing nintendo RIGHT NOW!
"Me: "Gosh darnit mom!
You're so unfair!
You don't know anything!
I wish I was dead!
"I think she may have referred to the PS1 as nintendo as well.
Parents just don't understand.
I'm really looking forward to doing similar things to my kids.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135845</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135687</id>
	<title>Availability?</title>
	<author>StingRay02</author>
	<datestamp>1243628820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is this UK only?  Seems that way from the articles, but the summary doesn't mention anything.  If it is, that's good news for them, but kinda useless for the rest of us.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this UK only ?
Seems that way from the articles , but the summary does n't mention anything .
If it is , that 's good news for them , but kinda useless for the rest of us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this UK only?
Seems that way from the articles, but the summary doesn't mention anything.
If it is, that's good news for them, but kinda useless for the rest of us.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136669</id>
	<title>Re:Global or just UK only?</title>
	<author>johnsie</author>
	<datestamp>1243598340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem is that companies are creating artificial borders on what should be a World Wide Web. This should not be allowed to happen.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is that companies are creating artificial borders on what should be a World Wide Web .
This should not be allowed to happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is that companies are creating artificial borders on what should be a World Wide Web.
This should not be allowed to happen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135917</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28144583</id>
	<title>Re:Really! You have to admire their optimism!</title>
	<author>Minimalist360</author>
	<datestamp>1243595040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, it's contractual obligations. Everyone can say "but it was DRMed, someone cracked it." Do you think Microsoft really WANT DRM? Or Apple? No, they do it so they can license the distribution of other people's content, people that wouldn't license it unless it is "protected." The whole thing is a giant waste of time, but it looks good on paper.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , it 's contractual obligations .
Everyone can say " but it was DRMed , someone cracked it .
" Do you think Microsoft really WANT DRM ?
Or Apple ?
No , they do it so they can license the distribution of other people 's content , people that would n't license it unless it is " protected .
" The whole thing is a giant waste of time , but it looks good on paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, it's contractual obligations.
Everyone can say "but it was DRMed, someone cracked it.
" Do you think Microsoft really WANT DRM?
Or Apple?
No, they do it so they can license the distribution of other people's content, people that wouldn't license it unless it is "protected.
" The whole thing is a giant waste of time, but it looks good on paper.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136393</id>
	<title>Hopes and dreams</title>
	<author>FluffyWithTeeth</author>
	<datestamp>1243594440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just hope there'll be some way to get setanta sports on this.</p><p>How can man live without old Celtic matches and the few bits of GAA they show?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just hope there 'll be some way to get setanta sports on this.How can man live without old Celtic matches and the few bits of GAA they show ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just hope there'll be some way to get setanta sports on this.How can man live without old Celtic matches and the few bits of GAA they show?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136137</id>
	<title>Re:Availability?</title>
	<author>LordSnooty</author>
	<datestamp>1243591200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>now you know how I feel when I wade through 100 articles about how Sen. Bob (CA (R)) has gained support for the lobbyists and tacked an amendment onto Prop 61 of the REALLYWELLACRONYMED Bill in the State Senate Legislature Tuesday</htmltext>
<tokenext>now you know how I feel when I wade through 100 articles about how Sen. Bob ( CA ( R ) ) has gained support for the lobbyists and tacked an amendment onto Prop 61 of the REALLYWELLACRONYMED Bill in the State Senate Legislature Tuesday</tokentext>
<sentencetext>now you know how I feel when I wade through 100 articles about how Sen. Bob (CA (R)) has gained support for the lobbyists and tacked an amendment onto Prop 61 of the REALLYWELLACRONYMED Bill in the State Senate Legislature Tuesday</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135687</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28138309</id>
	<title>Re:Simulcast?</title>
	<author>Novotny</author>
	<datestamp>1243609440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wish I had mods points atm, that's not a troll at all.  It's a very good point.  Marketing people are always making up stupid words these days.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wish I had mods points atm , that 's not a troll at all .
It 's a very good point .
Marketing people are always making up stupid words these days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wish I had mods points atm, that's not a troll at all.
It's a very good point.
Marketing people are always making up stupid words these days.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136039</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28138071</id>
	<title>Re:Price..?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243608480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While probably not directly in response to this, Sony did supposedly release PlayTV (a device) in the UK in September of last year.  So maybe this is MS's response, and also explains why it's in such a limited market--afaik, PlayTV is only available in the UK too.</p><p>And yes, I too am disappointed in Sony's slowness in coming up with a PVR or streaming device for the PS3 for the rest of the world's market.  The PS3, imo, is a pretty damn cool device that seems continually hamstrung by Sony's incompetence in managing and expanding the opportunities for device users.  They allow sharing and streaming between devices such as their handhelds, but can't get content onboard easily.  (Which is why I have a separate PVR box to copy content over to the PS3, which is a bit of a pain.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While probably not directly in response to this , Sony did supposedly release PlayTV ( a device ) in the UK in September of last year .
So maybe this is MS 's response , and also explains why it 's in such a limited market--afaik , PlayTV is only available in the UK too.And yes , I too am disappointed in Sony 's slowness in coming up with a PVR or streaming device for the PS3 for the rest of the world 's market .
The PS3 , imo , is a pretty damn cool device that seems continually hamstrung by Sony 's incompetence in managing and expanding the opportunities for device users .
They allow sharing and streaming between devices such as their handhelds , but ca n't get content onboard easily .
( Which is why I have a separate PVR box to copy content over to the PS3 , which is a bit of a pain .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While probably not directly in response to this, Sony did supposedly release PlayTV (a device) in the UK in September of last year.
So maybe this is MS's response, and also explains why it's in such a limited market--afaik, PlayTV is only available in the UK too.And yes, I too am disappointed in Sony's slowness in coming up with a PVR or streaming device for the PS3 for the rest of the world's market.
The PS3, imo, is a pretty damn cool device that seems continually hamstrung by Sony's incompetence in managing and expanding the opportunities for device users.
They allow sharing and streaming between devices such as their handhelds, but can't get content onboard easily.
(Which is why I have a separate PVR box to copy content over to the PS3, which is a bit of a pain.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136231</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136127</id>
	<title>Re:Global or just UK only?</title>
	<author>Inda</author>
	<datestamp>1243591080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Judging from the Sopcast steams I watch, every other country in the world gets all English Premier League matches free. Sky and the Premier League wont show all matches in the UK because they think it'll reduce gate money.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Judging from the Sopcast steams I watch , every other country in the world gets all English Premier League matches free .
Sky and the Premier League wont show all matches in the UK because they think it 'll reduce gate money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Judging from the Sopcast steams I watch, every other country in the world gets all English Premier League matches free.
Sky and the Premier League wont show all matches in the UK because they think it'll reduce gate money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135917</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135799
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135687
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136601
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136231
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136127
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135917
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28139551
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135845
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28139459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136193
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28137085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135917
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28138309
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136039
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135917
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136039
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136669
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135917
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28137197
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135845
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28137117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136231
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28138531
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135917
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28141311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28137273
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135917
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28144583
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136193
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135687
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28138983
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136007
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28138071
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136231
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136397
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136231
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28143251
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136193
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28138537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28137273
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135917
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28137479
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135917
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135917
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136333
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136039
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28139007
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135845
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_045233_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136137
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135687
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_045233.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136193
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28139459
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28144583
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28143251
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_045233.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135799
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135863
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_045233.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135987
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_045233.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135845
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28139551
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28139007
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28137197
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_045233.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136393
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_045233.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135907
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_045233.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28138809
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_045233.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136231
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28137117
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136397
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28138071
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136601
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_045233.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136011
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_045233.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136039
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136333
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28138309
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136455
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_045233.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135687
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136137
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136371
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135807
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_045233.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135677
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_045233.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136007
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28138983
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_045233.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135957
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_045233.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136145
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_045233.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28135917
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28137479
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136117
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28138531
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28137273
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28141311
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28138537
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136493
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28137085
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136669
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136157
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136127
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_045233.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_045233.28136791
</commentlist>
</conversation>
