<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_06_0544202</id>
	<title>The Pirates Will Always Win, Says UK ISP</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1244290560000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>TheEvilOverlord writes <i>"The head of UK ISP TalkTalk, Charles Dunstone, has made the comment ahead of the communications minister's Digital Britain report that <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jun/05/dunstone-carphone-warehouse-results-pirates">illegal downloading cannot be stopped</a>.  He said 'If you try speed humps or disconnections for peer-to-peer, people will simply either disguise their traffic or share the content another way. It is a game of Tom and Jerry and you will never catch the mouse. The mouse always wins in this battle and we need to be careful that politicians do not get talked into putting legislation in place that, in the end, ends up looking stupid.'  Instead he advocates allowing users 'to get content easily and cheaply.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>TheEvilOverlord writes " The head of UK ISP TalkTalk , Charles Dunstone , has made the comment ahead of the communications minister 's Digital Britain report that illegal downloading can not be stopped .
He said 'If you try speed humps or disconnections for peer-to-peer , people will simply either disguise their traffic or share the content another way .
It is a game of Tom and Jerry and you will never catch the mouse .
The mouse always wins in this battle and we need to be careful that politicians do not get talked into putting legislation in place that , in the end , ends up looking stupid .
' Instead he advocates allowing users 'to get content easily and cheaply .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TheEvilOverlord writes "The head of UK ISP TalkTalk, Charles Dunstone, has made the comment ahead of the communications minister's Digital Britain report that illegal downloading cannot be stopped.
He said 'If you try speed humps or disconnections for peer-to-peer, people will simply either disguise their traffic or share the content another way.
It is a game of Tom and Jerry and you will never catch the mouse.
The mouse always wins in this battle and we need to be careful that politicians do not get talked into putting legislation in place that, in the end, ends up looking stupid.
'  Instead he advocates allowing users 'to get content easily and cheaply.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28233975</id>
	<title>Re:The ways in which TalkTalk gets it</title>
	<author>Tony Hoyle</author>
	<datestamp>1244309520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FTTC is being tested by BT Wholesale, and later in the year there will be lots of ISPs providing it - many of them *much* better than TalkTalk.</p><p>What they forget to mention is that 40mb download (definately achievable if you're near enough your cabinet, as it's VDSL), but only a 2mb upload.  With that level of disparity I wonder if the ACK packets will saturate the upstream before you hit 40mb anyway.</p><p>Also, they won't be increasing the monthly caps, so if you do stream that fast you're going to get burned anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FTTC is being tested by BT Wholesale , and later in the year there will be lots of ISPs providing it - many of them * much * better than TalkTalk.What they forget to mention is that 40mb download ( definately achievable if you 're near enough your cabinet , as it 's VDSL ) , but only a 2mb upload .
With that level of disparity I wonder if the ACK packets will saturate the upstream before you hit 40mb anyway.Also , they wo n't be increasing the monthly caps , so if you do stream that fast you 're going to get burned anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTTC is being tested by BT Wholesale, and later in the year there will be lots of ISPs providing it - many of them *much* better than TalkTalk.What they forget to mention is that 40mb download (definately achievable if you're near enough your cabinet, as it's VDSL), but only a 2mb upload.
With that level of disparity I wonder if the ACK packets will saturate the upstream before you hit 40mb anyway.Also, they won't be increasing the monthly caps, so if you do stream that fast you're going to get burned anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231991</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232089</id>
	<title>Re:Amazon!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244296980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>$ ls -d */* |cat</p></div><p>Please tell me you're doing that on purpose to piss of the Useless Use of Cat people. Please.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>$ ls -d * / * | catPlease tell me you 're doing that on purpose to piss of the Useless Use of Cat people .
Please .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$ ls -d */* |catPlease tell me you're doing that on purpose to piss of the Useless Use of Cat people.
Please.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232015</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think that's actually the industry's go</title>
	<author>Krneki</author>
	<datestamp>1244296080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unless they offer a better service then Napster, your dentist will keep using it. Besides a dentist might not be good with computers, but he ain't a stupid person.<br><br>It was clear from the start of the Internet that free sharing can't be stopped. They need to accept it and move forward.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless they offer a better service then Napster , your dentist will keep using it .
Besides a dentist might not be good with computers , but he ai n't a stupid person.It was clear from the start of the Internet that free sharing ca n't be stopped .
They need to accept it and move forward .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless they offer a better service then Napster, your dentist will keep using it.
Besides a dentist might not be good with computers, but he ain't a stupid person.It was clear from the start of the Internet that free sharing can't be stopped.
They need to accept it and move forward.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231961</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231983</id>
	<title>Finally</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244295600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some one who has a handle on things. "to get content easily and cheaply". You mean charging 80 dollars CAD is is too much, No shit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some one who has a handle on things .
" to get content easily and cheaply " .
You mean charging 80 dollars CAD is is too much , No shit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some one who has a handle on things.
"to get content easily and cheaply".
You mean charging 80 dollars CAD is is too much, No shit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231991</id>
	<title>The ways in which TalkTalk gets it</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1244295660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's a few snippets from the article, selected to show how TalkTalk gets it:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>TalkTalk has always maintained the defence that it is merely a broadband pipe and not an online policeman for the content industry.  Dunstone said any technical measures to try and clamp down on sharers of copyrighted material would soon be bypassed by pirates.</p></div><p><div class="quote"><p>"If people want to share content they will find another way to do it," [...] This idea that it is all peer to peer and somehow the ISPs can just stop it is very naive."</p></div><p><div class="quote"><p>TalkTalk is testing BT's new fibre-optic super-fast broadband network in north London [...] Dunstone [of TalkTalk] reckons super-fast broadband &#226;" offering speeds of up to 40Mb a second &#226;" will be more expensive than current-generation broadband but less than the sort of &#194;&pound;39.99-a-month prices being asked for basic broadband a few years ago.</p></div><p>Fast cheap internets, "we can't stop the pirates"...</p><p>Exchange your currency into British pounds and vote with it.</p><p>(I'm not paid to say that)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's a few snippets from the article , selected to show how TalkTalk gets it : TalkTalk has always maintained the defence that it is merely a broadband pipe and not an online policeman for the content industry .
Dunstone said any technical measures to try and clamp down on sharers of copyrighted material would soon be bypassed by pirates .
" If people want to share content they will find another way to do it , " [ ... ] This idea that it is all peer to peer and somehow the ISPs can just stop it is very naive .
" TalkTalk is testing BT 's new fibre-optic super-fast broadband network in north London [ ... ] Dunstone [ of TalkTalk ] reckons super-fast broadband   " offering speeds of up to 40Mb a second   " will be more expensive than current-generation broadband but less than the sort of     39.99-a-month prices being asked for basic broadband a few years ago.Fast cheap internets , " we ca n't stop the pirates " ...Exchange your currency into British pounds and vote with it .
( I 'm not paid to say that )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's a few snippets from the article, selected to show how TalkTalk gets it:TalkTalk has always maintained the defence that it is merely a broadband pipe and not an online policeman for the content industry.
Dunstone said any technical measures to try and clamp down on sharers of copyrighted material would soon be bypassed by pirates.
"If people want to share content they will find another way to do it," [...] This idea that it is all peer to peer and somehow the ISPs can just stop it is very naive.
"TalkTalk is testing BT's new fibre-optic super-fast broadband network in north London [...] Dunstone [of TalkTalk] reckons super-fast broadband â" offering speeds of up to 40Mb a second â" will be more expensive than current-generation broadband but less than the sort of Â£39.99-a-month prices being asked for basic broadband a few years ago.Fast cheap internets, "we can't stop the pirates"...Exchange your currency into British pounds and vote with it.
(I'm not paid to say that)
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232051</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think that's actually the industry's go</title>
	<author>ickleberry</author>
	<datestamp>1244296560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Cloud computing" is the new way of stopping software piracy. Client-side security such as DRM is doomed to fail but server-side has half a chance.
Web applications can be filled with ads and user-tracking but nobody complains because it doesn't have the same invasive mechanism as client based spyware. but as the browser is given more control, more access to hardware and more 'sploits surface the over all effect will be the same.
<br> <br>
of course there should always be enough legitimate client-side FOSS around that people won't actually *need* to use web-apps</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Cloud computing " is the new way of stopping software piracy .
Client-side security such as DRM is doomed to fail but server-side has half a chance .
Web applications can be filled with ads and user-tracking but nobody complains because it does n't have the same invasive mechanism as client based spyware .
but as the browser is given more control , more access to hardware and more 'sploits surface the over all effect will be the same .
of course there should always be enough legitimate client-side FOSS around that people wo n't actually * need * to use web-apps</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Cloud computing" is the new way of stopping software piracy.
Client-side security such as DRM is doomed to fail but server-side has half a chance.
Web applications can be filled with ads and user-tracking but nobody complains because it doesn't have the same invasive mechanism as client based spyware.
but as the browser is given more control, more access to hardware and more 'sploits surface the over all effect will be the same.
of course there should always be enough legitimate client-side FOSS around that people won't actually *need* to use web-apps</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231961</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232097</id>
	<title>DRM free and I'll buy it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244297040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was going to buy song from apple the other day- I have an account I opened with a &#194;&pound;20 iTunes voucher I was given, but instead opted for the effort of finding (it was quite an unknown song) and downloading it illegally so I had a DRM free copy.</p><p>Now if someone like me who WANTED to pay for it, HAD THE MEANS to pay for it, and found it EASIER to pay for it, but didn't- how will record companies ever compete with piracy?<br>Cheap, DRM and hassle free media is the only way forward in my opinion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was going to buy song from apple the other day- I have an account I opened with a     20 iTunes voucher I was given , but instead opted for the effort of finding ( it was quite an unknown song ) and downloading it illegally so I had a DRM free copy.Now if someone like me who WANTED to pay for it , HAD THE MEANS to pay for it , and found it EASIER to pay for it , but did n't- how will record companies ever compete with piracy ? Cheap , DRM and hassle free media is the only way forward in my opinion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was going to buy song from apple the other day- I have an account I opened with a Â£20 iTunes voucher I was given, but instead opted for the effort of finding (it was quite an unknown song) and downloading it illegally so I had a DRM free copy.Now if someone like me who WANTED to pay for it, HAD THE MEANS to pay for it, and found it EASIER to pay for it, but didn't- how will record companies ever compete with piracy?Cheap, DRM and hassle free media is the only way forward in my opinion.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232313</id>
	<title>Di34</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244298900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">accounts for less when IDC recently That 7hey sideline</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>accounts for less when IDC recently That 7hey sideline [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>accounts for less when IDC recently That 7hey sideline [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28235849</id>
	<title>Re:Amazon!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244278920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok. But how do you prove that those are legally bought files? Or I could say, prove that the music I downloaded from torrent is not bought on Amazon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok. But how do you prove that those are legally bought files ?
Or I could say , prove that the music I downloaded from torrent is not bought on Amazon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok. But how do you prove that those are legally bought files?
Or I could say, prove that the music I downloaded from torrent is not bought on Amazon.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232065</id>
	<title>The Pirates Will Always Win...</title>
	<author>pboechat</author>
	<datestamp>1244296740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Take that, ninjas!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Take that , ninjas !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take that, ninjas!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28234465</id>
	<title>Way to lower pracy</title>
	<author>Psychotic\_Wrath</author>
	<datestamp>1244313360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think the only way that piracy can be significantly lowered is by making the software less expensive, and by making the measures taken to make piracy difficult. If it is more difficult to crack the game than it is to just buy it, then it comes to a point where people would rather just go out and buy the thing rather than deal with cracking it all the time.
Companies say that piracy drives their costs up. If they thought right then it should drive the prices down. People pirate because they aren't wiling to pay the price in stores. Instead they pay the price in time by cracking the software.
Find the point where you can get more people to buy your product and making piracy of the product hard enough, and you will be able to lower piracy significantly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the only way that piracy can be significantly lowered is by making the software less expensive , and by making the measures taken to make piracy difficult .
If it is more difficult to crack the game than it is to just buy it , then it comes to a point where people would rather just go out and buy the thing rather than deal with cracking it all the time .
Companies say that piracy drives their costs up .
If they thought right then it should drive the prices down .
People pirate because they are n't wiling to pay the price in stores .
Instead they pay the price in time by cracking the software .
Find the point where you can get more people to buy your product and making piracy of the product hard enough , and you will be able to lower piracy significantly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the only way that piracy can be significantly lowered is by making the software less expensive, and by making the measures taken to make piracy difficult.
If it is more difficult to crack the game than it is to just buy it, then it comes to a point where people would rather just go out and buy the thing rather than deal with cracking it all the time.
Companies say that piracy drives their costs up.
If they thought right then it should drive the prices down.
People pirate because they aren't wiling to pay the price in stores.
Instead they pay the price in time by cracking the software.
Find the point where you can get more people to buy your product and making piracy of the product hard enough, and you will be able to lower piracy significantly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232163</id>
	<title>Re:They hit the nail on the head</title>
	<author>psnyder</author>
	<datestamp>1244297640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>we need to be careful that politicians do not get talked into putting legislation in place that, in the end, ends up looking stupid.</p></div><p>or even worse, introduces new problems without solving the intended ones.</p></div><p>Charles Dunstone's wording is better when talking to politicians.<br>
Politicians know that new problems will always arise, so it's not much of a deterrent.  But they do NOT want to look stupid.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>we need to be careful that politicians do not get talked into putting legislation in place that , in the end , ends up looking stupid.or even worse , introduces new problems without solving the intended ones.Charles Dunstone 's wording is better when talking to politicians .
Politicians know that new problems will always arise , so it 's not much of a deterrent .
But they do NOT want to look stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>we need to be careful that politicians do not get talked into putting legislation in place that, in the end, ends up looking stupid.or even worse, introduces new problems without solving the intended ones.Charles Dunstone's wording is better when talking to politicians.
Politicians know that new problems will always arise, so it's not much of a deterrent.
But they do NOT want to look stupid.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232603</id>
	<title>Re:They hit the nail on the head</title>
	<author>jonbryce</author>
	<datestamp>1244301000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or they will have to do more live performances.</p><p>I spend about &pound;250 per year on concert tickets.  I wouldn't consider spending anything like that amount on CDs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or they will have to do more live performances.I spend about   250 per year on concert tickets .
I would n't consider spending anything like that amount on CDs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or they will have to do more live performances.I spend about £250 per year on concert tickets.
I wouldn't consider spending anything like that amount on CDs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232083</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231953</id>
	<title>Same goes for child porn</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244295240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As much as the general populace hates it they should stop trying to suppress child porn. If it was freely available there would be less incentive to kidnap little kiddies to produce more. Now I'm saying that free p2p kiddy porn will reduce the revenues of the kiddy porn industry, maybe I'm wrong and a study will come out that says p2p kiddy porn downloaders purchase more of the stuff but at least if the people who look at the stuff are decriminalised the source should be easier to track down using Echelon, GCHQ and all that bad stuff. and they will have a better idea of who to look out for as a potential kiddy rapist as kiddy porn viewers will no longer go through much effort to cover up their tracks</htmltext>
<tokenext>As much as the general populace hates it they should stop trying to suppress child porn .
If it was freely available there would be less incentive to kidnap little kiddies to produce more .
Now I 'm saying that free p2p kiddy porn will reduce the revenues of the kiddy porn industry , maybe I 'm wrong and a study will come out that says p2p kiddy porn downloaders purchase more of the stuff but at least if the people who look at the stuff are decriminalised the source should be easier to track down using Echelon , GCHQ and all that bad stuff .
and they will have a better idea of who to look out for as a potential kiddy rapist as kiddy porn viewers will no longer go through much effort to cover up their tracks</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As much as the general populace hates it they should stop trying to suppress child porn.
If it was freely available there would be less incentive to kidnap little kiddies to produce more.
Now I'm saying that free p2p kiddy porn will reduce the revenues of the kiddy porn industry, maybe I'm wrong and a study will come out that says p2p kiddy porn downloaders purchase more of the stuff but at least if the people who look at the stuff are decriminalised the source should be easier to track down using Echelon, GCHQ and all that bad stuff.
and they will have a better idea of who to look out for as a potential kiddy rapist as kiddy porn viewers will no longer go through much effort to cover up their tracks</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232017</id>
	<title>Re:Of course...</title>
	<author>Youngbull</author>
	<datestamp>1244296080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As long as there is internet, there will be piracy. Plain n' simple.</p></div><p>keep it down man! we don't want them to shut down the net!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As long as there is internet , there will be piracy .
Plain n ' simple.keep it down man !
we do n't want them to shut down the net !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As long as there is internet, there will be piracy.
Plain n' simple.keep it down man!
we don't want them to shut down the net!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231909</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232707</id>
	<title>Re:Of course...</title>
	<author>noidentity</author>
	<datestamp>1244301660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>As long as there is internet, there will be piracy. Plain n' simple.</p></div></blockquote><p>Because before the Internet, when we just had home computers and tape recorders, there was none.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As long as there is internet , there will be piracy .
Plain n ' simple.Because before the Internet , when we just had home computers and tape recorders , there was none .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As long as there is internet, there will be piracy.
Plain n' simple.Because before the Internet, when we just had home computers and tape recorders, there was none.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231909</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231999</id>
	<title>Wow! Someone with a clue?!?!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244295780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Price media at a REASONABLE price and make it so simple and easy for us to get it in a form we want.  and you'll make all the money you deserve.  And hey.  not pissing off millions of people is good too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Price media at a REASONABLE price and make it so simple and easy for us to get it in a form we want .
and you 'll make all the money you deserve .
And hey .
not pissing off millions of people is good too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Price media at a REASONABLE price and make it so simple and easy for us to get it in a form we want.
and you'll make all the money you deserve.
And hey.
not pissing off millions of people is good too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232489</id>
	<title>Re:They hit the nail on the head</title>
	<author>McGiraf</author>
	<datestamp>1244300340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hardly "unbiased" it's and ISP, how can they sell their high speed if you have the choice of<br>1) paying the same price as the store for you download</p><p>or</p><p>2)go to prison for "illegal" downloading?</p><p>for 1) you pay your ISP on top of the "content" and you will not get 10 movies or what ever a month, too expensive.</p><p>and 2) not many people want to go in prison</p><p>so without "illegal" downloading and cheaper price for download than physical goods you do not need high bandwidth. You go to a ISP that offer 256k "basic DSL" and pay less than the super high speed adn it cost them about the same to provide it.</p><p>yeah unbiased.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hardly " unbiased " it 's and ISP , how can they sell their high speed if you have the choice of1 ) paying the same price as the store for you downloador2 ) go to prison for " illegal " downloading ? for 1 ) you pay your ISP on top of the " content " and you will not get 10 movies or what ever a month , too expensive.and 2 ) not many people want to go in prisonso without " illegal " downloading and cheaper price for download than physical goods you do not need high bandwidth .
You go to a ISP that offer 256k " basic DSL " and pay less than the super high speed adn it cost them about the same to provide it.yeah unbiased .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hardly "unbiased" it's and ISP, how can they sell their high speed if you have the choice of1) paying the same price as the store for you downloador2)go to prison for "illegal" downloading?for 1) you pay your ISP on top of the "content" and you will not get 10 movies or what ever a month, too expensive.and 2) not many people want to go in prisonso without "illegal" downloading and cheaper price for download than physical goods you do not need high bandwidth.
You go to a ISP that offer 256k "basic DSL" and pay less than the super high speed adn it cost them about the same to provide it.yeah unbiased.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28233305</id>
	<title>Re:They hit the nail on the head</title>
	<author>eiMichael</author>
	<datestamp>1244305440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>All this means that if your art can be reproduced, it will.  Be fucking excited that people regard your creative endeavors worth reproducing.  This doesn't mean people won't pay for some of it.  It just means that people won't go through hoops and gatekeepers for it.<br>
<br>This reproduction opens your exposure to a MUCH MUCH wider audience.  You may lose some paying consumers as they never really wanted to pay the price, but buying your CD was just the easiest way to get your art.  Now it isn't.  However, people may be willing to 'donate' the $9.99 they would have paid in a store to those who produced such art.<br>
<br>This new distribution network for information is probably one of the biggest technological jumps in producing as it gives everyone who has an IP address the ability to distribute w/e it is they create.  From tweeting to personal scientific research, everyone has the capacity to be a producer.  This leads to tons of new competition against big-media, and as has been shown people will produce for nothing more than a few hits on their web site.<br>
<br>In summary, if you do art for a living, good luck.  Everyone is creative, and now you have a bunch of competition lowering the value of what you produce.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All this means that if your art can be reproduced , it will .
Be fucking excited that people regard your creative endeavors worth reproducing .
This does n't mean people wo n't pay for some of it .
It just means that people wo n't go through hoops and gatekeepers for it .
This reproduction opens your exposure to a MUCH MUCH wider audience .
You may lose some paying consumers as they never really wanted to pay the price , but buying your CD was just the easiest way to get your art .
Now it is n't .
However , people may be willing to 'donate ' the $ 9.99 they would have paid in a store to those who produced such art .
This new distribution network for information is probably one of the biggest technological jumps in producing as it gives everyone who has an IP address the ability to distribute w/e it is they create .
From tweeting to personal scientific research , everyone has the capacity to be a producer .
This leads to tons of new competition against big-media , and as has been shown people will produce for nothing more than a few hits on their web site .
In summary , if you do art for a living , good luck .
Everyone is creative , and now you have a bunch of competition lowering the value of what you produce .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All this means that if your art can be reproduced, it will.
Be fucking excited that people regard your creative endeavors worth reproducing.
This doesn't mean people won't pay for some of it.
It just means that people won't go through hoops and gatekeepers for it.
This reproduction opens your exposure to a MUCH MUCH wider audience.
You may lose some paying consumers as they never really wanted to pay the price, but buying your CD was just the easiest way to get your art.
Now it isn't.
However, people may be willing to 'donate' the $9.99 they would have paid in a store to those who produced such art.
This new distribution network for information is probably one of the biggest technological jumps in producing as it gives everyone who has an IP address the ability to distribute w/e it is they create.
From tweeting to personal scientific research, everyone has the capacity to be a producer.
This leads to tons of new competition against big-media, and as has been shown people will produce for nothing more than a few hits on their web site.
In summary, if you do art for a living, good luck.
Everyone is creative, and now you have a bunch of competition lowering the value of what you produce.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232083</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28234849</id>
	<title>Don't call it that</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244316660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Piracy is attacking ships at sea and a very bad thing. Sharing is the basis of society.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Piracy is attacking ships at sea and a very bad thing .
Sharing is the basis of society .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Piracy is attacking ships at sea and a very bad thing.
Sharing is the basis of society.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28237167</id>
	<title>Wow... I fell for their sweet-talk</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1244289300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a lot of people have mentioned, TalkTalk aren't all roses.  Censorship, advertisement, traffic caps, oversubscription, bad support<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p><p>I guess I in my innocence assumed all ISPs to be as benign as mine.</p><p>They <em>overtly</em> censor thepiratebay.org, because the court told them to.  Anything else is fair game.  No ads, friendly support (good for what little I've used it), no caps, I seem to get the advertised rates.</p><p>They're at bnaa.dk (in Danish).  Again, I'm not paid to say anything<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a lot of people have mentioned , TalkTalk are n't all roses .
Censorship , advertisement , traffic caps , oversubscription , bad support : ( I guess I in my innocence assumed all ISPs to be as benign as mine.They overtly censor thepiratebay.org , because the court told them to .
Anything else is fair game .
No ads , friendly support ( good for what little I 've used it ) , no caps , I seem to get the advertised rates.They 're at bnaa.dk ( in Danish ) .
Again , I 'm not paid to say anything : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a lot of people have mentioned, TalkTalk aren't all roses.
Censorship, advertisement, traffic caps, oversubscription, bad support :(I guess I in my innocence assumed all ISPs to be as benign as mine.They overtly censor thepiratebay.org, because the court told them to.
Anything else is fair game.
No ads, friendly support (good for what little I've used it), no caps, I seem to get the advertised rates.They're at bnaa.dk (in Danish).
Again, I'm not paid to say anything :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231991</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28235693</id>
	<title>Phorm</title>
	<author>Ant P.</author>
	<datestamp>1244321160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As mentioned in the comments somewhere above, this ISP has no problem with spying on your traffic and injecting ads into it. It depends which you find more tolerable - online policemen or online telemarketers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As mentioned in the comments somewhere above , this ISP has no problem with spying on your traffic and injecting ads into it .
It depends which you find more tolerable - online policemen or online telemarketers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As mentioned in the comments somewhere above, this ISP has no problem with spying on your traffic and injecting ads into it.
It depends which you find more tolerable - online policemen or online telemarketers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231991</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231981</id>
	<title>Re: There will always be piracy</title>
	<author>Baron\_Yam</author>
	<datestamp>1244295540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not so certain...</p><p>At some point, as with Prohibition in the States, the law may cave to reality at some point and we'll give up on the concept of owning strings of 1s and 0s.</p><p>Some other mechanism for paying creators will have to emerge - I think it'll end up being patrons for most things and live performances for others (like band tours and book readings), with a smattering of physical merchandise related to the original content.</p><p>Some things may end up being free, done as labours of love.  It's not like those of us in the First World don't have enough resources and time to burn on things we enjoy without necessarily requiring pay.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not so certain...At some point , as with Prohibition in the States , the law may cave to reality at some point and we 'll give up on the concept of owning strings of 1s and 0s.Some other mechanism for paying creators will have to emerge - I think it 'll end up being patrons for most things and live performances for others ( like band tours and book readings ) , with a smattering of physical merchandise related to the original content.Some things may end up being free , done as labours of love .
It 's not like those of us in the First World do n't have enough resources and time to burn on things we enjoy without necessarily requiring pay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not so certain...At some point, as with Prohibition in the States, the law may cave to reality at some point and we'll give up on the concept of owning strings of 1s and 0s.Some other mechanism for paying creators will have to emerge - I think it'll end up being patrons for most things and live performances for others (like band tours and book readings), with a smattering of physical merchandise related to the original content.Some things may end up being free, done as labours of love.
It's not like those of us in the First World don't have enough resources and time to burn on things we enjoy without necessarily requiring pay.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231909</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232095</id>
	<title>Piracy is not the problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244296980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The mouse always wins in this battle and we need to be careful that politicians do not get talked into putting legislation in place that, in the end, ends up looking stupid."</p><p>yea, the thing that politicians has yet to understand is that piracy is not a behavior created for it's own self fulfillment, but rather a function of how parts of the surrounding society firmly and grossly overestimates the value of their product.<br>In these cases people say "if you won't sell me the thing i desperately need that you have a gazzilion of for a fair price, and if i take one you won't actually loose one, then i guess I'll just have to take it for free without you knowing".</p><p>It wasn't long ago where a single track was worth a couple of bucks, likewise a album, and even i paid for that since it was worth it, but now they are basically worthless, the music is still great but i can get is anywhere for free whether i want to or not, so it shouldn't take a years salary to fill an ipod, but rather like $50.</p><p>It's the same with almost anything though, so if i where them i wouldn't count pirates as a problem but as a competitor, especially if i already am in a monopoly situation, which most recordlabels and move studios are.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The mouse always wins in this battle and we need to be careful that politicians do not get talked into putting legislation in place that , in the end , ends up looking stupid .
" yea , the thing that politicians has yet to understand is that piracy is not a behavior created for it 's own self fulfillment , but rather a function of how parts of the surrounding society firmly and grossly overestimates the value of their product.In these cases people say " if you wo n't sell me the thing i desperately need that you have a gazzilion of for a fair price , and if i take one you wo n't actually loose one , then i guess I 'll just have to take it for free without you knowing " .It was n't long ago where a single track was worth a couple of bucks , likewise a album , and even i paid for that since it was worth it , but now they are basically worthless , the music is still great but i can get is anywhere for free whether i want to or not , so it should n't take a years salary to fill an ipod , but rather like $ 50.It 's the same with almost anything though , so if i where them i would n't count pirates as a problem but as a competitor , especially if i already am in a monopoly situation , which most recordlabels and move studios are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The mouse always wins in this battle and we need to be careful that politicians do not get talked into putting legislation in place that, in the end, ends up looking stupid.
"yea, the thing that politicians has yet to understand is that piracy is not a behavior created for it's own self fulfillment, but rather a function of how parts of the surrounding society firmly and grossly overestimates the value of their product.In these cases people say "if you won't sell me the thing i desperately need that you have a gazzilion of for a fair price, and if i take one you won't actually loose one, then i guess I'll just have to take it for free without you knowing".It wasn't long ago where a single track was worth a couple of bucks, likewise a album, and even i paid for that since it was worth it, but now they are basically worthless, the music is still great but i can get is anywhere for free whether i want to or not, so it shouldn't take a years salary to fill an ipod, but rather like $50.It's the same with almost anything though, so if i where them i wouldn't count pirates as a problem but as a competitor, especially if i already am in a monopoly situation, which most recordlabels and move studios are.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28236243</id>
	<title>Re:They hit the nail on the head</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244281440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"These days, a lot can be done very cheaply... Powerful computers with complex 3d modeling software are affordable and most special effects are computerized... Same for audio, a lot can and is done in software these days."</p><p>The problem is that that is only true for some sub-genres of music. (Techno, bedroom hiphop made from recycling other people records etc)</p><p>For most genres involving actual musicians the cost of the equipment has risen dramatically.</p><p>The reason for this is that the real cost of a studio is the building and sound treatment. The equipment, even in the days of Studer 24 tracks and SSL desks, is a smaller consideration. The cost of property in a good location has not got any cheaper.</p><p>Of course, like any market, people are seeking to produce goods for cheaper. So there is a lot of the kind of music around at the moment that one guy can make on a computer. The problem is that no one wants to listen to it, and everyone complains that music is not as good any more.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:( Still, at least it's cheap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" These days , a lot can be done very cheaply... Powerful computers with complex 3d modeling software are affordable and most special effects are computerized... Same for audio , a lot can and is done in software these days .
" The problem is that that is only true for some sub-genres of music .
( Techno , bedroom hiphop made from recycling other people records etc ) For most genres involving actual musicians the cost of the equipment has risen dramatically.The reason for this is that the real cost of a studio is the building and sound treatment .
The equipment , even in the days of Studer 24 tracks and SSL desks , is a smaller consideration .
The cost of property in a good location has not got any cheaper.Of course , like any market , people are seeking to produce goods for cheaper .
So there is a lot of the kind of music around at the moment that one guy can make on a computer .
The problem is that no one wants to listen to it , and everyone complains that music is not as good any more .
: ( Still , at least it 's cheap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"These days, a lot can be done very cheaply... Powerful computers with complex 3d modeling software are affordable and most special effects are computerized... Same for audio, a lot can and is done in software these days.
"The problem is that that is only true for some sub-genres of music.
(Techno, bedroom hiphop made from recycling other people records etc)For most genres involving actual musicians the cost of the equipment has risen dramatically.The reason for this is that the real cost of a studio is the building and sound treatment.
The equipment, even in the days of Studer 24 tracks and SSL desks, is a smaller consideration.
The cost of property in a good location has not got any cheaper.Of course, like any market, people are seeking to produce goods for cheaper.
So there is a lot of the kind of music around at the moment that one guy can make on a computer.
The problem is that no one wants to listen to it, and everyone complains that music is not as good any more.
:( Still, at least it's cheap.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232985</id>
	<title>Re:Amazon!</title>
	<author>caluml</author>
	<datestamp>1244303700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>What, exactly, are you thinking that | cat on the end is adding?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What , exactly , are you thinking that | cat on the end is adding ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What, exactly, are you thinking that | cat on the end is adding?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232175</id>
	<title>Re:Amazon!</title>
	<author>Crookdotter</author>
	<datestamp>1244297760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>If I got that right, that's 54 albums, so in cost that's $215 you've spent right there. I bet I could have the majority of that on a torrent in a day or two, for nothing. <br> <br>What's the incentive for pirates to look at amazon?</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I got that right , that 's 54 albums , so in cost that 's $ 215 you 've spent right there .
I bet I could have the majority of that on a torrent in a day or two , for nothing .
What 's the incentive for pirates to look at amazon ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I got that right, that's 54 albums, so in cost that's $215 you've spent right there.
I bet I could have the majority of that on a torrent in a day or two, for nothing.
What's the incentive for pirates to look at amazon?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28234415</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think that's actually the industry's go</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244312880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about DC++?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about DC + + ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about DC++?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232151</id>
	<title>A suit with a clue</title>
	<author>vosester</author>
	<datestamp>1244297580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A suit with a clue, might have to switch form current ISP Virgin Media.</p><p>Who's CEO is a tool of the highest order, by saying Net Neutrality was bollocks.</p><p>Really it should be Illegal for content providers to own an ISP.</p><p> The amount of power these content providers are getting is scary.</p><p>If I played a song down my phone line and the other person recorded it, that would be like retro file sharing.</p><p>But they would never get a judge to sign a wire tap for that, so why do they have the power to do it to my internet connection?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A suit with a clue , might have to switch form current ISP Virgin Media.Who 's CEO is a tool of the highest order , by saying Net Neutrality was bollocks.Really it should be Illegal for content providers to own an ISP .
The amount of power these content providers are getting is scary.If I played a song down my phone line and the other person recorded it , that would be like retro file sharing.But they would never get a judge to sign a wire tap for that , so why do they have the power to do it to my internet connection ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A suit with a clue, might have to switch form current ISP Virgin Media.Who's CEO is a tool of the highest order, by saying Net Neutrality was bollocks.Really it should be Illegal for content providers to own an ISP.
The amount of power these content providers are getting is scary.If I played a song down my phone line and the other person recorded it, that would be like retro file sharing.But they would never get a judge to sign a wire tap for that, so why do they have the power to do it to my internet connection?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001</id>
	<title>Amazon!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244295840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Amazon has 89 cent downloads.  And<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.99 to 3.99 albums (one per day).  Pirates should check out Amazon!!!</p><p>Here is what I've gotten (albums for less than $3.99) in 6 months:</p><p>$ ls -d */* |cat<br>Aerosmith/Big Ones<br>Alanis Morissette/Flavors Of Entanglement<br>Amy Grant/Heart In Motion<br>Bob Marley/Live At The Lyceum<br>Bon Jovi/Cross Road<br>Boston/Boston<br>Butch Walker/Sycamore Meadows<br>Cary Brothers/Who You Are<br>Creedence Clearwater Revival/Chronicle\_ 20 Greatest Hits<br>Creed/Greatest Hits<br>David Bowie/Heroes<br>Eagles/One Of These Nights<br>Elvis Costello/My Aim Is True<br>Forgive Durden/Forgive Durden Presents Razia's Shadow\_ A Musical<br>Heart/Make Me<br>Inxs/Kick<br>Jack's Mannequin/The Glass Passenger (Amazon Exclusive)<br>Jackson Browne/The Pretender<br>James Morrison/Songs For You, Truths For Me<br>Jimi Hendrix/Electric Ladyland<br>Joan Jett &amp; The Blackhearts/I Love Rock N' Roll<br>Joe Bonamassa/The Ballad Of John Henry<br>Joshua Radin/Simple Times<br>Kate Voegele/A Fine Mess<br>Katy Perry/One Of The Boys<br>Led Zeppelin/Led Zeppelin<br>Madonna/Like A Virgin<br>MC5/Kick Out The Jams<br>Metric/Fantasies<br>Mieka Pauley/Elijah Drop Your Gun<br>Neil Diamond/Sweet Caroline<br>No Doubt/The Singles Collection<br>Pink Floyd/Animals<br>Prince/Purple Rain [Explicit]<br>Queen/News Of The World<br>Robin Trower/Bridge Of Sighs<br>Rod Stewart/The Definitive Rod Stewart<br>Seether/Finding Beauty In Negative Spaces Spaces (Bonus Track Version) - [Explicit]<br>Seth Walker/Leap Of Faith<br>Shiny Toy Guns/Major Tom<br>Soundgarden/Superunknown<br>The Apples In Stereo/New Magnetic Wonder<br>The Band/Greatest Hits<br>The Benjy Davis Project/Dust<br>The Go-Go's/Beauty And The Beat<br>The Pussycat Dolls/Doll Domination<br>The Weepies/Hideaway<br>The White Tie Affair/Walk This Way<br>The Who/Who Are You<br>U2/No Line On The Horizon<br>Van Halen/Van Halen<br>Van Halen/Van Halen II<br>Various Artists/Motown Number 1's Vol. 2<br>Whitesnake/Whitesnake<br>Yes/The Yes Album</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Amazon has 89 cent downloads .
And .99 to 3.99 albums ( one per day ) .
Pirates should check out Amazon ! !
! Here is what I 've gotten ( albums for less than $ 3.99 ) in 6 months : $ ls -d * / * | catAerosmith/Big OnesAlanis Morissette/Flavors Of EntanglementAmy Grant/Heart In MotionBob Marley/Live At The LyceumBon Jovi/Cross RoadBoston/BostonButch Walker/Sycamore MeadowsCary Brothers/Who You AreCreedence Clearwater Revival/Chronicle \ _ 20 Greatest HitsCreed/Greatest HitsDavid Bowie/HeroesEagles/One Of These NightsElvis Costello/My Aim Is TrueForgive Durden/Forgive Durden Presents Razia 's Shadow \ _ A MusicalHeart/Make MeInxs/KickJack 's Mannequin/The Glass Passenger ( Amazon Exclusive ) Jackson Browne/The PretenderJames Morrison/Songs For You , Truths For MeJimi Hendrix/Electric LadylandJoan Jett &amp; The Blackhearts/I Love Rock N ' RollJoe Bonamassa/The Ballad Of John HenryJoshua Radin/Simple TimesKate Voegele/A Fine MessKaty Perry/One Of The BoysLed Zeppelin/Led ZeppelinMadonna/Like A VirginMC5/Kick Out The JamsMetric/FantasiesMieka Pauley/Elijah Drop Your GunNeil Diamond/Sweet CarolineNo Doubt/The Singles CollectionPink Floyd/AnimalsPrince/Purple Rain [ Explicit ] Queen/News Of The WorldRobin Trower/Bridge Of SighsRod Stewart/The Definitive Rod StewartSeether/Finding Beauty In Negative Spaces Spaces ( Bonus Track Version ) - [ Explicit ] Seth Walker/Leap Of FaithShiny Toy Guns/Major TomSoundgarden/SuperunknownThe Apples In Stereo/New Magnetic WonderThe Band/Greatest HitsThe Benjy Davis Project/DustThe Go-Go 's/Beauty And The BeatThe Pussycat Dolls/Doll DominationThe Weepies/HideawayThe White Tie Affair/Walk This WayThe Who/Who Are YouU2/No Line On The HorizonVan Halen/Van HalenVan Halen/Van Halen IIVarious Artists/Motown Number 1 's Vol .
2Whitesnake/WhitesnakeYes/The Yes Album</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amazon has 89 cent downloads.
And .99 to 3.99 albums (one per day).
Pirates should check out Amazon!!
!Here is what I've gotten (albums for less than $3.99) in 6 months:$ ls -d */* |catAerosmith/Big OnesAlanis Morissette/Flavors Of EntanglementAmy Grant/Heart In MotionBob Marley/Live At The LyceumBon Jovi/Cross RoadBoston/BostonButch Walker/Sycamore MeadowsCary Brothers/Who You AreCreedence Clearwater Revival/Chronicle\_ 20 Greatest HitsCreed/Greatest HitsDavid Bowie/HeroesEagles/One Of These NightsElvis Costello/My Aim Is TrueForgive Durden/Forgive Durden Presents Razia's Shadow\_ A MusicalHeart/Make MeInxs/KickJack's Mannequin/The Glass Passenger (Amazon Exclusive)Jackson Browne/The PretenderJames Morrison/Songs For You, Truths For MeJimi Hendrix/Electric LadylandJoan Jett &amp; The Blackhearts/I Love Rock N' RollJoe Bonamassa/The Ballad Of John HenryJoshua Radin/Simple TimesKate Voegele/A Fine MessKaty Perry/One Of The BoysLed Zeppelin/Led ZeppelinMadonna/Like A VirginMC5/Kick Out The JamsMetric/FantasiesMieka Pauley/Elijah Drop Your GunNeil Diamond/Sweet CarolineNo Doubt/The Singles CollectionPink Floyd/AnimalsPrince/Purple Rain [Explicit]Queen/News Of The WorldRobin Trower/Bridge Of SighsRod Stewart/The Definitive Rod StewartSeether/Finding Beauty In Negative Spaces Spaces (Bonus Track Version) - [Explicit]Seth Walker/Leap Of FaithShiny Toy Guns/Major TomSoundgarden/SuperunknownThe Apples In Stereo/New Magnetic WonderThe Band/Greatest HitsThe Benjy Davis Project/DustThe Go-Go's/Beauty And The BeatThe Pussycat Dolls/Doll DominationThe Weepies/HideawayThe White Tie Affair/Walk This WayThe Who/Who Are YouU2/No Line On The HorizonVan Halen/Van HalenVan Halen/Van Halen IIVarious Artists/Motown Number 1's Vol.
2Whitesnake/WhitesnakeYes/The Yes Album</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28233179</id>
	<title>It's a sudden break of common sense</title>
	<author>DragonTHC</author>
	<datestamp>1244304660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have been screaming this line for years and years.</p><p>It would appear, I'm a fucking visionary.</p><p>Why do they put up so many barriers to buying their content?</p><p>Make it cheaper, make it easier to find and access.  If I could buy your content online in HD format for what I think it's worth, then I would buy it instead of download it.  You think it's worth more than it is.  You strictly control access to it.  You claim that your business is suffering.  Adapt to the damn market.</p><p>And finally, make up your damn mind.  Is it a product or a license?  You can't have it both ways.  If it's a product, I can understand that.  Since downloads are not stealing and aren't a diminishment of your product, we can download anything we want.</p><p>If it's a license, then I have a right to download the mp3s for all the vinyl and CDs that I own.  I also have a right to download any movies I own on vhs (which is a lot.)</p><p>If it's both, we can still download anything we want.</p><p>Copyright law was intended to prevent counterfeiting.  Piracy isn't counterfeiting.  Downloading isn't piracy.  Downloading isn't counterfeiting.</p><p>The statutory damages were intended to prevent corporate counterfeiting.  They were never intended to be applied to music fans.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have been screaming this line for years and years.It would appear , I 'm a fucking visionary.Why do they put up so many barriers to buying their content ? Make it cheaper , make it easier to find and access .
If I could buy your content online in HD format for what I think it 's worth , then I would buy it instead of download it .
You think it 's worth more than it is .
You strictly control access to it .
You claim that your business is suffering .
Adapt to the damn market.And finally , make up your damn mind .
Is it a product or a license ?
You ca n't have it both ways .
If it 's a product , I can understand that .
Since downloads are not stealing and are n't a diminishment of your product , we can download anything we want.If it 's a license , then I have a right to download the mp3s for all the vinyl and CDs that I own .
I also have a right to download any movies I own on vhs ( which is a lot .
) If it 's both , we can still download anything we want.Copyright law was intended to prevent counterfeiting .
Piracy is n't counterfeiting .
Downloading is n't piracy .
Downloading is n't counterfeiting.The statutory damages were intended to prevent corporate counterfeiting .
They were never intended to be applied to music fans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have been screaming this line for years and years.It would appear, I'm a fucking visionary.Why do they put up so many barriers to buying their content?Make it cheaper, make it easier to find and access.
If I could buy your content online in HD format for what I think it's worth, then I would buy it instead of download it.
You think it's worth more than it is.
You strictly control access to it.
You claim that your business is suffering.
Adapt to the damn market.And finally, make up your damn mind.
Is it a product or a license?
You can't have it both ways.
If it's a product, I can understand that.
Since downloads are not stealing and aren't a diminishment of your product, we can download anything we want.If it's a license, then I have a right to download the mp3s for all the vinyl and CDs that I own.
I also have a right to download any movies I own on vhs (which is a lot.
)If it's both, we can still download anything we want.Copyright law was intended to prevent counterfeiting.
Piracy isn't counterfeiting.
Downloading isn't piracy.
Downloading isn't counterfeiting.The statutory damages were intended to prevent corporate counterfeiting.
They were never intended to be applied to music fans.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232887</id>
	<title>Re:Wow, progress being made, but ...</title>
	<author>Migraineman</author>
	<datestamp>1244302980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The entertainment industry is notorious for creating an artificial scarcity.  They squeeze the distribution pipe between the content creators and the customers.  There's plenty of content, and the economics dictate that the price should drop.  However, that prevents the media cartels from making "good healthy profits" (as defined by *them*.)  Their solution isn't to flood the market with lots of content<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... that would entail more work for them for the same return.  They have chosen to choke-off the supply line, separating the product from the customer such that they may dictate the market price for a given set of products.  This method is only sustainable if no one is allowed to circumvent their choke hold, which is why legislative actions are so important to them.  If there are no repercussions to you bypassing the toll booth, their economic model fails.  <br> <br>
The revolution is upon them.  It snuck up in the darkness of the internet, and the media companies are scrambling to kill it.  If they had any vision a few decades ago, we would be begging Paramount-Verizon or Universal-Bell-South to deploy video-on-demand services through the government-restricted 2B+D ISDN services residential customers are allowed to have.  (Corporate customers may petition the Federal Digital Communications Commission for higher bandwidth access<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and trust me, you don't want to run afoul of the FDCC.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>The entertainment industry is notorious for creating an artificial scarcity .
They squeeze the distribution pipe between the content creators and the customers .
There 's plenty of content , and the economics dictate that the price should drop .
However , that prevents the media cartels from making " good healthy profits " ( as defined by * them * .
) Their solution is n't to flood the market with lots of content ... that would entail more work for them for the same return .
They have chosen to choke-off the supply line , separating the product from the customer such that they may dictate the market price for a given set of products .
This method is only sustainable if no one is allowed to circumvent their choke hold , which is why legislative actions are so important to them .
If there are no repercussions to you bypassing the toll booth , their economic model fails .
The revolution is upon them .
It snuck up in the darkness of the internet , and the media companies are scrambling to kill it .
If they had any vision a few decades ago , we would be begging Paramount-Verizon or Universal-Bell-South to deploy video-on-demand services through the government-restricted 2B + D ISDN services residential customers are allowed to have .
( Corporate customers may petition the Federal Digital Communications Commission for higher bandwidth access ... and trust me , you do n't want to run afoul of the FDCC .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The entertainment industry is notorious for creating an artificial scarcity.
They squeeze the distribution pipe between the content creators and the customers.
There's plenty of content, and the economics dictate that the price should drop.
However, that prevents the media cartels from making "good healthy profits" (as defined by *them*.
)  Their solution isn't to flood the market with lots of content ... that would entail more work for them for the same return.
They have chosen to choke-off the supply line, separating the product from the customer such that they may dictate the market price for a given set of products.
This method is only sustainable if no one is allowed to circumvent their choke hold, which is why legislative actions are so important to them.
If there are no repercussions to you bypassing the toll booth, their economic model fails.
The revolution is upon them.
It snuck up in the darkness of the internet, and the media companies are scrambling to kill it.
If they had any vision a few decades ago, we would be begging Paramount-Verizon or Universal-Bell-South to deploy video-on-demand services through the government-restricted 2B+D ISDN services residential customers are allowed to have.
(Corporate customers may petition the Federal Digital Communications Commission for higher bandwidth access ... and trust me, you don't want to run afoul of the FDCC.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232091</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28239615</id>
	<title>Re:Of course...</title>
	<author>glodime</author>
	<datestamp>1244318160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As long as there <b>are boats</b>, there will be piracy. Plain n' simple.</p></div><p>There, fixed that for you...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As long as there are boats , there will be piracy .
Plain n ' simple.There , fixed that for you.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As long as there are boats, there will be piracy.
Plain n' simple.There, fixed that for you...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231909</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28233723</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think that's actually the industry's go</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1244307840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I believe the industry knows that you cannot stop 100\% of software piracy.  I don't think that's their goal.</p></div><p>Its also not the governments goal. Their goal is to use this as an excuse to get citizen support of reduction of our rights.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe the industry knows that you can not stop 100 \ % of software piracy .
I do n't think that 's their goal.Its also not the governments goal .
Their goal is to use this as an excuse to get citizen support of reduction of our rights .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe the industry knows that you cannot stop 100\% of software piracy.
I don't think that's their goal.Its also not the governments goal.
Their goal is to use this as an excuse to get citizen support of reduction of our rights.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231961</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889</id>
	<title>They hit the nail on the head</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244294460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is really refreshing to see someone, sometimes, who understands the situation and puts it down this clear in an unbiased manner.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>we need to be careful that politicians do not get talked into putting legislation in place that, in the end, ends up looking stupid.</p></div><p>or even worse, introduces new problems without solving the intended ones.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is really refreshing to see someone , sometimes , who understands the situation and puts it down this clear in an unbiased manner.we need to be careful that politicians do not get talked into putting legislation in place that , in the end , ends up looking stupid.or even worse , introduces new problems without solving the intended ones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is really refreshing to see someone, sometimes, who understands the situation and puts it down this clear in an unbiased manner.we need to be careful that politicians do not get talked into putting legislation in place that, in the end, ends up looking stupid.or even worse, introduces new problems without solving the intended ones.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232071</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think that's actually the industry's go</title>
	<author>Jah-Wren Ryel</author>
	<datestamp>1244296860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I believe the industry is just trying to make sure my dentist doesn't start downloading songs again.</p></div><p>That's what they like to think.  But knowledge of how to use the latest piracy tools is just as unstoppable as the piracy itself.  It is a variation on the same phenomenon that results in virus-construction-kits and script-kiddies.</p><p>They can only go so far to make piracy harder.  What they can do without practical limit is to make alternatives to piracy easier.  If typing a song name into google gets you 10 different places you can legitimately download it in various ways for various payments (outright purchase, or advertising supported, or streaming, etc all with different pricing based on the seller) then that goes a long ways to keeping the dentist from even thinking about piracy.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe the industry is just trying to make sure my dentist does n't start downloading songs again.That 's what they like to think .
But knowledge of how to use the latest piracy tools is just as unstoppable as the piracy itself .
It is a variation on the same phenomenon that results in virus-construction-kits and script-kiddies.They can only go so far to make piracy harder .
What they can do without practical limit is to make alternatives to piracy easier .
If typing a song name into google gets you 10 different places you can legitimately download it in various ways for various payments ( outright purchase , or advertising supported , or streaming , etc all with different pricing based on the seller ) then that goes a long ways to keeping the dentist from even thinking about piracy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe the industry is just trying to make sure my dentist doesn't start downloading songs again.That's what they like to think.
But knowledge of how to use the latest piracy tools is just as unstoppable as the piracy itself.
It is a variation on the same phenomenon that results in virus-construction-kits and script-kiddies.They can only go so far to make piracy harder.
What they can do without practical limit is to make alternatives to piracy easier.
If typing a song name into google gets you 10 different places you can legitimately download it in various ways for various payments (outright purchase, or advertising supported, or streaming, etc all with different pricing based on the seller) then that goes a long ways to keeping the dentist from even thinking about piracy.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231961</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28237647</id>
	<title>Re:They hit the nail on the head</title>
	<author>Zarluk</author>
	<datestamp>1244294040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>big productions are done for.</p></div><p>
No problem, here. Most of then aren't worth the time I spent viewing them... still, I remember several "low cost" productions that, most likelly,  will stay in the history of cinema for many long years: "Easy Ryder", in the US, and most of the european cinema between 1950 and 1980 (Arrabal, Bunuel, Fellini, Pasolini, Polanski, and so may others).
</p><p>
I'm sure there will be more <b>great</b> "low budget" movies done in the USA... I just failed to remember them<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(
</p><p><div class="quote"><p>They will be dependant not on their skill but on their patronage.</p></div><p>You mean: "They will be dependant on their skill and not on their patronage", don't you?

</p><p>As far as I understand, <b> for several decades</b>, the <b>real</b> artists have been totally <b>screwed</b> by the major labels. Here are two examples:
</p><p> <b>Frank Zappa:</b> <br>
I'll prove to you that I'm bad enough to go to hell<br>
Because I have been through it!<br>
I have seen it!<br>
It has happened to me!<br>
Remember, I was signed with <b>Warner Brothers</b>
for eight fuckin' years!!!<br>
(in "Tities an Beers")
</p><p> <b>Sex Pistols:</b>"Fuck <b>EMI</b>" (in "The Great Rock and Roll Swindle")</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>big productions are done for .
No problem , here .
Most of then are n't worth the time I spent viewing them... still , I remember several " low cost " productions that , most likelly , will stay in the history of cinema for many long years : " Easy Ryder " , in the US , and most of the european cinema between 1950 and 1980 ( Arrabal , Bunuel , Fellini , Pasolini , Polanski , and so may others ) .
I 'm sure there will be more great " low budget " movies done in the USA... I just failed to remember them : ( They will be dependant not on their skill but on their patronage.You mean : " They will be dependant on their skill and not on their patronage " , do n't you ?
As far as I understand , for several decades , the real artists have been totally screwed by the major labels .
Here are two examples : Frank Zappa : I 'll prove to you that I 'm bad enough to go to hell Because I have been through it !
I have seen it !
It has happened to me !
Remember , I was signed with Warner Brothers for eight fuckin ' years ! ! !
( in " Tities an Beers " ) Sex Pistols : " Fuck EMI " ( in " The Great Rock and Roll Swindle " )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>big productions are done for.
No problem, here.
Most of then aren't worth the time I spent viewing them... still, I remember several "low cost" productions that, most likelly,  will stay in the history of cinema for many long years: "Easy Ryder", in the US, and most of the european cinema between 1950 and 1980 (Arrabal, Bunuel, Fellini, Pasolini, Polanski, and so may others).
I'm sure there will be more great "low budget" movies done in the USA... I just failed to remember them :(
They will be dependant not on their skill but on their patronage.You mean: "They will be dependant on their skill and not on their patronage", don't you?
As far as I understand,  for several decades, the real artists have been totally screwed by the major labels.
Here are two examples:
 Frank Zappa: 
I'll prove to you that I'm bad enough to go to hell
Because I have been through it!
I have seen it!
It has happened to me!
Remember, I was signed with Warner Brothers
for eight fuckin' years!!!
(in "Tities an Beers")
 Sex Pistols:"Fuck EMI" (in "The Great Rock and Roll Swindle")
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232083</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28238331</id>
	<title>Piracy alone accomplishes nothing</title>
	<author>mrpiddly</author>
	<datestamp>1244300700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>People these days seem to blame everything and everyone except themselves. In this case, they bemoan the system, the artists, the producers, the prices, ect but they do not offer alternatives and they do not work to directly change things. Either standup and take real measures to bring about change or stop crying about everything that you think is wrong. Just sitting around and pirating digital content accomplishes nothing on its own.</htmltext>
<tokenext>People these days seem to blame everything and everyone except themselves .
In this case , they bemoan the system , the artists , the producers , the prices , ect but they do not offer alternatives and they do not work to directly change things .
Either standup and take real measures to bring about change or stop crying about everything that you think is wrong .
Just sitting around and pirating digital content accomplishes nothing on its own .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People these days seem to blame everything and everyone except themselves.
In this case, they bemoan the system, the artists, the producers, the prices, ect but they do not offer alternatives and they do not work to directly change things.
Either standup and take real measures to bring about change or stop crying about everything that you think is wrong.
Just sitting around and pirating digital content accomplishes nothing on its own.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232243</id>
	<title>W00T 7dp</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244298360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>implementation to GNAA and support achieve any of the coomunity. The for election, I The BSD license, our chances in any way related be a lot slower fellow travellers?</htmltext>
<tokenext>implementation to GNAA and support achieve any of the coomunity .
The for election , I The BSD license , our chances in any way related be a lot slower fellow travellers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>implementation to GNAA and support achieve any of the coomunity.
The for election, I The BSD license, our chances in any way related be a lot slower fellow travellers?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232391</id>
	<title>Re:They hit the nail on the head</title>
	<author>joaobranco</author>
	<datestamp>1244299560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>we need to be careful that politicians do not get talked into putting legislation in place that, in the end, ends up looking stupid.</p></div><p>or even worse, introduces new problems without solving the intended ones.</p></div><p>Trouble is, some of the new problems it introduces (namely overbearing policing of actions online, bordering on a police state) are not usually seen as problems by the politicians (at least those in power or which hope to achieve it soon), but rather goals that they date not describe publicly...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>we need to be careful that politicians do not get talked into putting legislation in place that , in the end , ends up looking stupid.or even worse , introduces new problems without solving the intended ones.Trouble is , some of the new problems it introduces ( namely overbearing policing of actions online , bordering on a police state ) are not usually seen as problems by the politicians ( at least those in power or which hope to achieve it soon ) , but rather goals that they date not describe publicly.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>we need to be careful that politicians do not get talked into putting legislation in place that, in the end, ends up looking stupid.or even worse, introduces new problems without solving the intended ones.Trouble is, some of the new problems it introduces (namely overbearing policing of actions online, bordering on a police state) are not usually seen as problems by the politicians (at least those in power or which hope to achieve it soon), but rather goals that they date not describe publicly...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232197</id>
	<title>Re:Amazon!</title>
	<author>akanouras</author>
	<datestamp>1244298060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>$ ls -<b>1</b>d */*</p></div><p>There, fixed that for you.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>$ ls -1d * / * There , fixed that for you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$ ls -1d */*There, fixed that for you.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232303</id>
	<title>on the same side as the P2P app devs</title>
	<author>Cyko\_01</author>
	<datestamp>1244298900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>both have the same logic in mind:<br>
we have a great network/protocol with large amounts of legal content! Why should we destroy a perfectly good network/protocol just to keep out the pirates?</htmltext>
<tokenext>both have the same logic in mind : we have a great network/protocol with large amounts of legal content !
Why should we destroy a perfectly good network/protocol just to keep out the pirates ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>both have the same logic in mind:
we have a great network/protocol with large amounts of legal content!
Why should we destroy a perfectly good network/protocol just to keep out the pirates?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28236611</id>
	<title>Publishing, File Sharing &amp; Revolution</title>
	<author>Randomly</author>
	<datestamp>1244284140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If the computer is the generic machine: the Internet is the generic means of digital retail and distribution. <a href="http://rand0m1y.blogspot.com/2009/05/publishing-file-sharing-revolution.html" title="blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">But does anyone really want to prevent peer to peer file sharing?</a> [blogspot.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the computer is the generic machine : the Internet is the generic means of digital retail and distribution .
But does anyone really want to prevent peer to peer file sharing ?
[ blogspot.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the computer is the generic machine: the Internet is the generic means of digital retail and distribution.
But does anyone really want to prevent peer to peer file sharing?
[blogspot.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232277</id>
	<title>I didn't know TalkTalk were like this.</title>
	<author>lattyware</author>
	<datestamp>1244298600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I live in an area where TalkTalk have an LLU, It may be worth switching to them in the near future.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I live in an area where TalkTalk have an LLU , It may be worth switching to them in the near future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I live in an area where TalkTalk have an LLU, It may be worth switching to them in the near future.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28234791</id>
	<title>Re:They hit the nail on the head</title>
	<author>RichardJenkins</author>
	<datestamp>1244316240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's easy for a business to "understand the situation" when understanding involves arguing against any legislation that increases your costs or decreases your profits.

They're just protecting the bottom line, nothing to see here.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's easy for a business to " understand the situation " when understanding involves arguing against any legislation that increases your costs or decreases your profits .
They 're just protecting the bottom line , nothing to see here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's easy for a business to "understand the situation" when understanding involves arguing against any legislation that increases your costs or decreases your profits.
They're just protecting the bottom line, nothing to see here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232863</id>
	<title>Re:They hit the nail on the head</title>
	<author>Yvanhoe</author>
	<datestamp>1244302860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem is that he will be considered biased : ISPs are known to be on the side of "pirates" by politicians. They even make  profit from them !</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is that he will be considered biased : ISPs are known to be on the side of " pirates " by politicians .
They even make profit from them !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is that he will be considered biased : ISPs are known to be on the side of "pirates" by politicians.
They even make  profit from them !</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28235893</id>
	<title>Re:Amazon!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244279160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Enjoy your clear channel approved pop rock</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Enjoy your clear channel approved pop rock</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Enjoy your clear channel approved pop rock</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28240427</id>
	<title>Re:Amazon!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244377920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With quality music like this who need piracy!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With quality music like this who need piracy !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With quality music like this who need piracy!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232057</id>
	<title>more subtle</title>
	<author>Weezul</author>
	<datestamp>1244296620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not true, the news media isn't vulnerable to piracy.  Well, obviously their product is ad supported, but only some small minority of "pirates" blocks the ads.  An easy solution is :  (1) change internet radio consist of separate mixing instructions and content, so the original song is immediately available to users, but (2) include banner as in the ogg/mp3 comments and get player to attempt to induce purchases.  But there are numerous other frameworks where users "usually pay".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not true , the news media is n't vulnerable to piracy .
Well , obviously their product is ad supported , but only some small minority of " pirates " blocks the ads .
An easy solution is : ( 1 ) change internet radio consist of separate mixing instructions and content , so the original song is immediately available to users , but ( 2 ) include banner as in the ogg/mp3 comments and get player to attempt to induce purchases .
But there are numerous other frameworks where users " usually pay " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not true, the news media isn't vulnerable to piracy.
Well, obviously their product is ad supported, but only some small minority of "pirates" blocks the ads.
An easy solution is :  (1) change internet radio consist of separate mixing instructions and content, so the original song is immediately available to users, but (2) include banner as in the ogg/mp3 comments and get player to attempt to induce purchases.
But there are numerous other frameworks where users "usually pay".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232129</id>
	<title>Re:Of course...</title>
	<author>SeaHunter</author>
	<datestamp>1244297340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If there was no Internet people would still have pirated software. I remember playing pirated video games on my Commadore 64.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If there was no Internet people would still have pirated software .
I remember playing pirated video games on my Commadore 64 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there was no Internet people would still have pirated software.
I remember playing pirated video games on my Commadore 64.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231909</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232631</id>
	<title>Re:They hit the nail on the head</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244301180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had custom made hardware and software to crack games. I had filing cabinets full of copied, cracked games. This was in the C64 days. When I would spend 20 times the cost of the computer on the hardware and software to break copy protection and would do it for 'fun' they can't easily win. When I'd spend six months breaking a dongle, they can't win.</p><p>Now some kid has 100,000 dollars worth of hardware debuggers, 20k worth of software debuggers, 100k network analyzser/scope, 20k waveform generate and a 5k multimeter. You can't win. You might slow them down and their friends my have to remind them to EAT but you can't win.</p><p>Yea his dad knows and he just snickers and buys him more. I'm so proud.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had custom made hardware and software to crack games .
I had filing cabinets full of copied , cracked games .
This was in the C64 days .
When I would spend 20 times the cost of the computer on the hardware and software to break copy protection and would do it for 'fun ' they ca n't easily win .
When I 'd spend six months breaking a dongle , they ca n't win.Now some kid has 100,000 dollars worth of hardware debuggers , 20k worth of software debuggers , 100k network analyzser/scope , 20k waveform generate and a 5k multimeter .
You ca n't win .
You might slow them down and their friends my have to remind them to EAT but you ca n't win.Yea his dad knows and he just snickers and buys him more .
I 'm so proud .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had custom made hardware and software to crack games.
I had filing cabinets full of copied, cracked games.
This was in the C64 days.
When I would spend 20 times the cost of the computer on the hardware and software to break copy protection and would do it for 'fun' they can't easily win.
When I'd spend six months breaking a dongle, they can't win.Now some kid has 100,000 dollars worth of hardware debuggers, 20k worth of software debuggers, 100k network analyzser/scope, 20k waveform generate and a 5k multimeter.
You can't win.
You might slow them down and their friends my have to remind them to EAT but you can't win.Yea his dad knows and he just snickers and buys him more.
I'm so proud.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28233303</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think that's actually the industry's go</title>
	<author>swilver</author>
	<datestamp>1244305440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I believe the industry knows that you cannot stop 100\% of software piracy. I don't think that's their goal.</p></div></blockquote><p>
I wouldn't be so sure<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)  In fact, I think that's exactly their goal and the only thing stopping them from going for it is that it would likely result in copyright law being abolished or at the very least thoroughly re-examined.  They'll push it as far as they can, and they'll only stop pushing when it starts to hurt their bottom line.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe the industry knows that you can not stop 100 \ % of software piracy .
I do n't think that 's their goal .
I would n't be so sure : ) In fact , I think that 's exactly their goal and the only thing stopping them from going for it is that it would likely result in copyright law being abolished or at the very least thoroughly re-examined .
They 'll push it as far as they can , and they 'll only stop pushing when it starts to hurt their bottom line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe the industry knows that you cannot stop 100\% of software piracy.
I don't think that's their goal.
I wouldn't be so sure :)  In fact, I think that's exactly their goal and the only thing stopping them from going for it is that it would likely result in copyright law being abolished or at the very least thoroughly re-examined.
They'll push it as far as they can, and they'll only stop pushing when it starts to hurt their bottom line.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231961</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232105</id>
	<title>This is why i respect TalkTalk</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244297160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And also why i switched to them from BT.</p><p>Hopefully they can convince the idiots in power of this and maybe actually figure out a way to offer easy access to media at a "decent" price.<br>If iTunes and similar services can work, i don't see why they won't implement things like this.</p><p>Just make the process as seamless as possible, but not to the extent that people will end up spending without realising it.</p><p>Imagine if you will, Youtube, but with paid videos, and if you click into a paid video, it will show a frame before playing that states that this is a video you need to pay for, you click Yes or No, simple.  No numbers, no addresses, nothing. (this is all done in the user account settings beforehand)<br>The number of people who would accept this system is surprisingly high, if it is made simple enough to register an account and cheap enough.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And also why i switched to them from BT.Hopefully they can convince the idiots in power of this and maybe actually figure out a way to offer easy access to media at a " decent " price.If iTunes and similar services can work , i do n't see why they wo n't implement things like this.Just make the process as seamless as possible , but not to the extent that people will end up spending without realising it.Imagine if you will , Youtube , but with paid videos , and if you click into a paid video , it will show a frame before playing that states that this is a video you need to pay for , you click Yes or No , simple .
No numbers , no addresses , nothing .
( this is all done in the user account settings beforehand ) The number of people who would accept this system is surprisingly high , if it is made simple enough to register an account and cheap enough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And also why i switched to them from BT.Hopefully they can convince the idiots in power of this and maybe actually figure out a way to offer easy access to media at a "decent" price.If iTunes and similar services can work, i don't see why they won't implement things like this.Just make the process as seamless as possible, but not to the extent that people will end up spending without realising it.Imagine if you will, Youtube, but with paid videos, and if you click into a paid video, it will show a frame before playing that states that this is a video you need to pay for, you click Yes or No, simple.
No numbers, no addresses, nothing.
(this is all done in the user account settings beforehand)The number of people who would accept this system is surprisingly high, if it is made simple enough to register an account and cheap enough.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28235257</id>
	<title>Re:They hit the nail on the head</title>
	<author>mcvos</author>
	<datestamp>1244318760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You may be right. However, if you are indeed right, big productions are done for. Authors will be thrown back 500 years and be dependant on external sources of income. They will be dependant not on their skill but on their patronage.</p></div><p>400 years. That's when the first printing monopolies were granted. But that was only so the printers/publishers could make a living. It's only since the 20th century that authors could live from their copyright. Before that, any author that could live from his writings did that because of patronage, which, by the way, can be very dependent on skill (depending on the kind of patronage).</p><p><div class="quote"><p>It will be, at best, like TV is today. Music fans will go from being the customers to being the product, sold to advertisers, or ideological causes, and you will hardly see any singers, actors or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... without a pepsi or cola light in hand.</p></div><p>Not at all. Many music fans will remain customers, and their idols will make a handsome living from concerts. For most musicians, that's already their major source of income, and it has always been like that. That won't change as long as rock stars are idolised.</p><p>Of course allowing free downloads will change the game, but the game has been changed several times already, and art has always survived, often even flourished. The same will happen now. People just need to find a new way.</p><p>The only people who are really fucked are the record companies and other publishers of other people's work. Self-publishing is too cheap and easy, exposure is free, and artists and customers can find each other without the help of a middle man. Their business model is obsolete, but we don't lose much by losing them.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You may be right .
However , if you are indeed right , big productions are done for .
Authors will be thrown back 500 years and be dependant on external sources of income .
They will be dependant not on their skill but on their patronage.400 years .
That 's when the first printing monopolies were granted .
But that was only so the printers/publishers could make a living .
It 's only since the 20th century that authors could live from their copyright .
Before that , any author that could live from his writings did that because of patronage , which , by the way , can be very dependent on skill ( depending on the kind of patronage ) .It will be , at best , like TV is today .
Music fans will go from being the customers to being the product , sold to advertisers , or ideological causes , and you will hardly see any singers , actors or ... without a pepsi or cola light in hand.Not at all .
Many music fans will remain customers , and their idols will make a handsome living from concerts .
For most musicians , that 's already their major source of income , and it has always been like that .
That wo n't change as long as rock stars are idolised.Of course allowing free downloads will change the game , but the game has been changed several times already , and art has always survived , often even flourished .
The same will happen now .
People just need to find a new way.The only people who are really fucked are the record companies and other publishers of other people 's work .
Self-publishing is too cheap and easy , exposure is free , and artists and customers can find each other without the help of a middle man .
Their business model is obsolete , but we do n't lose much by losing them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You may be right.
However, if you are indeed right, big productions are done for.
Authors will be thrown back 500 years and be dependant on external sources of income.
They will be dependant not on their skill but on their patronage.400 years.
That's when the first printing monopolies were granted.
But that was only so the printers/publishers could make a living.
It's only since the 20th century that authors could live from their copyright.
Before that, any author that could live from his writings did that because of patronage, which, by the way, can be very dependent on skill (depending on the kind of patronage).It will be, at best, like TV is today.
Music fans will go from being the customers to being the product, sold to advertisers, or ideological causes, and you will hardly see any singers, actors or ... without a pepsi or cola light in hand.Not at all.
Many music fans will remain customers, and their idols will make a handsome living from concerts.
For most musicians, that's already their major source of income, and it has always been like that.
That won't change as long as rock stars are idolised.Of course allowing free downloads will change the game, but the game has been changed several times already, and art has always survived, often even flourished.
The same will happen now.
People just need to find a new way.The only people who are really fucked are the record companies and other publishers of other people's work.
Self-publishing is too cheap and easy, exposure is free, and artists and customers can find each other without the help of a middle man.
Their business model is obsolete, but we don't lose much by losing them.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232083</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232083</id>
	<title>Re:They hit the nail on the head</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244296920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>He said 'If you try speed humps or disconnections for peer-to-peer, people will simply either disguise their traffic or share the content another way. It is a game of Tom and Jerry and you will never catch the mouse. The mouse always wins in this battle and we need to be careful that politicians do not get talked</p></div><p>You may be right. However, if you are indeed right, big productions are done for. Authors will be thrown back 500 years and be dependant on external sources of income. They will be dependant not on their skill but on their patronage.</p><p>I'm sure some will survive. But artists will become progressively more dependant on government handouts, ads, or other such indirect sources of income.</p><p>As technology kills the last real differences between "home-tv" quality and cinema quality, it will become progressively harder to sell entertainment (since you're fighting against the economic force that free represents), until it can barely be done at all.</p><p>It will be, at best, like TV is today. Music fans will go from being the customers to being the product, sold to advertisers, or ideological causes, and you will hardly see any singers, actors or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... without a pepsi or cola light in hand.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>He said 'If you try speed humps or disconnections for peer-to-peer , people will simply either disguise their traffic or share the content another way .
It is a game of Tom and Jerry and you will never catch the mouse .
The mouse always wins in this battle and we need to be careful that politicians do not get talkedYou may be right .
However , if you are indeed right , big productions are done for .
Authors will be thrown back 500 years and be dependant on external sources of income .
They will be dependant not on their skill but on their patronage.I 'm sure some will survive .
But artists will become progressively more dependant on government handouts , ads , or other such indirect sources of income.As technology kills the last real differences between " home-tv " quality and cinema quality , it will become progressively harder to sell entertainment ( since you 're fighting against the economic force that free represents ) , until it can barely be done at all.It will be , at best , like TV is today .
Music fans will go from being the customers to being the product , sold to advertisers , or ideological causes , and you will hardly see any singers , actors or ... without a pepsi or cola light in hand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He said 'If you try speed humps or disconnections for peer-to-peer, people will simply either disguise their traffic or share the content another way.
It is a game of Tom and Jerry and you will never catch the mouse.
The mouse always wins in this battle and we need to be careful that politicians do not get talkedYou may be right.
However, if you are indeed right, big productions are done for.
Authors will be thrown back 500 years and be dependant on external sources of income.
They will be dependant not on their skill but on their patronage.I'm sure some will survive.
But artists will become progressively more dependant on government handouts, ads, or other such indirect sources of income.As technology kills the last real differences between "home-tv" quality and cinema quality, it will become progressively harder to sell entertainment (since you're fighting against the economic force that free represents), until it can barely be done at all.It will be, at best, like TV is today.
Music fans will go from being the customers to being the product, sold to advertisers, or ideological causes, and you will hardly see any singers, actors or ... without a pepsi or cola light in hand.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232091</id>
	<title>Wow, progress being made, but ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244296980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>they're still calling us pirates. I like to think of myself as someone who likes to walk around the tollbooths the entertainment industry puts in front of everything, not walk through them. Haven't they got enough money? How many copies of my favorite albums do i have to buy to replace the ones i lost, or had stolen or whatever? Because the tollbooth owners don't care about that sort of fairness, how can i be expected to WILLINGLY put up with the hassle of the tollbooth experience when i can just walk around? The ISP guy got it spot on in one regard -- the only way to combat the culture that has developed to avoid this hassle (ie filesharing) is to make stuff dirt cheap and mega accessible. But there's no or very little profit in that is there, and so here lies the contradiction of trying to own something in digital form and make "good healthy profits". Normally i would sarcastically say "good luck with that" but its simply not funny that while they're trying to make these healthy profits we have to put up with all the associated nastiness of their stand-over tactics and absurd propaganda... can we have the revolution now please?</htmltext>
<tokenext>they 're still calling us pirates .
I like to think of myself as someone who likes to walk around the tollbooths the entertainment industry puts in front of everything , not walk through them .
Have n't they got enough money ?
How many copies of my favorite albums do i have to buy to replace the ones i lost , or had stolen or whatever ?
Because the tollbooth owners do n't care about that sort of fairness , how can i be expected to WILLINGLY put up with the hassle of the tollbooth experience when i can just walk around ?
The ISP guy got it spot on in one regard -- the only way to combat the culture that has developed to avoid this hassle ( ie filesharing ) is to make stuff dirt cheap and mega accessible .
But there 's no or very little profit in that is there , and so here lies the contradiction of trying to own something in digital form and make " good healthy profits " .
Normally i would sarcastically say " good luck with that " but its simply not funny that while they 're trying to make these healthy profits we have to put up with all the associated nastiness of their stand-over tactics and absurd propaganda... can we have the revolution now please ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they're still calling us pirates.
I like to think of myself as someone who likes to walk around the tollbooths the entertainment industry puts in front of everything, not walk through them.
Haven't they got enough money?
How many copies of my favorite albums do i have to buy to replace the ones i lost, or had stolen or whatever?
Because the tollbooth owners don't care about that sort of fairness, how can i be expected to WILLINGLY put up with the hassle of the tollbooth experience when i can just walk around?
The ISP guy got it spot on in one regard -- the only way to combat the culture that has developed to avoid this hassle (ie filesharing) is to make stuff dirt cheap and mega accessible.
But there's no or very little profit in that is there, and so here lies the contradiction of trying to own something in digital form and make "good healthy profits".
Normally i would sarcastically say "good luck with that" but its simply not funny that while they're trying to make these healthy profits we have to put up with all the associated nastiness of their stand-over tactics and absurd propaganda... can we have the revolution now please?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28234197</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think that's actually the industry's go</title>
	<author>4D6963</author>
	<datestamp>1244311320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was going to offer a rebuttal with examples of how you're wrong, but actually you're right, back then you'd just easily search for a song, download it, it would instantly start (can't say the same for BitTorrent or eMule), using a mere 33.6 K modem with a 20 hours/month connection you still could get quite a lot, and you could go to chatrooms, actually make new friends and even see what they had. And if you downloaded porn, you'd even get the person you were downloading from telling you to get your hands out your trousers.

</p><p>Amazing how I forgot how it was better back then than it is now, except of course for the fact that now you get entire albums in a zip and the rarer stuff is much easier to find.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was going to offer a rebuttal with examples of how you 're wrong , but actually you 're right , back then you 'd just easily search for a song , download it , it would instantly start ( ca n't say the same for BitTorrent or eMule ) , using a mere 33.6 K modem with a 20 hours/month connection you still could get quite a lot , and you could go to chatrooms , actually make new friends and even see what they had .
And if you downloaded porn , you 'd even get the person you were downloading from telling you to get your hands out your trousers .
Amazing how I forgot how it was better back then than it is now , except of course for the fact that now you get entire albums in a zip and the rarer stuff is much easier to find .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was going to offer a rebuttal with examples of how you're wrong, but actually you're right, back then you'd just easily search for a song, download it, it would instantly start (can't say the same for BitTorrent or eMule), using a mere 33.6 K modem with a 20 hours/month connection you still could get quite a lot, and you could go to chatrooms, actually make new friends and even see what they had.
And if you downloaded porn, you'd even get the person you were downloading from telling you to get your hands out your trousers.
Amazing how I forgot how it was better back then than it is now, except of course for the fact that now you get entire albums in a zip and the rarer stuff is much easier to find.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232725</id>
	<title>TRUE for almost all crime</title>
	<author>mrnick</author>
	<datestamp>1244301780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The best the police can do is try and stay only a few steps away from the criminals, instead of miles.  With computer crime FUGET ABOUT TIT!</p><p>Copy protection doesn't work.  Never has, never will.</p><p>It used to take someone with GURU computer skills to be a pirate, now all it takes is a kid with access to the Internet.</p><p>The problem is not piracy, it is the distribution and cost of media (content not storage).</p><p>I would feel confident in saying that the majority of American homes have one, likely more, instances of pirated content in their homes.  That sounds like a referendum on piracy.  Though, if you could buy a new DVD movie for $1 then who would wait hours for a movie to download?</p><p>They are not criminals they are just tired of working within a system that is broke.  FUDGE the system!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The best the police can do is try and stay only a few steps away from the criminals , instead of miles .
With computer crime FUGET ABOUT TIT ! Copy protection does n't work .
Never has , never will.It used to take someone with GURU computer skills to be a pirate , now all it takes is a kid with access to the Internet.The problem is not piracy , it is the distribution and cost of media ( content not storage ) .I would feel confident in saying that the majority of American homes have one , likely more , instances of pirated content in their homes .
That sounds like a referendum on piracy .
Though , if you could buy a new DVD movie for $ 1 then who would wait hours for a movie to download ? They are not criminals they are just tired of working within a system that is broke .
FUDGE the system !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The best the police can do is try and stay only a few steps away from the criminals, instead of miles.
With computer crime FUGET ABOUT TIT!Copy protection doesn't work.
Never has, never will.It used to take someone with GURU computer skills to be a pirate, now all it takes is a kid with access to the Internet.The problem is not piracy, it is the distribution and cost of media (content not storage).I would feel confident in saying that the majority of American homes have one, likely more, instances of pirated content in their homes.
That sounds like a referendum on piracy.
Though, if you could buy a new DVD movie for $1 then who would wait hours for a movie to download?They are not criminals they are just tired of working within a system that is broke.
FUDGE the system!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231893</id>
	<title>Yep, now explain that to the politicians please.</title>
	<author>siphbowl</author>
	<datestamp>1244294460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Accurate, and correct. Although it's not (or shouldn't be) an ISP's job to police what goes through a phone line.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Accurate , and correct .
Although it 's not ( or should n't be ) an ISP 's job to police what goes through a phone line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Accurate, and correct.
Although it's not (or shouldn't be) an ISP's job to police what goes through a phone line.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232483</id>
	<title>Torrents are just more convenient</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244300280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Digital music stores can't compete with the community based private torrent trackers for me. I'm heavily into electronic music and even dedicated stores like beatport do not offer me the choice i get on torrent sites, not to mention how much easier it is to select the good releases from the bad ones because on torrent sites i can recognize the appreciated uploader and know i'm downloading something good.  On beatport i should go listening to crappy quality short previews and hope for the best and also pay them at least 1,29 per track.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Digital music stores ca n't compete with the community based private torrent trackers for me .
I 'm heavily into electronic music and even dedicated stores like beatport do not offer me the choice i get on torrent sites , not to mention how much easier it is to select the good releases from the bad ones because on torrent sites i can recognize the appreciated uploader and know i 'm downloading something good .
On beatport i should go listening to crappy quality short previews and hope for the best and also pay them at least 1,29 per track .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Digital music stores can't compete with the community based private torrent trackers for me.
I'm heavily into electronic music and even dedicated stores like beatport do not offer me the choice i get on torrent sites, not to mention how much easier it is to select the good releases from the bad ones because on torrent sites i can recognize the appreciated uploader and know i'm downloading something good.
On beatport i should go listening to crappy quality short previews and hope for the best and also pay them at least 1,29 per track.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232459</id>
	<title>hes right</title>
	<author>Bizzeh</author>
	<datestamp>1244300100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the thing is, hes right. all companies are doing when they are trying to stop pirates is presenting them with a new challange. the way to stop, or at least curb piracy is do what dvd's did, be cheap. i bought about 5 dvd's from asda about 2 hours ago because they were all good, and they all cost less than &#194;&pound;7 each, one was &#194;&pound;3. im sure the companies involved are still making money from these dvd's, infact, im sure they are making more, because when a dvd cost so little, it makes it not worth the time of downloading it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the thing is , hes right .
all companies are doing when they are trying to stop pirates is presenting them with a new challange .
the way to stop , or at least curb piracy is do what dvd 's did , be cheap .
i bought about 5 dvd 's from asda about 2 hours ago because they were all good , and they all cost less than     7 each , one was     3 .
im sure the companies involved are still making money from these dvd 's , infact , im sure they are making more , because when a dvd cost so little , it makes it not worth the time of downloading it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the thing is, hes right.
all companies are doing when they are trying to stop pirates is presenting them with a new challange.
the way to stop, or at least curb piracy is do what dvd's did, be cheap.
i bought about 5 dvd's from asda about 2 hours ago because they were all good, and they all cost less than Â£7 each, one was Â£3.
im sure the companies involved are still making money from these dvd's, infact, im sure they are making more, because when a dvd cost so little, it makes it not worth the time of downloading it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232289</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think that's actually the industry's go</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244298720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I believe the industry is just trying to make sure my dentist doesn't start downloading songs again.</p></div><p>I believe the industry wants to extract as much money from your dentist as possible.  For example, he can download a song, but every time he listens to it, they get money.  Or better yet, he downloads a song, and then has to pay them recurring fees for the rest of his life.  (I haven't heard that one actually suggested yet, but it is only a matter of time.)</p><p>There's nothing wrong with a business wanting to make money.  But they should be doing it by trying to create value for the customers.  Any other means (anti-competitive measures, deceptive marketing practices, cooking the books, etc.) is immoral and unethical.</p><p>
&nbsp; -- 77IM</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe the industry is just trying to make sure my dentist does n't start downloading songs again.I believe the industry wants to extract as much money from your dentist as possible .
For example , he can download a song , but every time he listens to it , they get money .
Or better yet , he downloads a song , and then has to pay them recurring fees for the rest of his life .
( I have n't heard that one actually suggested yet , but it is only a matter of time .
) There 's nothing wrong with a business wanting to make money .
But they should be doing it by trying to create value for the customers .
Any other means ( anti-competitive measures , deceptive marketing practices , cooking the books , etc .
) is immoral and unethical .
  -- 77IM</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe the industry is just trying to make sure my dentist doesn't start downloading songs again.I believe the industry wants to extract as much money from your dentist as possible.
For example, he can download a song, but every time he listens to it, they get money.
Or better yet, he downloads a song, and then has to pay them recurring fees for the rest of his life.
(I haven't heard that one actually suggested yet, but it is only a matter of time.
)There's nothing wrong with a business wanting to make money.
But they should be doing it by trying to create value for the customers.
Any other means (anti-competitive measures, deceptive marketing practices, cooking the books, etc.
) is immoral and unethical.
  -- 77IM
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231961</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232133</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think that's actually the industry's go</title>
	<author>Jawn98685</author>
	<datestamp>1244297400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I believe the industry is just trying to make sure my dentist doesn't start downloading songs again.</p></div><p>
And <i>that</i> will be their undoing. Never mind the fact that, at the price point in place before electronic distribution became reasonable the dentist would never have purchased all those songs (thus putting the lie to all the "lost revenue" bullshit), the record companies, if they had had any fucking vision at all, would have seen that this was a money making opportunity and built it (Napster) first, along with a pricing model and payment scheme that leveraged the almost zero distribution costs. Instead, they have tried to protect their buggy-whip industry to through litigation. </p><p>Yes, the mice are going to win.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe the industry is just trying to make sure my dentist does n't start downloading songs again .
And that will be their undoing .
Never mind the fact that , at the price point in place before electronic distribution became reasonable the dentist would never have purchased all those songs ( thus putting the lie to all the " lost revenue " bullshit ) , the record companies , if they had had any fucking vision at all , would have seen that this was a money making opportunity and built it ( Napster ) first , along with a pricing model and payment scheme that leveraged the almost zero distribution costs .
Instead , they have tried to protect their buggy-whip industry to through litigation .
Yes , the mice are going to win .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe the industry is just trying to make sure my dentist doesn't start downloading songs again.
And that will be their undoing.
Never mind the fact that, at the price point in place before electronic distribution became reasonable the dentist would never have purchased all those songs (thus putting the lie to all the "lost revenue" bullshit), the record companies, if they had had any fucking vision at all, would have seen that this was a money making opportunity and built it (Napster) first, along with a pricing model and payment scheme that leveraged the almost zero distribution costs.
Instead, they have tried to protect their buggy-whip industry to through litigation.
Yes, the mice are going to win.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231961</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28233661</id>
	<title>Re:The ways in which TalkTalk gets it</title>
	<author>Marcika</author>
	<datestamp>1244307480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>TalkTalk is testing BT's new fibre-optic super-fast broadband network in north London [...] Dunstone [of TalkTalk] reckons super-fast broadband &#226;" offering speeds of up to 40Mb a second &#226;" will be more expensive than current-generation broadband but less than the sort of &#194;&pound;39.99-a-month prices being asked for basic broadband a few years ago.</p></div><p>Fast cheap internets, "we can't stop the pirates"...</p><p>Exchange your currency into British pounds and vote with it.</p><p>(I'm not paid to say that)</p></div><p>You wouldn't be all that enthusiastic if you actually had ISP service from TalkTalk... (Like I have.)</p><p> They are 40x oversubscribed and proud of it - so my 8Mbit line only gets more than 500kbit between 2am and 4am. </p><p>Their support is notoriously bad - I had to talk to them about 12 times for half an hour each to get 110 quid back that they overbilled when I moved house.</p><p> They use the Internet Watch Foundation secret censorship list (Slashdot reported).</p><p>They suck as bad as any ISP, their only redeeming feature is that they cost half as much as BT. They only push the "dumb pipe" angle as they are confident that they can outcompete anyone on price if they can keep the market extremely low-cost and low-service. (Mind you, I am not pro-netcop, but TalkTalk are not the knight in shiny armor by a long strech.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>TalkTalk is testing BT 's new fibre-optic super-fast broadband network in north London [ ... ] Dunstone [ of TalkTalk ] reckons super-fast broadband   " offering speeds of up to 40Mb a second   " will be more expensive than current-generation broadband but less than the sort of     39.99-a-month prices being asked for basic broadband a few years ago.Fast cheap internets , " we ca n't stop the pirates " ...Exchange your currency into British pounds and vote with it .
( I 'm not paid to say that ) You would n't be all that enthusiastic if you actually had ISP service from TalkTalk... ( Like I have .
) They are 40x oversubscribed and proud of it - so my 8Mbit line only gets more than 500kbit between 2am and 4am .
Their support is notoriously bad - I had to talk to them about 12 times for half an hour each to get 110 quid back that they overbilled when I moved house .
They use the Internet Watch Foundation secret censorship list ( Slashdot reported ) .They suck as bad as any ISP , their only redeeming feature is that they cost half as much as BT .
They only push the " dumb pipe " angle as they are confident that they can outcompete anyone on price if they can keep the market extremely low-cost and low-service .
( Mind you , I am not pro-netcop , but TalkTalk are not the knight in shiny armor by a long strech .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TalkTalk is testing BT's new fibre-optic super-fast broadband network in north London [...] Dunstone [of TalkTalk] reckons super-fast broadband â" offering speeds of up to 40Mb a second â" will be more expensive than current-generation broadband but less than the sort of Â£39.99-a-month prices being asked for basic broadband a few years ago.Fast cheap internets, "we can't stop the pirates"...Exchange your currency into British pounds and vote with it.
(I'm not paid to say that)You wouldn't be all that enthusiastic if you actually had ISP service from TalkTalk... (Like I have.
) They are 40x oversubscribed and proud of it - so my 8Mbit line only gets more than 500kbit between 2am and 4am.
Their support is notoriously bad - I had to talk to them about 12 times for half an hour each to get 110 quid back that they overbilled when I moved house.
They use the Internet Watch Foundation secret censorship list (Slashdot reported).They suck as bad as any ISP, their only redeeming feature is that they cost half as much as BT.
They only push the "dumb pipe" angle as they are confident that they can outcompete anyone on price if they can keep the market extremely low-cost and low-service.
(Mind you, I am not pro-netcop, but TalkTalk are not the knight in shiny armor by a long strech.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231991</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28239701</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think that's actually the industry's go</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244406240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Napster was a nice first attempt, and it paved the way for everything that followed, but for my (lack of) money, AudioGalaxy was the best at helping me discover new music. During the time period I was using AudioGalaxy, I bought a ton of CDs from artists I never would have heard of otherwise. Since AudioGalaxy went away, I've bought exactly 1 CD (from a major label, but the artist is someone I know, so I felt like supporting them.)</p><p>In some ways I'm glad they shut it down..I've gotten to keep probably $1k-$2k/yr in money that I was spending on CDs at the time. But the music I listen to is now a lot less varied and I don't find as many new artists that I like.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Napster was a nice first attempt , and it paved the way for everything that followed , but for my ( lack of ) money , AudioGalaxy was the best at helping me discover new music .
During the time period I was using AudioGalaxy , I bought a ton of CDs from artists I never would have heard of otherwise .
Since AudioGalaxy went away , I 've bought exactly 1 CD ( from a major label , but the artist is someone I know , so I felt like supporting them .
) In some ways I 'm glad they shut it down..I 've gotten to keep probably $ 1k- $ 2k/yr in money that I was spending on CDs at the time .
But the music I listen to is now a lot less varied and I do n't find as many new artists that I like .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Napster was a nice first attempt, and it paved the way for everything that followed, but for my (lack of) money, AudioGalaxy was the best at helping me discover new music.
During the time period I was using AudioGalaxy, I bought a ton of CDs from artists I never would have heard of otherwise.
Since AudioGalaxy went away, I've bought exactly 1 CD (from a major label, but the artist is someone I know, so I felt like supporting them.
)In some ways I'm glad they shut it down..I've gotten to keep probably $1k-$2k/yr in money that I was spending on CDs at the time.
But the music I listen to is now a lot less varied and I don't find as many new artists that I like.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232557</id>
	<title>Re:Amazon!</title>
	<author>adona1</author>
	<datestamp>1244300700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, pirates <i>should</i> check out Amazon. I've checked it out. However, because I don't live in America, <i>they wouldn't let me give them my money</i>. Credit card out, mp3s selected, and bam...sorry, you're in the wrong country (nothing stopping me buying the CD from Amazon though). And the record companies wonder why they're dying...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , pirates should check out Amazon .
I 've checked it out .
However , because I do n't live in America , they would n't let me give them my money .
Credit card out , mp3s selected , and bam...sorry , you 're in the wrong country ( nothing stopping me buying the CD from Amazon though ) .
And the record companies wonder why they 're dying.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, pirates should check out Amazon.
I've checked it out.
However, because I don't live in America, they wouldn't let me give them my money.
Credit card out, mp3s selected, and bam...sorry, you're in the wrong country (nothing stopping me buying the CD from Amazon though).
And the record companies wonder why they're dying...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232081</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think that's actually the industry's go</title>
	<author>Yacoby</author>
	<datestamp>1244296920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>he had no problems using Napster, and how he was finding songs on there from back when he was a kid, how he could find anything he wanted, and how simple it was to get whatever song he wanted...</p><p>I believe the industry is just trying to make sure my dentist doesn't start downloading songs again.</p></div><p>Then the solution is not to sue the dentist, but to give him options to get the music he wants cheaply and easily. By cheaply, I don't mean the current prices that they are ripping me off with. 12p a track sounds reasonable. 10p to the artist, 1p to the publisher, and 1p to the distributer.<br>When they try and sell me a digital album for &#194;&pound;8 - &#194;&pound;10, I just give up. Do they think I am made of money? Why should I pay a large amount of money for something that costs them nothing to reproduce?</p><p>One big issue the industry will hit is that when people my age (late teens) get to the point when we are the dentist, we won't have any problem pirating things. We won't have any problems with computer illiteracy. We will know where to find the programs that encrypt the traffic. If we don't, we just ask a friend who does.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>he had no problems using Napster , and how he was finding songs on there from back when he was a kid , how he could find anything he wanted , and how simple it was to get whatever song he wanted...I believe the industry is just trying to make sure my dentist does n't start downloading songs again.Then the solution is not to sue the dentist , but to give him options to get the music he wants cheaply and easily .
By cheaply , I do n't mean the current prices that they are ripping me off with .
12p a track sounds reasonable .
10p to the artist , 1p to the publisher , and 1p to the distributer.When they try and sell me a digital album for     8 -     10 , I just give up .
Do they think I am made of money ?
Why should I pay a large amount of money for something that costs them nothing to reproduce ? One big issue the industry will hit is that when people my age ( late teens ) get to the point when we are the dentist , we wo n't have any problem pirating things .
We wo n't have any problems with computer illiteracy .
We will know where to find the programs that encrypt the traffic .
If we do n't , we just ask a friend who does .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>he had no problems using Napster, and how he was finding songs on there from back when he was a kid, how he could find anything he wanted, and how simple it was to get whatever song he wanted...I believe the industry is just trying to make sure my dentist doesn't start downloading songs again.Then the solution is not to sue the dentist, but to give him options to get the music he wants cheaply and easily.
By cheaply, I don't mean the current prices that they are ripping me off with.
12p a track sounds reasonable.
10p to the artist, 1p to the publisher, and 1p to the distributer.When they try and sell me a digital album for Â£8 - Â£10, I just give up.
Do they think I am made of money?
Why should I pay a large amount of money for something that costs them nothing to reproduce?One big issue the industry will hit is that when people my age (late teens) get to the point when we are the dentist, we won't have any problem pirating things.
We won't have any problems with computer illiteracy.
We will know where to find the programs that encrypt the traffic.
If we don't, we just ask a friend who does.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231961</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28235133</id>
	<title>Re:Wow, progress being made, but ...</title>
	<author>cliffski</author>
	<datestamp>1244318160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I like to think of myself as someone who wanders past the security guards the local food store employs. Have walmart got enough money?<br>Wal-mart don't care about fairness, how can I be expected to queue up to pay when I can just shoplift..."</p><p>Face facts. if you had to look the content creator in the eye every time you pirated, you wouldn't take jack shit. This is just the usual bullshit to paper over that part of your conscience that gets pricked when you realise you are helping yourself to other peoples work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I like to think of myself as someone who wanders past the security guards the local food store employs .
Have walmart got enough money ? Wal-mart do n't care about fairness , how can I be expected to queue up to pay when I can just shoplift... " Face facts .
if you had to look the content creator in the eye every time you pirated , you would n't take jack shit .
This is just the usual bullshit to paper over that part of your conscience that gets pricked when you realise you are helping yourself to other peoples work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I like to think of myself as someone who wanders past the security guards the local food store employs.
Have walmart got enough money?Wal-mart don't care about fairness, how can I be expected to queue up to pay when I can just shoplift..."Face facts.
if you had to look the content creator in the eye every time you pirated, you wouldn't take jack shit.
This is just the usual bullshit to paper over that part of your conscience that gets pricked when you realise you are helping yourself to other peoples work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232091</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28234799</id>
	<title>FINALLY someone seeing clearly!</title>
	<author>kheldan</author>
	<datestamp>1244316300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've recited the mantra a million times: <i>You can't stop the signal, Mal!</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've recited the mantra a million times : You ca n't stop the signal , Mal !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've recited the mantra a million times: You can't stop the signal, Mal!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232193</id>
	<title>Re:They hit the nail on the head</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244298000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can't stop copyright infringement but you can inhibit free culture.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You ca n't stop copyright infringement but you can inhibit free culture .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can't stop copyright infringement but you can inhibit free culture.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28239877</id>
	<title>Re:Amazon!</title>
	<author>remmelt</author>
	<datestamp>1244366820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You had a good argument, but I stopped reading at "Alanis Morissette."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You had a good argument , but I stopped reading at " Alanis Morissette .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You had a good argument, but I stopped reading at "Alanis Morissette.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231909</id>
	<title>Of course...</title>
	<author>XPeter</author>
	<datestamp>1244294700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As long as there is internet, there will be piracy. Plain n' simple.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As long as there is internet , there will be piracy .
Plain n ' simple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As long as there is internet, there will be piracy.
Plain n' simple.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28255857</id>
	<title>Re: There will always be piracy</title>
	<author>DelShalDar</author>
	<datestamp>1244453160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The funny thing is that most content creators <i>already</i> have patrons paying their way.  If you work for a company as a software developer, or work for a production studio drawing or performing, then those respective companies are the patrons.</p><p>The original 7 year copyright was considered an okay compromise because it was relatively short, but was still long enough to allow the creator to <i>potentially</i> earn enough to live off while they held the copyright, as well as having a means to control how much and how far their work spread during that time frame.  As soon as that time frame was up, the formerly copyrighted content belonged to <i>everyone</i> and it could be used, duplicated, or sold by anyone and everyone.  It promoted a sense of community and cultural contribution to everything creative in the community and society at large.</p><p>The only thing preventing the creator from duplicating and selling that work was an agreement with their patron to not do so without the patron's consent.  The patron was ultimately responsible for adhering to the creator's wishes with regards to the duplication and distribution of the work that was created so long as they didn't go against the initial arrangement with regards to the uniqueness of the work.  Both parties held equal power over the distribution and reproduction of the work, with a bit more freedom given to the creator as they had the ability to create other, similar works as they saw fit.  All that, thanks to the patrons who could afford to bankroll the creator while they were doing the creating.</p><p>While that model worked out decently for all involved while the common artisan didn't have ready or easy access to the means of reproduction and distribution, it no longer works out that way.  The problem is that these days, the balance of power rests more with the patrons than the creators, and so we have companies holding the copyrights to works they didn't actually put any actual effort into creating beyond a vague "I'd like something like..." for the creator to deal with.  Once those works are paid for, usually through a mechanism such as a wage/salary (almost always a statement that  more creative effort is expected to be forthcoming) or contract (short-term or one-time effort), the modern patrons have set it up so that the artists, once paid for their work, get nothing more than a pittance for the continued use of their work.</p><p>For musicians and songwriters it's a "Thanks for the song and here's an exceedingly small percentage of the total profit we re-sell your work for.  Be lucky we're giving you that, 'cuz if it wasn't in the contract you'd get nothing."</p><p>For software developers it's more like "Thanks for the non-overtime 80-hour weeks you've put in to make the software worth multiple millions of dollars in annual revenue, here's your standard bi-weekly paycheck (no raises this year, recession, you understand) and we'll see you bright and early tomorrow morning when you'll be tasked with making us even more money by building another application that's also going to be worth millions to the company."</p><p>I'd love to see a return to the original arrangement where the actual creators held the power and the patrons had to negotiate with the creators to get access to the content.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The funny thing is that most content creators already have patrons paying their way .
If you work for a company as a software developer , or work for a production studio drawing or performing , then those respective companies are the patrons.The original 7 year copyright was considered an okay compromise because it was relatively short , but was still long enough to allow the creator to potentially earn enough to live off while they held the copyright , as well as having a means to control how much and how far their work spread during that time frame .
As soon as that time frame was up , the formerly copyrighted content belonged to everyone and it could be used , duplicated , or sold by anyone and everyone .
It promoted a sense of community and cultural contribution to everything creative in the community and society at large.The only thing preventing the creator from duplicating and selling that work was an agreement with their patron to not do so without the patron 's consent .
The patron was ultimately responsible for adhering to the creator 's wishes with regards to the duplication and distribution of the work that was created so long as they did n't go against the initial arrangement with regards to the uniqueness of the work .
Both parties held equal power over the distribution and reproduction of the work , with a bit more freedom given to the creator as they had the ability to create other , similar works as they saw fit .
All that , thanks to the patrons who could afford to bankroll the creator while they were doing the creating.While that model worked out decently for all involved while the common artisan did n't have ready or easy access to the means of reproduction and distribution , it no longer works out that way .
The problem is that these days , the balance of power rests more with the patrons than the creators , and so we have companies holding the copyrights to works they did n't actually put any actual effort into creating beyond a vague " I 'd like something like... " for the creator to deal with .
Once those works are paid for , usually through a mechanism such as a wage/salary ( almost always a statement that more creative effort is expected to be forthcoming ) or contract ( short-term or one-time effort ) , the modern patrons have set it up so that the artists , once paid for their work , get nothing more than a pittance for the continued use of their work.For musicians and songwriters it 's a " Thanks for the song and here 's an exceedingly small percentage of the total profit we re-sell your work for .
Be lucky we 're giving you that , 'cuz if it was n't in the contract you 'd get nothing .
" For software developers it 's more like " Thanks for the non-overtime 80-hour weeks you 've put in to make the software worth multiple millions of dollars in annual revenue , here 's your standard bi-weekly paycheck ( no raises this year , recession , you understand ) and we 'll see you bright and early tomorrow morning when you 'll be tasked with making us even more money by building another application that 's also going to be worth millions to the company .
" I 'd love to see a return to the original arrangement where the actual creators held the power and the patrons had to negotiate with the creators to get access to the content .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The funny thing is that most content creators already have patrons paying their way.
If you work for a company as a software developer, or work for a production studio drawing or performing, then those respective companies are the patrons.The original 7 year copyright was considered an okay compromise because it was relatively short, but was still long enough to allow the creator to potentially earn enough to live off while they held the copyright, as well as having a means to control how much and how far their work spread during that time frame.
As soon as that time frame was up, the formerly copyrighted content belonged to everyone and it could be used, duplicated, or sold by anyone and everyone.
It promoted a sense of community and cultural contribution to everything creative in the community and society at large.The only thing preventing the creator from duplicating and selling that work was an agreement with their patron to not do so without the patron's consent.
The patron was ultimately responsible for adhering to the creator's wishes with regards to the duplication and distribution of the work that was created so long as they didn't go against the initial arrangement with regards to the uniqueness of the work.
Both parties held equal power over the distribution and reproduction of the work, with a bit more freedom given to the creator as they had the ability to create other, similar works as they saw fit.
All that, thanks to the patrons who could afford to bankroll the creator while they were doing the creating.While that model worked out decently for all involved while the common artisan didn't have ready or easy access to the means of reproduction and distribution, it no longer works out that way.
The problem is that these days, the balance of power rests more with the patrons than the creators, and so we have companies holding the copyrights to works they didn't actually put any actual effort into creating beyond a vague "I'd like something like..." for the creator to deal with.
Once those works are paid for, usually through a mechanism such as a wage/salary (almost always a statement that  more creative effort is expected to be forthcoming) or contract (short-term or one-time effort), the modern patrons have set it up so that the artists, once paid for their work, get nothing more than a pittance for the continued use of their work.For musicians and songwriters it's a "Thanks for the song and here's an exceedingly small percentage of the total profit we re-sell your work for.
Be lucky we're giving you that, 'cuz if it wasn't in the contract you'd get nothing.
"For software developers it's more like "Thanks for the non-overtime 80-hour weeks you've put in to make the software worth multiple millions of dollars in annual revenue, here's your standard bi-weekly paycheck (no raises this year, recession, you understand) and we'll see you bright and early tomorrow morning when you'll be tasked with making us even more money by building another application that's also going to be worth millions to the company.
"I'd love to see a return to the original arrangement where the actual creators held the power and the patrons had to negotiate with the creators to get access to the content.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231981</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28233141</id>
	<title>Re:They hit the nail on the head</title>
	<author>Truus</author>
	<datestamp>1244304540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>In the Middle Ages the life of an actor was a lot harder than what it is likely to be when no movies are sold anymore in these periods of time. Cinema's, live concerts, and theatres will do the job for these still ridiculously rich group of people.

So hit that download button, and save your money for the theatre.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In the Middle Ages the life of an actor was a lot harder than what it is likely to be when no movies are sold anymore in these periods of time .
Cinema 's , live concerts , and theatres will do the job for these still ridiculously rich group of people .
So hit that download button , and save your money for the theatre .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the Middle Ages the life of an actor was a lot harder than what it is likely to be when no movies are sold anymore in these periods of time.
Cinema's, live concerts, and theatres will do the job for these still ridiculously rich group of people.
So hit that download button, and save your money for the theatre.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28237137</id>
	<title>Piracy and Child Porn comparison</title>
	<author>brit74</author>
	<datestamp>1244289060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I completely agree with this article.  And, on that note: I propose that we legalize child pornography.  Why?  Because every "can't stop it" argument that applies to legalizing piracy applies even better to child pornography.  People who trade child pornography are, in fact, more careful about "sharing" their porn with other people - which makes it even harder to stop than piracy.  Clearly, we need to "allowing users 'to get child porn easily and cheaply.'"
<br> <br>
(Yes, I am be sarcastic.  And, yes, I think this argument is 100\% valid - so long as you accept the "we can't stop piracy" argument.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I completely agree with this article .
And , on that note : I propose that we legalize child pornography .
Why ? Because every " ca n't stop it " argument that applies to legalizing piracy applies even better to child pornography .
People who trade child pornography are , in fact , more careful about " sharing " their porn with other people - which makes it even harder to stop than piracy .
Clearly , we need to " allowing users 'to get child porn easily and cheaply .
' " ( Yes , I am be sarcastic .
And , yes , I think this argument is 100 \ % valid - so long as you accept the " we ca n't stop piracy " argument .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I completely agree with this article.
And, on that note: I propose that we legalize child pornography.
Why?  Because every "can't stop it" argument that applies to legalizing piracy applies even better to child pornography.
People who trade child pornography are, in fact, more careful about "sharing" their porn with other people - which makes it even harder to stop than piracy.
Clearly, we need to "allowing users 'to get child porn easily and cheaply.
'"
 
(Yes, I am be sarcastic.
And, yes, I think this argument is 100\% valid - so long as you accept the "we can't stop piracy" argument.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28233281</id>
	<title>the issue is control</title>
	<author>DaveGod</author>
	<datestamp>1244305320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Piracy is not what is stopping the music industry embracing online distribution. How could it <i>possibly</i> be worse than the existing position? What they are frightened of is their lack of control and competition. Piracy is making their existing business untenable, but competing with it will cause them all kinds of problems that they are used to having control over. What's Wall Mart going to do when the label is actively competing with it? What are their mega stars going to do when the labels no longer control the channel? What happens when pricing becomes competitive? </p><p>"Allowing users 'to get content easily and cheaply" might be good for music, consumers and the industry as a whole but there is not much there that is attractive to the labels. They will do it when they really have to, I think presently they are clinging on while they can and meanwhile negotiating for the best position possible for when they do. </p><p>The labels aren't nearly as stupid, out of touch and unable to adapt as they seem. They were incredibly quick and successful in moving to exploit the surge in popularity of live music, I'm not even sure whether that was a natural change in consumer tastes or something instigated by the labels. </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Piracy is not what is stopping the music industry embracing online distribution .
How could it possibly be worse than the existing position ?
What they are frightened of is their lack of control and competition .
Piracy is making their existing business untenable , but competing with it will cause them all kinds of problems that they are used to having control over .
What 's Wall Mart going to do when the label is actively competing with it ?
What are their mega stars going to do when the labels no longer control the channel ?
What happens when pricing becomes competitive ?
" Allowing users 'to get content easily and cheaply " might be good for music , consumers and the industry as a whole but there is not much there that is attractive to the labels .
They will do it when they really have to , I think presently they are clinging on while they can and meanwhile negotiating for the best position possible for when they do .
The labels are n't nearly as stupid , out of touch and unable to adapt as they seem .
They were incredibly quick and successful in moving to exploit the surge in popularity of live music , I 'm not even sure whether that was a natural change in consumer tastes or something instigated by the labels .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Piracy is not what is stopping the music industry embracing online distribution.
How could it possibly be worse than the existing position?
What they are frightened of is their lack of control and competition.
Piracy is making their existing business untenable, but competing with it will cause them all kinds of problems that they are used to having control over.
What's Wall Mart going to do when the label is actively competing with it?
What are their mega stars going to do when the labels no longer control the channel?
What happens when pricing becomes competitive?
"Allowing users 'to get content easily and cheaply" might be good for music, consumers and the industry as a whole but there is not much there that is attractive to the labels.
They will do it when they really have to, I think presently they are clinging on while they can and meanwhile negotiating for the best position possible for when they do.
The labels aren't nearly as stupid, out of touch and unable to adapt as they seem.
They were incredibly quick and successful in moving to exploit the surge in popularity of live music, I'm not even sure whether that was a natural change in consumer tastes or something instigated by the labels. </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232323</id>
	<title>Re:The ways in which TalkTalk gets it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244299020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've just today got my broadband service through virginmedia activated.  placed the order about a week ago.</p><p>If i'd known this a weeks ago, I would have gone to talktalk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've just today got my broadband service through virginmedia activated .
placed the order about a week ago.If i 'd known this a weeks ago , I would have gone to talktalk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've just today got my broadband service through virginmedia activated.
placed the order about a week ago.If i'd known this a weeks ago, I would have gone to talktalk.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231991</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232189</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think that's actually the industry's go</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244297880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Napster was awesome, and I regret its passing. There is nothing like it today.

</p><p>The great thing about Napster was that it let me find new music that I liked. I'd see a reference to a song in, say, a book; I'd search for it on Napster, download the track, and play it; and then, if I liked it, I could <i>go back to the same place</i> and see what else the guy had. I discovered <i>They Might Be Giants</i> that way; I downloaded <i>Rock To Wind A String Around</i> from a recommendation, then went back and dug out more of their tracks, then ordered the <i>Apollo 18</i> CD.

</p><p>Okay, Napster was pretty slow and BitTorrent has it beat technically in pretty much every way, but no other music sharing service had the same sense of exploration and community. You could explore people's music collections, find interesting new rare stuff, and then actually <i>talk</i> to them about it (if they were on). It was, in fact, all social networking and Web 2.0-y before the terms had even been invented. I wish something like it existed today.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Napster was awesome , and I regret its passing .
There is nothing like it today .
The great thing about Napster was that it let me find new music that I liked .
I 'd see a reference to a song in , say , a book ; I 'd search for it on Napster , download the track , and play it ; and then , if I liked it , I could go back to the same place and see what else the guy had .
I discovered They Might Be Giants that way ; I downloaded Rock To Wind A String Around from a recommendation , then went back and dug out more of their tracks , then ordered the Apollo 18 CD .
Okay , Napster was pretty slow and BitTorrent has it beat technically in pretty much every way , but no other music sharing service had the same sense of exploration and community .
You could explore people 's music collections , find interesting new rare stuff , and then actually talk to them about it ( if they were on ) .
It was , in fact , all social networking and Web 2.0-y before the terms had even been invented .
I wish something like it existed today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Napster was awesome, and I regret its passing.
There is nothing like it today.
The great thing about Napster was that it let me find new music that I liked.
I'd see a reference to a song in, say, a book; I'd search for it on Napster, download the track, and play it; and then, if I liked it, I could go back to the same place and see what else the guy had.
I discovered They Might Be Giants that way; I downloaded Rock To Wind A String Around from a recommendation, then went back and dug out more of their tracks, then ordered the Apollo 18 CD.
Okay, Napster was pretty slow and BitTorrent has it beat technically in pretty much every way, but no other music sharing service had the same sense of exploration and community.
You could explore people's music collections, find interesting new rare stuff, and then actually talk to them about it (if they were on).
It was, in fact, all social networking and Web 2.0-y before the terms had even been invented.
I wish something like it existed today.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231961</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28235043</id>
	<title>Copyright Infringement = Bank Account Infringement</title>
	<author>B\_SharpC</author>
	<datestamp>1244317620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is easy to stop copyright infringement.<br>Similarly, bank account infringement is currently halted.</p><p>Pirates love the protection they get from their own bank account infringement.<br>But when authors want the same protection for their IP property from pirates, the pirates cry.</p><p>You cannot have it both ways. Laws must be equal and reciprocal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is easy to stop copyright infringement.Similarly , bank account infringement is currently halted.Pirates love the protection they get from their own bank account infringement.But when authors want the same protection for their IP property from pirates , the pirates cry.You can not have it both ways .
Laws must be equal and reciprocal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is easy to stop copyright infringement.Similarly, bank account infringement is currently halted.Pirates love the protection they get from their own bank account infringement.But when authors want the same protection for their IP property from pirates, the pirates cry.You cannot have it both ways.
Laws must be equal and reciprocal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231961</id>
	<title>I don't think that's actually the industry's goal.</title>
	<author>Pollux</author>
	<datestamp>1244295300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I believe the industry knows that you cannot stop 100\% of software piracy.  I don't think that's their goal.</p><p>I remember back in 2000 when I went to my dentist.  He sat me down and started making the usual small-talk, asked me where I worked, what I was majoring in in college, etc.  When I told him I was a comp sci major, he brought up Napster.  My dentist was using Napster.  He went on and on about how computer illiterate he was, but he had no problems using Napster, and how he was finding songs on there from back when he was a kid, how he could find anything he wanted, and how simple it was to get whatever song he wanted...</p><p>I believe the industry is just trying to make sure my dentist doesn't start downloading songs again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe the industry knows that you can not stop 100 \ % of software piracy .
I do n't think that 's their goal.I remember back in 2000 when I went to my dentist .
He sat me down and started making the usual small-talk , asked me where I worked , what I was majoring in in college , etc .
When I told him I was a comp sci major , he brought up Napster .
My dentist was using Napster .
He went on and on about how computer illiterate he was , but he had no problems using Napster , and how he was finding songs on there from back when he was a kid , how he could find anything he wanted , and how simple it was to get whatever song he wanted...I believe the industry is just trying to make sure my dentist does n't start downloading songs again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe the industry knows that you cannot stop 100\% of software piracy.
I don't think that's their goal.I remember back in 2000 when I went to my dentist.
He sat me down and started making the usual small-talk, asked me where I worked, what I was majoring in in college, etc.
When I told him I was a comp sci major, he brought up Napster.
My dentist was using Napster.
He went on and on about how computer illiterate he was, but he had no problems using Napster, and how he was finding songs on there from back when he was a kid, how he could find anything he wanted, and how simple it was to get whatever song he wanted...I believe the industry is just trying to make sure my dentist doesn't start downloading songs again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28237081</id>
	<title>Give people what they want.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244288580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If we could download what we want when we want, most of us wouldn't care if we had to pay. I only ever download stuff iligally if I can't buy it. Much more slowly and in poor quality a lot of the time because that's all I can get. I'd much rather pay a few pounds to get a decent quality legal copy. Just archive EVERYTHING and charge a decent price, that doesn't take the piss.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If we could download what we want when we want , most of us would n't care if we had to pay .
I only ever download stuff iligally if I ca n't buy it .
Much more slowly and in poor quality a lot of the time because that 's all I can get .
I 'd much rather pay a few pounds to get a decent quality legal copy .
Just archive EVERYTHING and charge a decent price , that does n't take the piss .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If we could download what we want when we want, most of us wouldn't care if we had to pay.
I only ever download stuff iligally if I can't buy it.
Much more slowly and in poor quality a lot of the time because that's all I can get.
I'd much rather pay a few pounds to get a decent quality legal copy.
Just archive EVERYTHING and charge a decent price, that doesn't take the piss.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28236359</id>
	<title>How can you stop politicians ?</title>
	<author>DaveDerrick</author>
	<datestamp>1244282280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can never stop politicians from passing stupid laws, thats even more impossible than stopping illegal downloads !</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can never stop politicians from passing stupid laws , thats even more impossible than stopping illegal downloads !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can never stop politicians from passing stupid laws, thats even more impossible than stopping illegal downloads !</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232431</id>
	<title>Re:Amazon!</title>
	<author>Thundarr Trollgrim</author>
	<datestamp>1244299860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You could have downloaded those for free and saved yourself a whole load of cash!</htmltext>
<tokenext>You could have downloaded those for free and saved yourself a whole load of cash !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You could have downloaded those for free and saved yourself a whole load of cash!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28237553</id>
	<title>Re:Amazon!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244293140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is seriously out of whack. Your list looks as if you had a mullet, you wore faded blue jeans, a T-shirt with a jacket on top of it, no socks and maybe some Nike sneakers... But then, there's this Soundgarden album with no wrong notes on it to give you a flannel shirt and some cred. Wha?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is seriously out of whack .
Your list looks as if you had a mullet , you wore faded blue jeans , a T-shirt with a jacket on top of it , no socks and maybe some Nike sneakers... But then , there 's this Soundgarden album with no wrong notes on it to give you a flannel shirt and some cred .
Wha ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is seriously out of whack.
Your list looks as if you had a mullet, you wore faded blue jeans, a T-shirt with a jacket on top of it, no socks and maybe some Nike sneakers... But then, there's this Soundgarden album with no wrong notes on it to give you a flannel shirt and some cred.
Wha?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232667</id>
	<title>Re:Amazon!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244301360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In these enlightened times I understand that homosexuality does not carry the stigma it once did, but I am puzzled at your decision to come out on Slashdot.  Aren't there more suitable websites for this kind of thing?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In these enlightened times I understand that homosexuality does not carry the stigma it once did , but I am puzzled at your decision to come out on Slashdot .
Are n't there more suitable websites for this kind of thing ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In these enlightened times I understand that homosexuality does not carry the stigma it once did, but I am puzzled at your decision to come out on Slashdot.
Aren't there more suitable websites for this kind of thing?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232453</id>
	<title>Re:They hit the nail on the head</title>
	<author>Bert64</author>
	<datestamp>1244300040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Things will even out, again thanks to technology...<br>A few years ago, high quality cameras and equipment for producing special effects cost huge sums of money, as did decent audio sequencing equipment... These days, a lot can be done very cheaply... Powerful computers with complex 3d modeling software are affordable and most special effects are computerized... Same for audio, a lot can and is done in software these days.</p><p>Big productions can be good, but they do come at a cost... Big name actors don't come cheap, and aren't necessarily any more talented... There are so many layers of management, corruption and greed that the production actually costs far more than it should.</p><p>Singers i think will do just fine, especially those who enjoy doing live shows... Technology is still no substitute for a live show. I guess other forms of live entertainment such as sports will also do very well. The effect it will have tho, is that being a singer will no longer be seen by people as an easy path to riches (as exemplified by all the talent shows on tv these days).. It will be seen as hard work, and only people who have a true passion for art will go for it.</p><p>There are also other avenues for actors, big name actors like patrick stewart do live plays, professional wrestling is also a form of acting, and the fame of being the star of popular (not necessarily profitable, most widely viewed is what matters) movies can propel people into other fields such as politics (see arnold schwarzenegger).</p><p>Incidentally, movies and music are already heavily used for advertising, not because they need the money to survive but because the producers are often greedy and only care about the money, not about the art.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Things will even out , again thanks to technology...A few years ago , high quality cameras and equipment for producing special effects cost huge sums of money , as did decent audio sequencing equipment... These days , a lot can be done very cheaply... Powerful computers with complex 3d modeling software are affordable and most special effects are computerized... Same for audio , a lot can and is done in software these days.Big productions can be good , but they do come at a cost... Big name actors do n't come cheap , and are n't necessarily any more talented... There are so many layers of management , corruption and greed that the production actually costs far more than it should.Singers i think will do just fine , especially those who enjoy doing live shows... Technology is still no substitute for a live show .
I guess other forms of live entertainment such as sports will also do very well .
The effect it will have tho , is that being a singer will no longer be seen by people as an easy path to riches ( as exemplified by all the talent shows on tv these days ) .. It will be seen as hard work , and only people who have a true passion for art will go for it.There are also other avenues for actors , big name actors like patrick stewart do live plays , professional wrestling is also a form of acting , and the fame of being the star of popular ( not necessarily profitable , most widely viewed is what matters ) movies can propel people into other fields such as politics ( see arnold schwarzenegger ) .Incidentally , movies and music are already heavily used for advertising , not because they need the money to survive but because the producers are often greedy and only care about the money , not about the art .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Things will even out, again thanks to technology...A few years ago, high quality cameras and equipment for producing special effects cost huge sums of money, as did decent audio sequencing equipment... These days, a lot can be done very cheaply... Powerful computers with complex 3d modeling software are affordable and most special effects are computerized... Same for audio, a lot can and is done in software these days.Big productions can be good, but they do come at a cost... Big name actors don't come cheap, and aren't necessarily any more talented... There are so many layers of management, corruption and greed that the production actually costs far more than it should.Singers i think will do just fine, especially those who enjoy doing live shows... Technology is still no substitute for a live show.
I guess other forms of live entertainment such as sports will also do very well.
The effect it will have tho, is that being a singer will no longer be seen by people as an easy path to riches (as exemplified by all the talent shows on tv these days).. It will be seen as hard work, and only people who have a true passion for art will go for it.There are also other avenues for actors, big name actors like patrick stewart do live plays, professional wrestling is also a form of acting, and the fame of being the star of popular (not necessarily profitable, most widely viewed is what matters) movies can propel people into other fields such as politics (see arnold schwarzenegger).Incidentally, movies and music are already heavily used for advertising, not because they need the money to survive but because the producers are often greedy and only care about the money, not about the art.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232083</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28233083</id>
	<title>Downloading is the future, and the present.</title>
	<author>TheMightyFuzzball</author>
	<datestamp>1244304240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think this person is the only person of his position that is actually seeing reality. All he has done is stated the plain obvious.
But it goes further than that, he (and everyone else) needs to realise that downloading is a very convinient method of distribution,
I would much rather download a film or album than go out and look for it, or even order it from Amazon.
Within the next few years ISPs should be providing (from what I read) 10Gb/s speeds, this is faster than USB 2.0...
With that kind of speed it will take people less than an hour to download a full Blu-Ray disk, I think you get my point...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think this person is the only person of his position that is actually seeing reality .
All he has done is stated the plain obvious .
But it goes further than that , he ( and everyone else ) needs to realise that downloading is a very convinient method of distribution , I would much rather download a film or album than go out and look for it , or even order it from Amazon .
Within the next few years ISPs should be providing ( from what I read ) 10Gb/s speeds , this is faster than USB 2.0.. . With that kind of speed it will take people less than an hour to download a full Blu-Ray disk , I think you get my point.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think this person is the only person of his position that is actually seeing reality.
All he has done is stated the plain obvious.
But it goes further than that, he (and everyone else) needs to realise that downloading is a very convinient method of distribution,
I would much rather download a film or album than go out and look for it, or even order it from Amazon.
Within the next few years ISPs should be providing (from what I read) 10Gb/s speeds, this is faster than USB 2.0...
With that kind of speed it will take people less than an hour to download a full Blu-Ray disk, I think you get my point...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28233303
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231961
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28235849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28234197
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232189
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231961
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28239701
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232189
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231961
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232083
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28235043
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28233305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232083
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28233975
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231991
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232197
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28255857
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231981
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231909
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28237553
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28235257
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232083
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28239615
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231909
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232631
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28233661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231991
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28235693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231991
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232015
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231961
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28235133
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232091
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231961
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28236243
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232083
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232051
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231961
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28235893
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232431
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232323
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231991
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232193
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232089
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28234415
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232189
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231961
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232129
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231909
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232133
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231961
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232071
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231961
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28237647
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232083
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231909
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232887
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232091
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28234791
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232557
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232289
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231961
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232707
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231909
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28239877
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28233141
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232083
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28237167
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231991
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28240427
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28233723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231961
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_06_0544202_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232985
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_06_0544202.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231991
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28235693
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28233975
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28233661
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232323
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28237167
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_06_0544202.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232105
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_06_0544202.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231953
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_06_0544202.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232091
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232887
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28235133
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_06_0544202.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232097
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_06_0544202.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232065
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_06_0544202.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232725
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_06_0544202.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232151
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_06_0544202.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231961
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232015
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232071
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232289
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232133
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232189
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28234197
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28239701
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28234415
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28233303
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232051
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232081
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28233723
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_06_0544202.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232095
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_06_0544202.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28234465
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_06_0544202.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231889
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232391
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28235043
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232489
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28234791
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232863
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232193
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232163
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232631
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232083
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232603
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28237647
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232453
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28236243
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28233141
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28235257
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28233305
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_06_0544202.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231893
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_06_0544202.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232001
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232667
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28235893
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232985
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28240427
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232431
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28237553
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232089
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232557
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232197
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28235849
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232175
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28239877
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_06_0544202.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231909
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232017
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232129
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28232707
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28231981
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28255857
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_06_0544202.28239615
</commentlist>
</conversation>
