<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_18_1230258</id>
	<title>Swedish Court Says IP Numbers Privacy Protected</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1245329340000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:peter.svedman@gmail.com" rel="nofollow">oh2</a> writes <i>"The highest applicable Swedish court, Regeringsr&#228;tten, has ruled that <a href="http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/ny-dom-paverkar-inte-ipredlagen-1.894500">IP numbers are protected</a> (in Swedish) since they can be traced to individuals. This means that only government agencies are allowed to track and store IP addresses, leaving 'anti-piracy' advocates with no legal way to find possible copyright infringers."</i> <b>Update: 06/18 14:42 GMT</b> by <b> <a href="http://slashdot.org/~kdawson/">KD</a> </b>: The original linked article had been pulled due to factual errors and a <a href="http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/ny-dom-paverkar-inte-ipredlagen-1.894500">new article</a> has been posted (link replaced above). Here is a <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=hp&amp;hl=en&amp;js=n&amp;u=http\%3A\%2F\%2Fwww.dn.se\%2Fkultur-noje\%2Fnyheter\%2Fny-dom-paverkar-inte-ipredlagen-1.894500&amp;sl=sv&amp;tl=en&amp;history\_state0=">Google translation</a>. The new article makes clear that the ruling does not affect the anti-piracy efforts of rights-holders. <br> <b>Update: 06/18 15:08 GMT</b> by <b> <a href="http://slashdot.org/~kdawson/">KD</a> </b>: Behind the link below is a summary in English of the article sent in by the submitter, <a href="mailto:peter.svedman@gmail.com" rel="nofollow">oh2</a>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>oh2 writes " The highest applicable Swedish court , Regeringsr   tten , has ruled that IP numbers are protected ( in Swedish ) since they can be traced to individuals .
This means that only government agencies are allowed to track and store IP addresses , leaving 'anti-piracy ' advocates with no legal way to find possible copyright infringers .
" Update : 06/18 14 : 42 GMT by KD : The original linked article had been pulled due to factual errors and a new article has been posted ( link replaced above ) .
Here is a Google translation .
The new article makes clear that the ruling does not affect the anti-piracy efforts of rights-holders .
Update : 06/18 15 : 08 GMT by KD : Behind the link below is a summary in English of the article sent in by the submitter , oh2 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>oh2 writes "The highest applicable Swedish court, Regeringsrätten, has ruled that IP numbers are protected (in Swedish) since they can be traced to individuals.
This means that only government agencies are allowed to track and store IP addresses, leaving 'anti-piracy' advocates with no legal way to find possible copyright infringers.
" Update: 06/18 14:42 GMT by  KD : The original linked article had been pulled due to factual errors and a new article has been posted (link replaced above).
Here is a Google translation.
The new article makes clear that the ruling does not affect the anti-piracy efforts of rights-holders.
Update: 06/18 15:08 GMT by  KD : Behind the link below is a summary in English of the article sent in by the submitter, oh2.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28377557</id>
	<title>Semi-official translation of the law in question</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245353520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.datainspektionen.se/in-english/legislation/The-Personal-Data-Act/" title="datainspektionen.se" rel="nofollow">Personal Data Act (1998:204)</a> [datainspektionen.se]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Personal Data Act ( 1998 : 204 ) [ datainspektionen.se ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personal Data Act (1998:204) [datainspektionen.se]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372599</id>
	<title>Exemption...</title>
	<author>Trracer</author>
	<datestamp>1245333480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sadly the Swedish anti-pirate bureau has an exemption allowing them to store the IP-addresses. This has already been updated in the Swedish press.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sadly the Swedish anti-pirate bureau has an exemption allowing them to store the IP-addresses .
This has already been updated in the Swedish press .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sadly the Swedish anti-pirate bureau has an exemption allowing them to store the IP-addresses.
This has already been updated in the Swedish press.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372561</id>
	<title>Far reaching consequences</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245333300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This decision doesn't only affect anti-piracy hunters. Virtually all web companies track user ip addresses for various purposes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This decision does n't only affect anti-piracy hunters .
Virtually all web companies track user ip addresses for various purposes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This decision doesn't only affect anti-piracy hunters.
Virtually all web companies track user ip addresses for various purposes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372539</id>
	<title>Proxy</title>
	<author>Threni</author>
	<datestamp>1245333180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I see growing trade for companies who 'launder' access to other sites, and not just warez, but absolutely anything else.   Perhaps there'll be more TOR exit nodes there now?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I see growing trade for companies who 'launder ' access to other sites , and not just warez , but absolutely anything else .
Perhaps there 'll be more TOR exit nodes there now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see growing trade for companies who 'launder' access to other sites, and not just warez, but absolutely anything else.
Perhaps there'll be more TOR exit nodes there now?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372937</id>
	<title>Re:bad rule</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245335160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What are you talking about?  People attack your servers, and you hunt them down and kill them?  When people attack your server, you find the responsible network block's admins abuse address, and report the IP and the problem.  If they fail to act, and you continue to see attacks from that ISP, then you report that ISP upstream.  None of that requires you knowing the individual(s) involved, and rightly so, since it could be the ISP pretending to be the individuals, for instance.</p><p>As for hurting more than helping... a swedish feminist politician recently compared (very directly, in a short post about that subject alone) file sharing to rape.  Are you really saying you don't value privacy of your IP address in a world like that, considering that people have been killed in mob violence when they were mistakenly believed to be child molesters, for instance?</p><p>Please think a little more about what you're saying.  It's often said, but nonetheless true, that those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What are you talking about ?
People attack your servers , and you hunt them down and kill them ?
When people attack your server , you find the responsible network block 's admins abuse address , and report the IP and the problem .
If they fail to act , and you continue to see attacks from that ISP , then you report that ISP upstream .
None of that requires you knowing the individual ( s ) involved , and rightly so , since it could be the ISP pretending to be the individuals , for instance.As for hurting more than helping... a swedish feminist politician recently compared ( very directly , in a short post about that subject alone ) file sharing to rape .
Are you really saying you do n't value privacy of your IP address in a world like that , considering that people have been killed in mob violence when they were mistakenly believed to be child molesters , for instance ? Please think a little more about what you 're saying .
It 's often said , but nonetheless true , that those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What are you talking about?
People attack your servers, and you hunt them down and kill them?
When people attack your server, you find the responsible network block's admins abuse address, and report the IP and the problem.
If they fail to act, and you continue to see attacks from that ISP, then you report that ISP upstream.
None of that requires you knowing the individual(s) involved, and rightly so, since it could be the ISP pretending to be the individuals, for instance.As for hurting more than helping... a swedish feminist politician recently compared (very directly, in a short post about that subject alone) file sharing to rape.
Are you really saying you don't value privacy of your IP address in a world like that, considering that people have been killed in mob violence when they were mistakenly believed to be child molesters, for instance?Please think a little more about what you're saying.
It's often said, but nonetheless true, that those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372551</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373443</id>
	<title>From the original document in swedish...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245337500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Basically APB argues IP addresses are not personal data and can not be linked to actual persons, thus should not be govenerd by the Personal Data Law (or something like that PUL, Person Uppgifts Lagen).</p><p>The court ruled that since APB is using IP addresses to sue people who are participating in illegal file sharing, then obviously IP addresses can be linked to persons and are thus protected by PUL.</p><p>The PUL law as google translated it:<br>http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;sl=sv&amp;tl=en&amp;u=http://www.notisum.se/rnp/SLS/lag/19980204.HTM&amp;prev=\_t</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Basically APB argues IP addresses are not personal data and can not be linked to actual persons , thus should not be govenerd by the Personal Data Law ( or something like that PUL , Person Uppgifts Lagen ) .The court ruled that since APB is using IP addresses to sue people who are participating in illegal file sharing , then obviously IP addresses can be linked to persons and are thus protected by PUL.The PUL law as google translated it : http : //translate.google.com/translate ? hl = en&amp;ie = UTF-8&amp;sl = sv&amp;tl = en&amp;u = http : //www.notisum.se/rnp/SLS/lag/19980204.HTM&amp;prev = \ _t</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Basically APB argues IP addresses are not personal data and can not be linked to actual persons, thus should not be govenerd by the Personal Data Law (or something like that PUL, Person Uppgifts Lagen).The court ruled that since APB is using IP addresses to sue people who are participating in illegal file sharing, then obviously IP addresses can be linked to persons and are thus protected by PUL.The PUL law as google translated it:http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;sl=sv&amp;tl=en&amp;u=http://www.notisum.se/rnp/SLS/lag/19980204.HTM&amp;prev=\_t</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372551</id>
	<title>bad rule</title>
	<author>gmack</author>
	<datestamp>1245333240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And no way for server admins to track what virus infected bots are trying to break into their systems.</p><p>This rule will hurt more than it will help.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And no way for server admins to track what virus infected bots are trying to break into their systems.This rule will hurt more than it will help .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And no way for server admins to track what virus infected bots are trying to break into their systems.This rule will hurt more than it will help.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372759</id>
	<title>um, honeypots and IDSes?</title>
	<author>Loco3KGT</author>
	<datestamp>1245334260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So are they now illegal in Sweden?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So are they now illegal in Sweden ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So are they now illegal in Sweden?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28380027</id>
	<title>Re:Privacy in Sweden</title>
	<author>turbidostato</author>
	<datestamp>1245317280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Sweden has some strange privacy norms."</p><p>Not that I know about.</p><p>"Asking what someone votes for politically is close to a serious faux pa."</p><p>It's unpolite which is quite different of being illegal.  But it is illegal to force someone to tell you where his vote went or trying to guess it by other covered means.  What do you exactly see strange here?</p><p>"In fact some people I know have absolutely no idea how their parents or even partners vote."</p><p>And what that exactly has to be with the legal system?  That only means that they have a culture where the political inclination of somebody is so deep into the privacy camp they better give it alone -and I see it as quite a sane position.  Exactly the same kind of culture bias, only on a different field: do you know what your parents' little sexual perversions are? is it illegal for me to ask?  still, how do you feel about my little inocent question?</p><p>"you can go and check tax returns for anyone in Sweden"</p><p>And do you see that as a bad thing exactly why?  Taxes are a public affair that affect all public stakeholders by its very nature.  Probably you won't have so many billionaires paying by not such quite clear maneouvres not so much if their taxes were to be publicly accesible.  Since taxes are "the common pocket of all us citizens" how can that be a bad thing?  Give it Caesar that of Caesar's...</p><p>"On the other hand, religion is another area that you very much leave alone and don't ask about."</p><p>Religion *is* a private matter.  Compound it with the fact that people, in the millions, have been killed because other people knowing their religious filation, not so far of Sweeden, not so much time ago and I think you'll get a decent picture of the situation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Sweden has some strange privacy norms .
" Not that I know about .
" Asking what someone votes for politically is close to a serious faux pa. " It 's unpolite which is quite different of being illegal .
But it is illegal to force someone to tell you where his vote went or trying to guess it by other covered means .
What do you exactly see strange here ?
" In fact some people I know have absolutely no idea how their parents or even partners vote .
" And what that exactly has to be with the legal system ?
That only means that they have a culture where the political inclination of somebody is so deep into the privacy camp they better give it alone -and I see it as quite a sane position .
Exactly the same kind of culture bias , only on a different field : do you know what your parents ' little sexual perversions are ?
is it illegal for me to ask ?
still , how do you feel about my little inocent question ?
" you can go and check tax returns for anyone in Sweden " And do you see that as a bad thing exactly why ?
Taxes are a public affair that affect all public stakeholders by its very nature .
Probably you wo n't have so many billionaires paying by not such quite clear maneouvres not so much if their taxes were to be publicly accesible .
Since taxes are " the common pocket of all us citizens " how can that be a bad thing ?
Give it Caesar that of Caesar 's... " On the other hand , religion is another area that you very much leave alone and do n't ask about .
" Religion * is * a private matter .
Compound it with the fact that people , in the millions , have been killed because other people knowing their religious filation , not so far of Sweeden , not so much time ago and I think you 'll get a decent picture of the situation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Sweden has some strange privacy norms.
"Not that I know about.
"Asking what someone votes for politically is close to a serious faux pa."It's unpolite which is quite different of being illegal.
But it is illegal to force someone to tell you where his vote went or trying to guess it by other covered means.
What do you exactly see strange here?
"In fact some people I know have absolutely no idea how their parents or even partners vote.
"And what that exactly has to be with the legal system?
That only means that they have a culture where the political inclination of somebody is so deep into the privacy camp they better give it alone -and I see it as quite a sane position.
Exactly the same kind of culture bias, only on a different field: do you know what your parents' little sexual perversions are?
is it illegal for me to ask?
still, how do you feel about my little inocent question?
"you can go and check tax returns for anyone in Sweden"And do you see that as a bad thing exactly why?
Taxes are a public affair that affect all public stakeholders by its very nature.
Probably you won't have so many billionaires paying by not such quite clear maneouvres not so much if their taxes were to be publicly accesible.
Since taxes are "the common pocket of all us citizens" how can that be a bad thing?
Give it Caesar that of Caesar's..."On the other hand, religion is another area that you very much leave alone and don't ask about.
"Religion *is* a private matter.
Compound it with the fact that people, in the millions, have been killed because other people knowing their religious filation, not so far of Sweeden, not so much time ago and I think you'll get a decent picture of the situation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372791</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372847</id>
	<title>Re:No, sorry.</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1245334680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't you know anything about IT? "Deny" automatically overrules "Allow"<br> <br>From <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme\_Administrative\_Court\_of\_Sweden" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme\_Administrative\_Court\_of\_Sweden</a> [wikipedia.org]<p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>... [T]he court as an institution is independent of the Riksdag, and the government is not able to interfere with the decisions of the court.</p></div><p>That's the IPRED law out the window, then.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't you know anything about IT ?
" Deny " automatically overrules " Allow " From http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme \ _Administrative \ _Court \ _of \ _Sweden [ wikipedia.org ] ... [ T ] he court as an institution is independent of the Riksdag , and the government is not able to interfere with the decisions of the court.That 's the IPRED law out the window , then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't you know anything about IT?
"Deny" automatically overrules "Allow" From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme\_Administrative\_Court\_of\_Sweden [wikipedia.org] ... [T]he court as an institution is independent of the Riksdag, and the government is not able to interfere with the decisions of the court.That's the IPRED law out the window, then.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372585</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28376413</id>
	<title>implications for</title>
	<author>droidsURlooking4</author>
	<datestamp>1245349380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>!{those who are not{anti{privacy{piracy}}}};</htmltext>
<tokenext>!
{ those who are not { anti { privacy { piracy } } } } ;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>!
{those who are not{anti{privacy{piracy}}}};</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373213</id>
	<title>Re:bad rule</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1245336660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And no way for server admins to track what virus infected bots are trying to break into their systems.</p></div><p>Even worse than this:</p><p>No way for ISPs to store in their DHCP server IP pool which IP addresses have already been given to customer networks.</p><p>Let's enforce this against the ISP of the judge who came up with this idea<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p><p>Or maybe have them rethink the issue and specify in greater detail what should and shouldn't be allowed.  If the problem is using IPs to identify people, instead of banning the storage of IP addresses one should ban the use of stored IP addresses to identify people?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And no way for server admins to track what virus infected bots are trying to break into their systems.Even worse than this : No way for ISPs to store in their DHCP server IP pool which IP addresses have already been given to customer networks.Let 's enforce this against the ISP of the judge who came up with this idea ; - ) Or maybe have them rethink the issue and specify in greater detail what should and should n't be allowed .
If the problem is using IPs to identify people , instead of banning the storage of IP addresses one should ban the use of stored IP addresses to identify people ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And no way for server admins to track what virus infected bots are trying to break into their systems.Even worse than this:No way for ISPs to store in their DHCP server IP pool which IP addresses have already been given to customer networks.Let's enforce this against the ISP of the judge who came up with this idea ;-)Or maybe have them rethink the issue and specify in greater detail what should and shouldn't be allowed.
If the problem is using IPs to identify people, instead of banning the storage of IP addresses one should ban the use of stored IP addresses to identify people?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372551</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28375063</id>
	<title>I.P. Address is not DNA or a Fingerprint</title>
	<author>Maxo-Texas</author>
	<datestamp>1245344220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They tie to a computer, not to a person.</p><p>And in many cases, they don't even do that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They tie to a computer , not to a person.And in many cases , they do n't even do that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They tie to a computer, not to a person.And in many cases, they don't even do that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372695</id>
	<title>Link changed?</title>
	<author>tonk</author>
	<datestamp>1245333960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The posted link didn't work for me, but http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/ny-dom-paverkar-inte-ipredlagen-1.894500 did.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The posted link did n't work for me , but http : //www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/ny-dom-paverkar-inte-ipredlagen-1.894500 did .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The posted link didn't work for me, but http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/ny-dom-paverkar-inte-ipredlagen-1.894500 did.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373441</id>
	<title>tried my own take on the translation bit.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245337500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...perhaps a little less googlish: http://www.allende.se/blog/2009/06/en-ipred-fant-balanserade/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...perhaps a little less googlish : http : //www.allende.se/blog/2009/06/en-ipred-fant-balanserade/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...perhaps a little less googlish: http://www.allende.se/blog/2009/06/en-ipred-fant-balanserade/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28378735</id>
	<title>Re:bad rule</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245356520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>A feminist liking filesharing to rape? This can only mean:</p><p>a) She's not really a feminist.<br>b) She's been fed enough BS about filesharing to actually believe it.<br>c) She's on the payroll of some media company.<br>d) All of the above.</p></div><p>Or!!</p><p>e) The idea of filesharing appeals to her<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-D</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A feminist liking filesharing to rape ?
This can only mean : a ) She 's not really a feminist.b ) She 's been fed enough BS about filesharing to actually believe it.c ) She 's on the payroll of some media company.d ) All of the above.Or !
! e ) The idea of filesharing appeals to her : -D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A feminist liking filesharing to rape?
This can only mean:a) She's not really a feminist.b) She's been fed enough BS about filesharing to actually believe it.c) She's on the payroll of some media company.d) All of the above.Or!
!e) The idea of filesharing appeals to her :-D
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28374869</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28374163</id>
	<title>slopery slip</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245340620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Next up: Street addresses and telephone numbers are banned.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Next up : Street addresses and telephone numbers are banned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Next up: Street addresses and telephone numbers are banned.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28375183</id>
	<title>Hallelujah</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245344760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can I get a amen!?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can I get a amen !
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can I get a amen!
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373595</id>
	<title>Re:No, sorry.</title>
	<author>value\_added</author>
	<datestamp>1245338100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Don't you know anything about IT? "Deny" automatically overrules "Allow"</i></p><p>LOL.  Do you?</p><p>If so, maybe you can explain how the rules relevant to Windows' ACLs (which I assume you're referring to) define IT, generally, how those those rules are relevant to say, packet filtering, and then, how they apply to the Swedish legal system.</p><p>So that you don't feel like a complete ass, I'll offer the comment that in the context of women (specifically, the behaviour of the ones I've known), it would be correct to suggest that an inherited deny overrides an inherited allow permission unless overridden by an explicit allow, but if you asked her, she'd insist that it's always the last matching rule that wins.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't you know anything about IT ?
" Deny " automatically overrules " Allow " LOL .
Do you ? If so , maybe you can explain how the rules relevant to Windows ' ACLs ( which I assume you 're referring to ) define IT , generally , how those those rules are relevant to say , packet filtering , and then , how they apply to the Swedish legal system.So that you do n't feel like a complete ass , I 'll offer the comment that in the context of women ( specifically , the behaviour of the ones I 've known ) , it would be correct to suggest that an inherited deny overrides an inherited allow permission unless overridden by an explicit allow , but if you asked her , she 'd insist that it 's always the last matching rule that wins .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't you know anything about IT?
"Deny" automatically overrules "Allow"LOL.
Do you?If so, maybe you can explain how the rules relevant to Windows' ACLs (which I assume you're referring to) define IT, generally, how those those rules are relevant to say, packet filtering, and then, how they apply to the Swedish legal system.So that you don't feel like a complete ass, I'll offer the comment that in the context of women (specifically, the behaviour of the ones I've known), it would be correct to suggest that an inherited deny overrides an inherited allow permission unless overridden by an explicit allow, but if you asked her, she'd insist that it's always the last matching rule that wins.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28376585</id>
	<title>Wrong Interpretation</title>
	<author>The Raven</author>
	<datestamp>1245350160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I understand correctly, this ruling does <b>NOT</b> affect webserver logs, because that person came TO YOU. It would, however, affect the legality of you selling or giving away those logs.</p><p>This is analogous to a doctor being able to keep records of his patients, but not able for that same doctor to sell or even disclose those records to a third party.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I understand correctly , this ruling does NOT affect webserver logs , because that person came TO YOU .
It would , however , affect the legality of you selling or giving away those logs.This is analogous to a doctor being able to keep records of his patients , but not able for that same doctor to sell or even disclose those records to a third party .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I understand correctly, this ruling does NOT affect webserver logs, because that person came TO YOU.
It would, however, affect the legality of you selling or giving away those logs.This is analogous to a doctor being able to keep records of his patients, but not able for that same doctor to sell or even disclose those records to a third party.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28379221</id>
	<title>Re:bad rule</title>
	<author>turbidostato</author>
	<datestamp>1245358020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The bad thing about this statement is that AFAIK one of the main defense points against the MAFIAA tactics "is/was that an IP cannot be deffinitely linked to an individual... how does this decision affect that?"</p><p>"May", which is enough to get into consideration when we are talking about fundamental rights as is the one about privacy, versus "for sure" which is what the MAFIAAs around the world want governments to believe.</p><p>A city council will mark as "non potable" any water spring that is not under scrutiny.  Would that mean it is certainly "poisonous"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The bad thing about this statement is that AFAIK one of the main defense points against the MAFIAA tactics " is/was that an IP can not be deffinitely linked to an individual... how does this decision affect that ?
" " May " , which is enough to get into consideration when we are talking about fundamental rights as is the one about privacy , versus " for sure " which is what the MAFIAAs around the world want governments to believe.A city council will mark as " non potable " any water spring that is not under scrutiny .
Would that mean it is certainly " poisonous " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The bad thing about this statement is that AFAIK one of the main defense points against the MAFIAA tactics "is/was that an IP cannot be deffinitely linked to an individual... how does this decision affect that?
""May", which is enough to get into consideration when we are talking about fundamental rights as is the one about privacy, versus "for sure" which is what the MAFIAAs around the world want governments to believe.A city council will mark as "non potable" any water spring that is not under scrutiny.
Would that mean it is certainly "poisonous"?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373417</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372791</id>
	<title>Privacy in Sweden</title>
	<author>Biotech9</author>
	<datestamp>1245334440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sweden has some strange privacy norms. Asking what someone votes for politically is close to a serious faux pa. In fact some people I know have absolutely no idea how their parents or even partners vote. That is a very private thing. But you can look up car owners on a free and public website by registration number, you can go and check tax returns for anyone in Sweden, and see what they earn. On the other hand, religion is another area that you very much leave alone and don't ask about.</p><p>Hopefully the IP information will be considered something a little more private, and after the Pirate party did so well in the European elections maybe there is a chance that common sense will prevail and rules like IPRED will be struck down anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sweden has some strange privacy norms .
Asking what someone votes for politically is close to a serious faux pa. In fact some people I know have absolutely no idea how their parents or even partners vote .
That is a very private thing .
But you can look up car owners on a free and public website by registration number , you can go and check tax returns for anyone in Sweden , and see what they earn .
On the other hand , religion is another area that you very much leave alone and do n't ask about.Hopefully the IP information will be considered something a little more private , and after the Pirate party did so well in the European elections maybe there is a chance that common sense will prevail and rules like IPRED will be struck down anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sweden has some strange privacy norms.
Asking what someone votes for politically is close to a serious faux pa. In fact some people I know have absolutely no idea how their parents or even partners vote.
That is a very private thing.
But you can look up car owners on a free and public website by registration number, you can go and check tax returns for anyone in Sweden, and see what they earn.
On the other hand, religion is another area that you very much leave alone and don't ask about.Hopefully the IP information will be considered something a little more private, and after the Pirate party did so well in the European elections maybe there is a chance that common sense will prevail and rules like IPRED will be struck down anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28375561</id>
	<title>Really?</title>
	<author>DaveV1.0</author>
	<datestamp>1245346260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then I guess they are busy bringing charges against LiveJournal and every other website that stores IP addresses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then I guess they are busy bringing charges against LiveJournal and every other website that stores IP addresses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then I guess they are busy bringing charges against LiveJournal and every other website that stores IP addresses.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372959</id>
	<title>Re:Far reaching consequences</title>
	<author>Yvanhoe</author>
	<datestamp>1245335280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Presumably with their users' consent...<br>
Plus, many web companies prefer to use cookies. Tracking via IP always causes troubles.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Presumably with their users ' consent.. . Plus , many web companies prefer to use cookies .
Tracking via IP always causes troubles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Presumably with their users' consent...
Plus, many web companies prefer to use cookies.
Tracking via IP always causes troubles.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372561</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373561</id>
	<title>Re:bad rule</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245337980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not quite. My Postal address is personal information too. But I give it to you whenever I want to have a response by mail. An IP address is like that. You can off course respond to and keep the info that is handed to you, but not sell it or give to other companies. This will hurt though, as you probably want the right to pass those addresses to a security firm or to your provider.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not quite .
My Postal address is personal information too .
But I give it to you whenever I want to have a response by mail .
An IP address is like that .
You can off course respond to and keep the info that is handed to you , but not sell it or give to other companies .
This will hurt though , as you probably want the right to pass those addresses to a security firm or to your provider .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not quite.
My Postal address is personal information too.
But I give it to you whenever I want to have a response by mail.
An IP address is like that.
You can off course respond to and keep the info that is handed to you, but not sell it or give to other companies.
This will hurt though, as you probably want the right to pass those addresses to a security firm or to your provider.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372551</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373093</id>
	<title>Re:But aren't they addresses?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245336180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Even if you have an unlisted number, should it be illegal for someone to write down your number if it shows up on caller ID when you call them?</p></div><p>There's a difference between you giving your number to someone, and someone using your number to find out who you are. I haven't really read the summary, but at first glance it appears that this law makes it so you can't use information <b>in court</b>, which ties an IP address to a name, and specific limitations may apply (e.g. certain agencies may have exemptions, or you can use it if you've been given the permission by the user, etc.).</p><p>This law may not prevent you from using the IP address to recognize your customer, but may make it unusable in court.</p><p>Basically, this would be great for the piracy movement (by preventing people from having their names associated with their IP addresses) - <b>except</b> that someone already mentioned above that the anti-piracy group is exempt from it...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(  [I have not verified the veracity of that claim]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if you have an unlisted number , should it be illegal for someone to write down your number if it shows up on caller ID when you call them ? There 's a difference between you giving your number to someone , and someone using your number to find out who you are .
I have n't really read the summary , but at first glance it appears that this law makes it so you ca n't use information in court , which ties an IP address to a name , and specific limitations may apply ( e.g .
certain agencies may have exemptions , or you can use it if you 've been given the permission by the user , etc .
) .This law may not prevent you from using the IP address to recognize your customer , but may make it unusable in court.Basically , this would be great for the piracy movement ( by preventing people from having their names associated with their IP addresses ) - except that someone already mentioned above that the anti-piracy group is exempt from it... : ( [ I have not verified the veracity of that claim ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if you have an unlisted number, should it be illegal for someone to write down your number if it shows up on caller ID when you call them?There's a difference between you giving your number to someone, and someone using your number to find out who you are.
I haven't really read the summary, but at first glance it appears that this law makes it so you can't use information in court, which ties an IP address to a name, and specific limitations may apply (e.g.
certain agencies may have exemptions, or you can use it if you've been given the permission by the user, etc.
).This law may not prevent you from using the IP address to recognize your customer, but may make it unusable in court.Basically, this would be great for the piracy movement (by preventing people from having their names associated with their IP addresses) - except that someone already mentioned above that the anti-piracy group is exempt from it... :(  [I have not verified the veracity of that claim]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372681</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373529</id>
	<title>Re:No, sorry.</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1245337860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Turns out that this is total rubbish, as there is a clause in Government law which appears to supersede this. So, the Government CAN interfere (read: ignore) with Supreme Administrative Court decisions.<br> <br>If the system was in any way similar, this would be like the Commons bring in legislation which contravenes a decision by the Lords. It seems that the systems are not analogous, though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Turns out that this is total rubbish , as there is a clause in Government law which appears to supersede this .
So , the Government CAN interfere ( read : ignore ) with Supreme Administrative Court decisions .
If the system was in any way similar , this would be like the Commons bring in legislation which contravenes a decision by the Lords .
It seems that the systems are not analogous , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Turns out that this is total rubbish, as there is a clause in Government law which appears to supersede this.
So, the Government CAN interfere (read: ignore) with Supreme Administrative Court decisions.
If the system was in any way similar, this would be like the Commons bring in legislation which contravenes a decision by the Lords.
It seems that the systems are not analogous, though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373477</id>
	<title>Consistency</title>
	<author>Arthur B.</author>
	<datestamp>1245337680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I oppose intellectual property, but I am often disappointed that most who do are inconsistent,<br>Many people explained that DMCA makes numbers illegal. Well, so is this. There's nothing wrong with storing IP adresses.</p><p>Information about people is information, just because you like privacy doesn't mean there's ethical magic surrounding this kind of information.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I oppose intellectual property , but I am often disappointed that most who do are inconsistent,Many people explained that DMCA makes numbers illegal .
Well , so is this .
There 's nothing wrong with storing IP adresses.Information about people is information , just because you like privacy does n't mean there 's ethical magic surrounding this kind of information .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I oppose intellectual property, but I am often disappointed that most who do are inconsistent,Many people explained that DMCA makes numbers illegal.
Well, so is this.
There's nothing wrong with storing IP adresses.Information about people is information, just because you like privacy doesn't mean there's ethical magic surrounding this kind of information.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372601</id>
	<title>Storing addresses you say</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245333480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So If I run a web server in Sweden, all my apache logs are now illegal? Better block all my nationals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So If I run a web server in Sweden , all my apache logs are now illegal ?
Better block all my nationals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So If I run a web server in Sweden, all my apache logs are now illegal?
Better block all my nationals.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373417</id>
	<title>Re:bad rule</title>
	<author>xtracto</author>
	<datestamp>1245337320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And no way for server admins to track what virus infected bots are trying to break into their systems.</p><p>This rule will hurt more than it will help.</p></div><p>I was just thinking, from the following snippet in the summary:<br><i>IP numbers are protected (in Swedish) since they can be traced to individuals</i></p><p>The bad thing about this statement is that AFAIK one of the main defense points against the MAFIAA tactics is/was that an IP cannot be deffinitely linked to an individual... how does this decision affect that? does it means that now that the highest Swedish court made this explicit, the sue-friendly groups can backup in this assumption?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And no way for server admins to track what virus infected bots are trying to break into their systems.This rule will hurt more than it will help.I was just thinking , from the following snippet in the summary : IP numbers are protected ( in Swedish ) since they can be traced to individualsThe bad thing about this statement is that AFAIK one of the main defense points against the MAFIAA tactics is/was that an IP can not be deffinitely linked to an individual... how does this decision affect that ?
does it means that now that the highest Swedish court made this explicit , the sue-friendly groups can backup in this assumption ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And no way for server admins to track what virus infected bots are trying to break into their systems.This rule will hurt more than it will help.I was just thinking, from the following snippet in the summary:IP numbers are protected (in Swedish) since they can be traced to individualsThe bad thing about this statement is that AFAIK one of the main defense points against the MAFIAA tactics is/was that an IP cannot be deffinitely linked to an individual... how does this decision affect that?
does it means that now that the highest Swedish court made this explicit, the sue-friendly groups can backup in this assumption?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372551</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373537</id>
	<title>Re:that's pretty retarded</title>
	<author>TheP4st</author>
	<datestamp>1245337920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's just like if you mailed me a letter or sent me an email.  In either case you're supplying a return address.</p></div><p>Huh? In the case of a letter I have to <i>actively</i> write the return address. In the case of email I can <i>spoof</i> the sender address.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's just like if you mailed me a letter or sent me an email .
In either case you 're supplying a return address.Huh ?
In the case of a letter I have to actively write the return address .
In the case of email I can spoof the sender address .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's just like if you mailed me a letter or sent me an email.
In either case you're supplying a return address.Huh?
In the case of a letter I have to actively write the return address.
In the case of email I can spoof the sender address.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373313</id>
	<title>Short summary</title>
	<author>oh2</author>
	<datestamp>1245337020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The original article has been pulled, new one available <a href="http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/ny-dom-paverkar-inte-ipredlagen-1.894500" title="www.dn.se"> (In swedish) here </a> [www.dn.se] <p>


<b>A short summary in english.</b> 

</p><p>
This autumn <a href="http://www.datainspektionen.se/in-english/" title="datainspektionen.se">Datainspektionen</a> [datainspektionen.se] will start monitoring how the IPRED law is applied when it comes to disclosure of personal information. A recent verdict in the Regeringsr&#195;tten, Swedens highest applicable court,  has upheld Datainspektionens decision that IP adresses are to be considered personal information and therefore protected under law.
</p><p>
In 2005 Datainspektionen ruled that collecting and storing personal information online like copyright advocates were doing was a breach of the Swedish PUL, Personal information act, that regulates how and what kind of information that can be traced to a single individual that can be stored. The antipiracy organizations were quickly granted an exemption though, that expired march 31st. Starting april 1st this year IPRED allows holders of copyright to apply to the courts for this information.

Datainspektionen will now monitor closely how any personal information aquired from the courts in this manner is used by copyright holders.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The original article has been pulled , new one available ( In swedish ) here [ www.dn.se ] A short summary in english .
This autumn Datainspektionen [ datainspektionen.se ] will start monitoring how the IPRED law is applied when it comes to disclosure of personal information .
A recent verdict in the Regeringsr   tten , Swedens highest applicable court , has upheld Datainspektionens decision that IP adresses are to be considered personal information and therefore protected under law .
In 2005 Datainspektionen ruled that collecting and storing personal information online like copyright advocates were doing was a breach of the Swedish PUL , Personal information act , that regulates how and what kind of information that can be traced to a single individual that can be stored .
The antipiracy organizations were quickly granted an exemption though , that expired march 31st .
Starting april 1st this year IPRED allows holders of copyright to apply to the courts for this information .
Datainspektionen will now monitor closely how any personal information aquired from the courts in this manner is used by copyright holders .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The original article has been pulled, new one available  (In swedish) here  [www.dn.se] 


A short summary in english.
This autumn Datainspektionen [datainspektionen.se] will start monitoring how the IPRED law is applied when it comes to disclosure of personal information.
A recent verdict in the RegeringsrÃtten, Swedens highest applicable court,  has upheld Datainspektionens decision that IP adresses are to be considered personal information and therefore protected under law.
In 2005 Datainspektionen ruled that collecting and storing personal information online like copyright advocates were doing was a breach of the Swedish PUL, Personal information act, that regulates how and what kind of information that can be traced to a single individual that can be stored.
The antipiracy organizations were quickly granted an exemption though, that expired march 31st.
Starting april 1st this year IPRED allows holders of copyright to apply to the courts for this information.
Datainspektionen will now monitor closely how any personal information aquired from the courts in this manner is used by copyright holders.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372997</id>
	<title>that's pretty retarded</title>
	<author>buddyglass</author>
	<datestamp>1245335520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So if I'm running an online forum or game of some sort, I can't drop IP-bans on offensive parties since that would constitute tracking an IP address?</p><p>I'm pretty much of the opinion that if you visit my website then you're volunteering your IP address.  It's just like if you mailed me a letter or sent me an email.  In either case you're supplying a return address.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So if I 'm running an online forum or game of some sort , I ca n't drop IP-bans on offensive parties since that would constitute tracking an IP address ? I 'm pretty much of the opinion that if you visit my website then you 're volunteering your IP address .
It 's just like if you mailed me a letter or sent me an email .
In either case you 're supplying a return address .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So if I'm running an online forum or game of some sort, I can't drop IP-bans on offensive parties since that would constitute tracking an IP address?I'm pretty much of the opinion that if you visit my website then you're volunteering your IP address.
It's just like if you mailed me a letter or sent me an email.
In either case you're supplying a return address.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372633</id>
	<title>Slashdot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245333540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>News for nerds, stuff that's English.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>News for nerds , stuff that 's English .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>News for nerds, stuff that's English.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28375073</id>
	<title>Maybe</title>
	<author>Junior J. Junior III</author>
	<datestamp>1245344280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I can use a standard protocol (ICMP, ARP, etc.) to determine your IP address, and such tools are available to anyone, then it is not reasonable to expect privacy.  If I know your host name, I can get your IP.  If you're connecting to my services via TCP or UDP, I have your IP, and kindof need it in order to do anything.</p><p>On the other hand, server logs with this info in it should be considered private.  Your transactions between you and my server are business between you and me.  You should have an reasonable expectation that I will keep that information private.  I would not divulge the information unless it were required by due process -- a warrant or subpoena or whatever.</p><p>I haven't read the court's decision yet, so I'm not sure what they're really saying, but depending on context the information may be reasonable to consider IP addresses in some sense private.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I can use a standard protocol ( ICMP , ARP , etc .
) to determine your IP address , and such tools are available to anyone , then it is not reasonable to expect privacy .
If I know your host name , I can get your IP .
If you 're connecting to my services via TCP or UDP , I have your IP , and kindof need it in order to do anything.On the other hand , server logs with this info in it should be considered private .
Your transactions between you and my server are business between you and me .
You should have an reasonable expectation that I will keep that information private .
I would not divulge the information unless it were required by due process -- a warrant or subpoena or whatever.I have n't read the court 's decision yet , so I 'm not sure what they 're really saying , but depending on context the information may be reasonable to consider IP addresses in some sense private .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I can use a standard protocol (ICMP, ARP, etc.
) to determine your IP address, and such tools are available to anyone, then it is not reasonable to expect privacy.
If I know your host name, I can get your IP.
If you're connecting to my services via TCP or UDP, I have your IP, and kindof need it in order to do anything.On the other hand, server logs with this info in it should be considered private.
Your transactions between you and my server are business between you and me.
You should have an reasonable expectation that I will keep that information private.
I would not divulge the information unless it were required by due process -- a warrant or subpoena or whatever.I haven't read the court's decision yet, so I'm not sure what they're really saying, but depending on context the information may be reasonable to consider IP addresses in some sense private.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28375177</id>
	<title>It's not just that they store. It's how and why.</title>
	<author>BlueParrot</author>
	<datestamp>1245344700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think this has the implications a lot of people think it has. The courts are very able to say that storing IPs with the purpose of protecting yourself against attacks is acceptable, but doing it the way the APB has been doing it is not. In fact, if I'm not mistaken Swedish law actually does specify how information is to be used when you supply a service over the net. ISPs ( as an example ) are required to delete details when they are no longer used. Due to EU directives they may soon be required to store it for 6 months, but regardless it is clear that Swedish law does permit "service providers" to store information for as long as is necessary to supply their service ( and afterwards they are required to delete it). What is considered "necessary" is down to the courts to decide I guess.</p><p>It would appear that the courts have simply ruled that APB stored personal details in a manner that is not consistent with Swedish law. I.e, it's not just the fact that they stored it. It is also a matter of how they stored it, and why they did it. I very much doubt that a Swedish court is going to convict you for having an IP ban in your server config as an example.</p><p>Oh, and because this is Sweden I don't have to rant about how I'm not a lawyer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think this has the implications a lot of people think it has .
The courts are very able to say that storing IPs with the purpose of protecting yourself against attacks is acceptable , but doing it the way the APB has been doing it is not .
In fact , if I 'm not mistaken Swedish law actually does specify how information is to be used when you supply a service over the net .
ISPs ( as an example ) are required to delete details when they are no longer used .
Due to EU directives they may soon be required to store it for 6 months , but regardless it is clear that Swedish law does permit " service providers " to store information for as long as is necessary to supply their service ( and afterwards they are required to delete it ) .
What is considered " necessary " is down to the courts to decide I guess.It would appear that the courts have simply ruled that APB stored personal details in a manner that is not consistent with Swedish law .
I.e , it 's not just the fact that they stored it .
It is also a matter of how they stored it , and why they did it .
I very much doubt that a Swedish court is going to convict you for having an IP ban in your server config as an example.Oh , and because this is Sweden I do n't have to rant about how I 'm not a lawyer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think this has the implications a lot of people think it has.
The courts are very able to say that storing IPs with the purpose of protecting yourself against attacks is acceptable, but doing it the way the APB has been doing it is not.
In fact, if I'm not mistaken Swedish law actually does specify how information is to be used when you supply a service over the net.
ISPs ( as an example ) are required to delete details when they are no longer used.
Due to EU directives they may soon be required to store it for 6 months, but regardless it is clear that Swedish law does permit "service providers" to store information for as long as is necessary to supply their service ( and afterwards they are required to delete it).
What is considered "necessary" is down to the courts to decide I guess.It would appear that the courts have simply ruled that APB stored personal details in a manner that is not consistent with Swedish law.
I.e, it's not just the fact that they stored it.
It is also a matter of how they stored it, and why they did it.
I very much doubt that a Swedish court is going to convict you for having an IP ban in your server config as an example.Oh, and because this is Sweden I don't have to rant about how I'm not a lawyer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372593</id>
	<title>Article has been replaced</title>
	<author>mattj452</author>
	<datestamp>1245333480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>The article had a lot of errors and DN has replaced it with a new article:
<a href="http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/ny-dom-paverkar-inte-ipredlagen-1.894500" title="www.dn.se" rel="nofollow">http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/ny-dom-paverkar-inte-ipredlagen-1.894500</a> [www.dn.se]

In short: They can still do what they want, but they need a permit for it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The article had a lot of errors and DN has replaced it with a new article : http : //www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/ny-dom-paverkar-inte-ipredlagen-1.894500 [ www.dn.se ] In short : They can still do what they want , but they need a permit for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article had a lot of errors and DN has replaced it with a new article:
http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/ny-dom-paverkar-inte-ipredlagen-1.894500 [www.dn.se]

In short: They can still do what they want, but they need a permit for it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373195</id>
	<title>fir*sT post</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245336600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">PYro-homOsexual resulted in the</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>PYro-homOsexual resulted in the [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PYro-homOsexual resulted in the [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28374833</id>
	<title>Swedish IPs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245343320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It doesn't matter that they are protected or not... I can't read Swedish.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It does n't matter that they are protected or not... I ca n't read Swedish .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It doesn't matter that they are protected or not... I can't read Swedish.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372623</id>
	<title>Article's been replaced</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245333540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's the <a href="http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/ny-dom-paverkar-inte-ipredlagen-1.894500" title="www.dn.se" rel="nofollow">new link</a> [www.dn.se].</p><p>The bottom line is that despite the ruling from regeringsr&#195;tten, APB may still collect IP addresses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's the new link [ www.dn.se ] .The bottom line is that despite the ruling from regeringsr   tten , APB may still collect IP addresses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's the new link [www.dn.se].The bottom line is that despite the ruling from regeringsrÃtten, APB may still collect IP addresses.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372899</id>
	<title>Re:bad rule</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245334980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And no way for server admins to track what virus infected bots are trying to break into their systems.</p><p>This rule will hurt more than it will help.</p></div><p>Can I use that BS rule next time my system has any problems? What a load of horse<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... Any compentent admin can take care of the system without knowing who did it. Yes I would like to know what little snot nosed 13yr old kid is doing the evilness but it could just as well be your grandma that got owned and doesn't know she's doing it.</p><p>So your real statement should say, "And no way for server admins to track down <b>WHO</b> is trying to break into there system. This rule will hurt the accountability process more than it will help.</p><p>I agree with the second statement, but only in so much as it will hurt accountabily, there are many sides to the IP coin. If you had to live with RIAA and MIAA being total over the top BS artists to sue some 79yr old grandmother who doesn't own a computer then you might look at this from a different perspective.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And no way for server admins to track what virus infected bots are trying to break into their systems.This rule will hurt more than it will help.Can I use that BS rule next time my system has any problems ?
What a load of horse .... Any compentent admin can take care of the system without knowing who did it .
Yes I would like to know what little snot nosed 13yr old kid is doing the evilness but it could just as well be your grandma that got owned and does n't know she 's doing it.So your real statement should say , " And no way for server admins to track down WHO is trying to break into there system .
This rule will hurt the accountability process more than it will help.I agree with the second statement , but only in so much as it will hurt accountabily , there are many sides to the IP coin .
If you had to live with RIAA and MIAA being total over the top BS artists to sue some 79yr old grandmother who does n't own a computer then you might look at this from a different perspective .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And no way for server admins to track what virus infected bots are trying to break into their systems.This rule will hurt more than it will help.Can I use that BS rule next time my system has any problems?
What a load of horse .... Any compentent admin can take care of the system without knowing who did it.
Yes I would like to know what little snot nosed 13yr old kid is doing the evilness but it could just as well be your grandma that got owned and doesn't know she's doing it.So your real statement should say, "And no way for server admins to track down WHO is trying to break into there system.
This rule will hurt the accountability process more than it will help.I agree with the second statement, but only in so much as it will hurt accountabily, there are many sides to the IP coin.
If you had to live with RIAA and MIAA being total over the top BS artists to sue some 79yr old grandmother who doesn't own a computer then you might look at this from a different perspective.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372551</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372681</id>
	<title>But aren't they addresses?</title>
	<author>LaminatorX</author>
	<datestamp>1245333840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't the whole point of a publicly routable address to trace to a specific host or gateway? I sense some significant unintended consequences here. A ton of services will have real problems if this gets enforced thoroughly.</p><p>I'm comparing this to phone numbers in my head.  Even if you have an unlisted number, should it be illegal for someone to write down your number if it shows up on caller ID when you call them?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't the whole point of a publicly routable address to trace to a specific host or gateway ?
I sense some significant unintended consequences here .
A ton of services will have real problems if this gets enforced thoroughly.I 'm comparing this to phone numbers in my head .
Even if you have an unlisted number , should it be illegal for someone to write down your number if it shows up on caller ID when you call them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't the whole point of a publicly routable address to trace to a specific host or gateway?
I sense some significant unintended consequences here.
A ton of services will have real problems if this gets enforced thoroughly.I'm comparing this to phone numbers in my head.
Even if you have an unlisted number, should it be illegal for someone to write down your number if it shows up on caller ID when you call them?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373063</id>
	<title>I guess No more GUI Interfaces in Visual Basic</title>
	<author>R4nm4-kun</author>
	<datestamp>1245336000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"I'll create a GUI interface in Visual Basic, see if I can track an IP address."  <br>
Swedish Court Says: No you won't!</htmltext>
<tokenext>" I 'll create a GUI interface in Visual Basic , see if I can track an IP address .
" Swedish Court Says : No you wo n't !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I'll create a GUI interface in Visual Basic, see if I can track an IP address.
"  
Swedish Court Says: No you won't!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28379747</id>
	<title>Re:But aren't they addresses?</title>
	<author>turbidostato</author>
	<datestamp>1245316380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Isn't the whole point of a publicly routable address to trace to a specific host or gateway? "</p><p>Yes.  And since the "whole point" is "to trace to a specific host or gateway" that means it has "no point" being used "to trace to a specific person".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Is n't the whole point of a publicly routable address to trace to a specific host or gateway ?
" Yes. And since the " whole point " is " to trace to a specific host or gateway " that means it has " no point " being used " to trace to a specific person " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Isn't the whole point of a publicly routable address to trace to a specific host or gateway?
"Yes.  And since the "whole point" is "to trace to a specific host or gateway" that means it has "no point" being used "to trace to a specific person".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372681</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373277</id>
	<title>Did you read the summary?</title>
	<author>sirwired</author>
	<datestamp>1245336900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The summary clearly states that the logging of IPs is to be stopped.  As a server admin, no, I don't give a damn about the actual ID of a person using an IP.  But how am I to "report the IP" that is causing the problem if I can't log IPs to begin with?</p><p>SirWired</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The summary clearly states that the logging of IPs is to be stopped .
As a server admin , no , I do n't give a damn about the actual ID of a person using an IP .
But how am I to " report the IP " that is causing the problem if I ca n't log IPs to begin with ? SirWired</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The summary clearly states that the logging of IPs is to be stopped.
As a server admin, no, I don't give a damn about the actual ID of a person using an IP.
But how am I to "report the IP" that is causing the problem if I can't log IPs to begin with?SirWired</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372937</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28374869</id>
	<title>Re:bad rule</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1245343380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A feminist liking filesharing to rape? This can only mean:</p><p>a) She's not really a feminist.<br>b) She's been fed enough BS about filesharing to actually believe it.<br>c) She's on the payroll of some media company.<br>d) All of the above.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A feminist liking filesharing to rape ?
This can only mean : a ) She 's not really a feminist.b ) She 's been fed enough BS about filesharing to actually believe it.c ) She 's on the payroll of some media company.d ) All of the above .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A feminist liking filesharing to rape?
This can only mean:a) She's not really a feminist.b) She's been fed enough BS about filesharing to actually believe it.c) She's on the payroll of some media company.d) All of the above.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372937</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372897</id>
	<title>Bandwidth use up to "normal" in Sweden</title>
	<author>the\_arrow</author>
	<datestamp>1245334980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In related news, the bandwidth usage in Sweden is back up to the numbers before the IPRED law was enacted. Normally the usage is low during the summertime, but apparently not this summer. It is speculated that the increase is because the law is pretty toothless at the moment, and the bandwith usage may decrease if the current investigation goes to court and leads to a conviction.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In related news , the bandwidth usage in Sweden is back up to the numbers before the IPRED law was enacted .
Normally the usage is low during the summertime , but apparently not this summer .
It is speculated that the increase is because the law is pretty toothless at the moment , and the bandwith usage may decrease if the current investigation goes to court and leads to a conviction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In related news, the bandwidth usage in Sweden is back up to the numbers before the IPRED law was enacted.
Normally the usage is low during the summertime, but apparently not this summer.
It is speculated that the increase is because the law is pretty toothless at the moment, and the bandwith usage may decrease if the current investigation goes to court and leads to a conviction.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372783</id>
	<title>Law of unintended consequences</title>
	<author>Grond</author>
	<datestamp>1245334380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you are a server operator in Sweden, this presumably means you also cannot store IPs for later analysis of where your traffic is coming from.  Now, you might say that IPs can be geocoded on the fly, but there are other issues:</p><p>You also can't log the IPs of attackers.  You can't log IPs to analyze botnets.  You can't log the IPs of spammers.</p><p>There are lots of legitimate reasons for private individuals and companies to store IP addresses.  By forbidding it wholesale, the court is demonstrating its technological ignorance.</p><p>Finally, I'll just add that it's a common argument here that IPs don't actually correspond to individuals with any certainty because of shared computers, NAT, insecure wireless networks, dynamic IPs, etc.  Clearly, the court here decided otherwise, and gave license to the government to record IP addresses.  Thus, in future Swedish criminal court cases, it might be assumed that an IP address is sufficient to tie a defendant to a criminal act.  I find that prospect much more disturbing than file sharers winding up in civil court on shaky evidence (which, if it's shaky, should easily be rebutted).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are a server operator in Sweden , this presumably means you also can not store IPs for later analysis of where your traffic is coming from .
Now , you might say that IPs can be geocoded on the fly , but there are other issues : You also ca n't log the IPs of attackers .
You ca n't log IPs to analyze botnets .
You ca n't log the IPs of spammers.There are lots of legitimate reasons for private individuals and companies to store IP addresses .
By forbidding it wholesale , the court is demonstrating its technological ignorance.Finally , I 'll just add that it 's a common argument here that IPs do n't actually correspond to individuals with any certainty because of shared computers , NAT , insecure wireless networks , dynamic IPs , etc .
Clearly , the court here decided otherwise , and gave license to the government to record IP addresses .
Thus , in future Swedish criminal court cases , it might be assumed that an IP address is sufficient to tie a defendant to a criminal act .
I find that prospect much more disturbing than file sharers winding up in civil court on shaky evidence ( which , if it 's shaky , should easily be rebutted ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you are a server operator in Sweden, this presumably means you also cannot store IPs for later analysis of where your traffic is coming from.
Now, you might say that IPs can be geocoded on the fly, but there are other issues:You also can't log the IPs of attackers.
You can't log IPs to analyze botnets.
You can't log the IPs of spammers.There are lots of legitimate reasons for private individuals and companies to store IP addresses.
By forbidding it wholesale, the court is demonstrating its technological ignorance.Finally, I'll just add that it's a common argument here that IPs don't actually correspond to individuals with any certainty because of shared computers, NAT, insecure wireless networks, dynamic IPs, etc.
Clearly, the court here decided otherwise, and gave license to the government to record IP addresses.
Thus, in future Swedish criminal court cases, it might be assumed that an IP address is sufficient to tie a defendant to a criminal act.
I find that prospect much more disturbing than file sharers winding up in civil court on shaky evidence (which, if it's shaky, should easily be rebutted).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372933</id>
	<title>Obongo firmware update</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245335100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>PARADIGM\_REG ^= (1FASCIST\_BIT\_OFFSET);<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/*There ya' go, buddy!*/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>PARADIGM \ _REG ^ = ( 1FASCIST \ _BIT \ _OFFSET ) ; / * There ya ' go , buddy !
* /</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PARADIGM\_REG ^= (1FASCIST\_BIT\_OFFSET); /*There ya' go, buddy!
*/</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372551</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372715</id>
	<title>Re:bad rule</title>
	<author>polle404</author>
	<datestamp>1245334020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the first article has been removed, since it was wrong on several points.<br><a href="http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/ny-dom-paverkar-inte-ipredlagen-1.894500" title="www.dn.se" rel="nofollow">http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/ny-dom-paverkar-inte-ipredlagen-1.894500</a> [www.dn.se]<br>the court says: IP's are personal information, therefore you can only get this information through a court of law, and this ruling does not affect the Ipred law<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPRED" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPRED</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>so a sysadm is not prohibited in managing his own network.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the first article has been removed , since it was wrong on several points.http : //www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/ny-dom-paverkar-inte-ipredlagen-1.894500 [ www.dn.se ] the court says : IP 's are personal information , therefore you can only get this information through a court of law , and this ruling does not affect the Ipred lawhttp : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPRED [ wikipedia.org ] so a sysadm is not prohibited in managing his own network .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the first article has been removed, since it was wrong on several points.http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/ny-dom-paverkar-inte-ipredlagen-1.894500 [www.dn.se]the court says: IP's are personal information, therefore you can only get this information through a court of law, and this ruling does not affect the Ipred lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPRED [wikipedia.org]so a sysadm is not prohibited in managing his own network.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372551</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28378547</id>
	<title>Swedish vs. English IP adresses?</title>
	<author>ehaggis</author>
	<datestamp>1245356040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"IP numbers are protected (in Swedish)". I did not know you could translate IP numbers from one language to another! Perhaps you pronounce it with diphthongs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" IP numbers are protected ( in Swedish ) " .
I did not know you could translate IP numbers from one language to another !
Perhaps you pronounce it with diphthongs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"IP numbers are protected (in Swedish)".
I did not know you could translate IP numbers from one language to another!
Perhaps you pronounce it with diphthongs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28375361</id>
	<title>Re:bad rule</title>
	<author>PhilHibbs</author>
	<datestamp>1245345480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>When people attack your server, you find the responsible network block's admins abuse address, and report the IP and the problem.</p></div><p>But by reporting the IP address, you are recording and transmitting someone else's private information.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>When people attack your server , you find the responsible network block 's admins abuse address , and report the IP and the problem.But by reporting the IP address , you are recording and transmitting someone else 's private information .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When people attack your server, you find the responsible network block's admins abuse address, and report the IP and the problem.But by reporting the IP address, you are recording and transmitting someone else's private information.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372937</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28375043</id>
	<title>Re:that's pretty retarded</title>
	<author>Dunbal</author>
	<datestamp>1245344160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>So if I'm running an online forum or game of some sort, I can't drop IP-bans on offensive parties</i></p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; That would be a pretty foolish thing to do anyway. Ban the account, not the IP. Many different people can use the same IP, especially if they're connected via a cable modem. Banning the IP is a lazy, sloppy way to do it.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Plus you can ban the IP all you want. You just can't use the IP to trace back to an actual person, and then take legal action from there. Of course if a person signed up for an account and agreed to abide by and be bound by your terms of service... the IP doesn't factor in to it. It's then a contract between you and them, which they happened to violate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So if I 'm running an online forum or game of some sort , I ca n't drop IP-bans on offensive parties       That would be a pretty foolish thing to do anyway .
Ban the account , not the IP .
Many different people can use the same IP , especially if they 're connected via a cable modem .
Banning the IP is a lazy , sloppy way to do it .
      Plus you can ban the IP all you want .
You just ca n't use the IP to trace back to an actual person , and then take legal action from there .
Of course if a person signed up for an account and agreed to abide by and be bound by your terms of service... the IP does n't factor in to it .
It 's then a contract between you and them , which they happened to violate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So if I'm running an online forum or game of some sort, I can't drop IP-bans on offensive parties
      That would be a pretty foolish thing to do anyway.
Ban the account, not the IP.
Many different people can use the same IP, especially if they're connected via a cable modem.
Banning the IP is a lazy, sloppy way to do it.
      Plus you can ban the IP all you want.
You just can't use the IP to trace back to an actual person, and then take legal action from there.
Of course if a person signed up for an account and agreed to abide by and be bound by your terms of service... the IP doesn't factor in to it.
It's then a contract between you and them, which they happened to violate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372577</id>
	<title>Working link:</title>
	<author>bauernakke</author>
	<datestamp>1245333420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/ny-dom-paverkar-inte-ipredlagen-1.894500" title="www.dn.se" rel="nofollow">http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/ny-dom-paverkar-inte-ipredlagen-1.894500</a> [www.dn.se]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/ny-dom-paverkar-inte-ipredlagen-1.894500 [ www.dn.se ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/ny-dom-paverkar-inte-ipredlagen-1.894500 [www.dn.se]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372675</id>
	<title>If only in the U.S.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245333840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm going to fire off an email to my friends right now letting the know about this landmark decision. I'll also send it unencrypted so the NSA can hear about it too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm going to fire off an email to my friends right now letting the know about this landmark decision .
I 'll also send it unencrypted so the NSA can hear about it too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm going to fire off an email to my friends right now letting the know about this landmark decision.
I'll also send it unencrypted so the NSA can hear about it too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372643</id>
	<title>Re:bad rule</title>
	<author>jtev</author>
	<datestamp>1245333660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>First thing I thought of too.  That, and almost all servers already log connections by IP address.  I mean, I look at<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/var/log/secure and what I see is a list of IP addresses that have connected to my machine, with what they have been trying to do.  Someone didn't have their thinking caps on when they wrote this law.</htmltext>
<tokenext>First thing I thought of too .
That , and almost all servers already log connections by IP address .
I mean , I look at /var/log/secure and what I see is a list of IP addresses that have connected to my machine , with what they have been trying to do .
Someone did n't have their thinking caps on when they wrote this law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First thing I thought of too.
That, and almost all servers already log connections by IP address.
I mean, I look at /var/log/secure and what I see is a list of IP addresses that have connected to my machine, with what they have been trying to do.
Someone didn't have their thinking caps on when they wrote this law.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372551</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372723</id>
	<title>Double edged sword?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245334080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think overall this is a win for Copyright lobby and not the other way around.</p><p>1) Legitimises IP address being tied to account holder. IE lessens the "TOR/ Wifi Defense"<br>2) APB have gotten an exemption and are now allowed to track IP's.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think overall this is a win for Copyright lobby and not the other way around.1 ) Legitimises IP address being tied to account holder .
IE lessens the " TOR/ Wifi Defense " 2 ) APB have gotten an exemption and are now allowed to track IP 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think overall this is a win for Copyright lobby and not the other way around.1) Legitimises IP address being tied to account holder.
IE lessens the "TOR/ Wifi Defense"2) APB have gotten an exemption and are now allowed to track IP's.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28375807</id>
	<title>IP is the "Last Frontier"</title>
	<author>macraig</author>
	<datestamp>1245347160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Once upon a time it was possession and control of land, real estate, that caused friction, conflict, and wars.  No more: land is a finite commodity.  The new Last Frontier is this so-called intellectual property, where an infinite amount of things to control can be created out of thin air.  These things don't require armies of soldiers to control them, instead they require armies of lawyers and expert witnesses.  There seems to be an economy of scale to this new IP real estate, though, because it requires a whole lot less investment in hardware and human resources to control this IP than a coveted patch of land with armies and tanks and planes and guns.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Once upon a time it was possession and control of land , real estate , that caused friction , conflict , and wars .
No more : land is a finite commodity .
The new Last Frontier is this so-called intellectual property , where an infinite amount of things to control can be created out of thin air .
These things do n't require armies of soldiers to control them , instead they require armies of lawyers and expert witnesses .
There seems to be an economy of scale to this new IP real estate , though , because it requires a whole lot less investment in hardware and human resources to control this IP than a coveted patch of land with armies and tanks and planes and guns .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once upon a time it was possession and control of land, real estate, that caused friction, conflict, and wars.
No more: land is a finite commodity.
The new Last Frontier is this so-called intellectual property, where an infinite amount of things to control can be created out of thin air.
These things don't require armies of soldiers to control them, instead they require armies of lawyers and expert witnesses.
There seems to be an economy of scale to this new IP real estate, though, because it requires a whole lot less investment in hardware and human resources to control this IP than a coveted patch of land with armies and tanks and planes and guns.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28374923</id>
	<title>The privacy contradiction...</title>
	<author>Glasswire</author>
	<datestamp>1245343620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your IP lease expired by DHCP server because the DHCP server violated privacy policy.  You will be asked to go to the ISPs website to "opt-in" to have that data persistnant but  - whoops - you have no IP to connect with...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your IP lease expired by DHCP server because the DHCP server violated privacy policy .
You will be asked to go to the ISPs website to " opt-in " to have that data persistnant but - whoops - you have no IP to connect with.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your IP lease expired by DHCP server because the DHCP server violated privacy policy.
You will be asked to go to the ISPs website to "opt-in" to have that data persistnant but  - whoops - you have no IP to connect with...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373807</id>
	<title>Re:If only in the U.S.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245339060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>NSA has access to all american CA root certificates.</htmltext>
<tokenext>NSA has access to all american CA root certificates .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NSA has access to all american CA root certificates.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372675</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28378521</id>
	<title>Jshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245355980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>study. [rice.edu] dist8ibu7ion make Win out; either the chosen, whatever raise or lower the as those non gay, study. [rice.edu]</htmltext>
<tokenext>study .
[ rice.edu ] dist8ibu7ion make Win out ; either the chosen , whatever raise or lower the as those non gay , study .
[ rice.edu ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>study.
[rice.edu] dist8ibu7ion make Win out; either the chosen, whatever raise or lower the as those non gay, study.
[rice.edu]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372549</id>
	<title>Second Post</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245333240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Second Post is better.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Second Post is better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Second Post is better.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373319</id>
	<title>127.0.0.1.bork.bork.bork</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245337020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I like that IP numbers are protected when they are in Swedish, but I doubt I can keep up the accent.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like that IP numbers are protected when they are in Swedish , but I doubt I can keep up the accent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like that IP numbers are protected when they are in Swedish, but I doubt I can keep up the accent.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372585</id>
	<title>No, sorry.</title>
	<author>richie2000</author>
	<datestamp>1245333420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's an exception to this law in the recently enacted IPRED-law (based on an EU directive) that basically allows rightsholders to gather IP-addresses anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's an exception to this law in the recently enacted IPRED-law ( based on an EU directive ) that basically allows rightsholders to gather IP-addresses anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's an exception to this law in the recently enacted IPRED-law (based on an EU directive) that basically allows rightsholders to gather IP-addresses anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1230258_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28379747
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372681
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1230258_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372997
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1230258_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373093
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372681
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1230258_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372643
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372551
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1230258_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373277
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372937
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372551
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1230258_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372551
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1230258_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28375361
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372937
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372551
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1230258_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372959
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372561
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1230258_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373529
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372585
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1230258_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28375043
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372997
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1230258_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373213
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372551
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1230258_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372715
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372551
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1230258_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28379221
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373417
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372551
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1230258_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372551
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1230258_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28378735
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28374869
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372937
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372551
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1230258_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28380027
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372791
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1230258_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373595
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372585
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1230258_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373561
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372551
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1230258_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372675
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1230258.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28378547
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1230258.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372997
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28375043
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373537
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1230258.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372791
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28380027
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1230258.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372551
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372933
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372937
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28374869
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28378735
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28375361
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373277
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372899
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373213
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373561
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372643
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372715
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373417
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28379221
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1230258.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372783
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1230258.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372681
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373093
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28379747
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1230258.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28374833
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1230258.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373477
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1230258.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372585
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372847
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373529
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373595
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1230258.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28375177
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1230258.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372675
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373807
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1230258.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372593
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1230258.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372539
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1230258.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372599
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1230258.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372561
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372959
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1230258.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28373443
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1230258.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372601
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1230258.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372695
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1230258.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1230258.28372723
</commentlist>
</conversation>
