<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_18_2111209</id>
	<title>Fighting For Downloaders' Hearts and Minds</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1245318600000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>iateyourcookies writes <i>"As opposed to enforcement which usually makes the headlines, The BBC is running an article called <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8106805.stm">Inside A Downloader's Head</a> which looks at the film and music industries' attempts to <em>prevent</em> copyright infringement. It details some of the campaigns, their rationale, controversy surrounding them and notes that 'there are plenty, even among the young, who can be eloquent about why they believe illegal downloading is not wrong. These can include everything from what they see as the unacceptable "control freakery" of DRM and regional coding, to overcharging and exploitation of the very artists the music industry claims to protect.' However, PR company for the industry Blue Rubicon attests that 'campaigns can change hearts and minds... If you do them right you can make a material impact on people's behaviour.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>iateyourcookies writes " As opposed to enforcement which usually makes the headlines , The BBC is running an article called Inside A Downloader 's Head which looks at the film and music industries ' attempts to prevent copyright infringement .
It details some of the campaigns , their rationale , controversy surrounding them and notes that 'there are plenty , even among the young , who can be eloquent about why they believe illegal downloading is not wrong .
These can include everything from what they see as the unacceptable " control freakery " of DRM and regional coding , to overcharging and exploitation of the very artists the music industry claims to protect .
' However , PR company for the industry Blue Rubicon attests that 'campaigns can change hearts and minds... If you do them right you can make a material impact on people 's behaviour .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>iateyourcookies writes "As opposed to enforcement which usually makes the headlines, The BBC is running an article called Inside A Downloader's Head which looks at the film and music industries' attempts to prevent copyright infringement.
It details some of the campaigns, their rationale, controversy surrounding them and notes that 'there are plenty, even among the young, who can be eloquent about why they believe illegal downloading is not wrong.
These can include everything from what they see as the unacceptable "control freakery" of DRM and regional coding, to overcharging and exploitation of the very artists the music industry claims to protect.
' However, PR company for the industry Blue Rubicon attests that 'campaigns can change hearts and minds... If you do them right you can make a material impact on people's behaviour.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28384715</id>
	<title>Most Effective Campaign==Hulu</title>
	<author>Alaren</author>
	<datestamp>1245339960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is they are hyping up their propaganda campaign, so when progressing technology inevitably wins the battle, they claim a "victory."

</p><p>The fact that home taping didn't kill the music industry is just the tip of the iceberg.  The quality of recording music off the airwaves meant that it was never a threat to begin with.  There are a lot of downloaders who are basically digital packrats, but a lot of people download TV as a cheap alternative to TiVo.  Is it their fault the video industry took <i>years</i> to provide video-on-demand at reasonable prices (i.e. free, with minimal commercial interruption)?  How much money did they spend fighting the technology before finally embracing it?  How many holdouts remain, bickering even now that video-on-demand is something viewers should be nickel-and-dimed for?

</p><p>Beating piracy is simple.  You don't have to convince anyone its "wrong."  You just have to convince them it is inferior to reasonably priced commercial alternatives... which means <i>providing</i> commercial alternatives that are superior to the pirated versions!  It really is that simple, and all it takes is embracing technology and sharing it with your customers, instead of shunning technology and charging premiums for the kind of functionality the pirates provide for free.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is they are hyping up their propaganda campaign , so when progressing technology inevitably wins the battle , they claim a " victory .
" The fact that home taping did n't kill the music industry is just the tip of the iceberg .
The quality of recording music off the airwaves meant that it was never a threat to begin with .
There are a lot of downloaders who are basically digital packrats , but a lot of people download TV as a cheap alternative to TiVo .
Is it their fault the video industry took years to provide video-on-demand at reasonable prices ( i.e .
free , with minimal commercial interruption ) ?
How much money did they spend fighting the technology before finally embracing it ?
How many holdouts remain , bickering even now that video-on-demand is something viewers should be nickel-and-dimed for ?
Beating piracy is simple .
You do n't have to convince anyone its " wrong .
" You just have to convince them it is inferior to reasonably priced commercial alternatives... which means providing commercial alternatives that are superior to the pirated versions !
It really is that simple , and all it takes is embracing technology and sharing it with your customers , instead of shunning technology and charging premiums for the kind of functionality the pirates provide for free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is they are hyping up their propaganda campaign, so when progressing technology inevitably wins the battle, they claim a "victory.
"

The fact that home taping didn't kill the music industry is just the tip of the iceberg.
The quality of recording music off the airwaves meant that it was never a threat to begin with.
There are a lot of downloaders who are basically digital packrats, but a lot of people download TV as a cheap alternative to TiVo.
Is it their fault the video industry took years to provide video-on-demand at reasonable prices (i.e.
free, with minimal commercial interruption)?
How much money did they spend fighting the technology before finally embracing it?
How many holdouts remain, bickering even now that video-on-demand is something viewers should be nickel-and-dimed for?
Beating piracy is simple.
You don't have to convince anyone its "wrong.
"  You just have to convince them it is inferior to reasonably priced commercial alternatives... which means providing commercial alternatives that are superior to the pirated versions!
It really is that simple, and all it takes is embracing technology and sharing it with your customers, instead of shunning technology and charging premiums for the kind of functionality the pirates provide for free.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381529</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28390437</id>
	<title>Re:Campaigns are pointless</title>
	<author>T Murphy</author>
	<datestamp>1245428340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Most music I listen to was made 10+ years ago, most of my favorite movies are 10+ years old; I'm all for 7 years copyright, but less starts to get to the point of people saying "I want it NOW", when that impulse is exactly what should compel people to buy it, not demand a free copy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most music I listen to was made 10 + years ago , most of my favorite movies are 10 + years old ; I 'm all for 7 years copyright , but less starts to get to the point of people saying " I want it NOW " , when that impulse is exactly what should compel people to buy it , not demand a free copy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most music I listen to was made 10+ years ago, most of my favorite movies are 10+ years old; I'm all for 7 years copyright, but less starts to get to the point of people saying "I want it NOW", when that impulse is exactly what should compel people to buy it, not demand a free copy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382091</id>
	<title>You wouldn't steal a car? No but I would copy one.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245325620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I like the commercials which say "you wouldn't steal a car!"</p><p>Actually if i could make a FREE copy of a car, without damaging/effecting/stealing the original owner's car and the COPY worked just as good (if not better than the original) I'd totally do it. The same goes for ANY consumer product really: if I could just download a free copy of all my groceries from the internet without paying for them I'd be on board.</p><p>I think the government/industry will never be able to get this problem solved as long as they treat it as theft, because unlike theft the original item and the original item owner are left OK. Its not a victmless crime, its a corporate victim crime.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like the commercials which say " you would n't steal a car !
" Actually if i could make a FREE copy of a car , without damaging/effecting/stealing the original owner 's car and the COPY worked just as good ( if not better than the original ) I 'd totally do it .
The same goes for ANY consumer product really : if I could just download a free copy of all my groceries from the internet without paying for them I 'd be on board.I think the government/industry will never be able to get this problem solved as long as they treat it as theft , because unlike theft the original item and the original item owner are left OK. Its not a victmless crime , its a corporate victim crime .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like the commercials which say "you wouldn't steal a car!
"Actually if i could make a FREE copy of a car, without damaging/effecting/stealing the original owner's car and the COPY worked just as good (if not better than the original) I'd totally do it.
The same goes for ANY consumer product really: if I could just download a free copy of all my groceries from the internet without paying for them I'd be on board.I think the government/industry will never be able to get this problem solved as long as they treat it as theft, because unlike theft the original item and the original item owner are left OK. Its not a victmless crime, its a corporate victim crime.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28387763</id>
	<title>Not all downloads come from the RIAA</title>
	<author>MobyDisk</author>
	<datestamp>1245415740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's lots of independent artists offering their music online for a reasonable price.  Same thing with video games, and source code.  Some of these people quit their day job and put their own time and money into creating these works.  Then I hear some "Stick it to the man: information wants to be free!" guy pirating this stuff.  The reality is that most of these people aren't venerable, they just want stuff for free.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's lots of independent artists offering their music online for a reasonable price .
Same thing with video games , and source code .
Some of these people quit their day job and put their own time and money into creating these works .
Then I hear some " Stick it to the man : information wants to be free !
" guy pirating this stuff .
The reality is that most of these people are n't venerable , they just want stuff for free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's lots of independent artists offering their music online for a reasonable price.
Same thing with video games, and source code.
Some of these people quit their day job and put their own time and money into creating these works.
Then I hear some "Stick it to the man: information wants to be free!
" guy pirating this stuff.
The reality is that most of these people aren't venerable, they just want stuff for free.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381893</id>
	<title>A campaign won't make a change</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1245324840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The core of what is wrong is the abuse, exploitation and extension of copyright law.  Region coding is not justifiable as a means to do anything but control multiple prices in multiple markets.  Content protection systems (aka DVD-CSS) are not justifiable as it does not prevent copying and only serves to control how and what players are used to access the media that, once purchased, the media companies no longer have any right or entitlement to.  And the very idea of DRM is not only a problem in the sense that it grants no rights to the user and that they literally have to "ask permission to access" each and every time the user wants to access it, but it also runs the risk of becoming theft on the part of the DRM controller as when they shut down, they deny all access to the content that was legally paid for by the consumer.  (They selleth, and then they taketh away!)  And the extension of copyright terms to durations that can only be useful to immortal corporate "persons"?  That is more unreasonable than words can express.</p><p>And before anyone can say "but that does not give you the right to steal" I have to say "so fucking what?!"  Look.  Fighting against "wrongness" in any way available is how the USA gained its independence.  Some colonials wanted to stay connected to the crown of England and didn't want any part of it.  Sounds like the "no right to steal" crowd.</p><p>And forgetting all this morality stuff, let's be plain about it.  The amount of copyright infringement is negligible and most infringers are also people who buy things when they can and when it is good enough.  These media jerks should let it quietly go on because they are still raking in tons of money and are still getting their laws passed.  They don't need the enemies they are breeding and they don't need the growing fight they are getting.  The more fight they give, the more doom they bring upon themselves.  Wait and see...  they will be wishing for "the good ole days" when they have everything nearly the way they wanted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The core of what is wrong is the abuse , exploitation and extension of copyright law .
Region coding is not justifiable as a means to do anything but control multiple prices in multiple markets .
Content protection systems ( aka DVD-CSS ) are not justifiable as it does not prevent copying and only serves to control how and what players are used to access the media that , once purchased , the media companies no longer have any right or entitlement to .
And the very idea of DRM is not only a problem in the sense that it grants no rights to the user and that they literally have to " ask permission to access " each and every time the user wants to access it , but it also runs the risk of becoming theft on the part of the DRM controller as when they shut down , they deny all access to the content that was legally paid for by the consumer .
( They selleth , and then they taketh away !
) And the extension of copyright terms to durations that can only be useful to immortal corporate " persons " ?
That is more unreasonable than words can express.And before anyone can say " but that does not give you the right to steal " I have to say " so fucking what ? !
" Look .
Fighting against " wrongness " in any way available is how the USA gained its independence .
Some colonials wanted to stay connected to the crown of England and did n't want any part of it .
Sounds like the " no right to steal " crowd.And forgetting all this morality stuff , let 's be plain about it .
The amount of copyright infringement is negligible and most infringers are also people who buy things when they can and when it is good enough .
These media jerks should let it quietly go on because they are still raking in tons of money and are still getting their laws passed .
They do n't need the enemies they are breeding and they do n't need the growing fight they are getting .
The more fight they give , the more doom they bring upon themselves .
Wait and see... they will be wishing for " the good ole days " when they have everything nearly the way they wanted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The core of what is wrong is the abuse, exploitation and extension of copyright law.
Region coding is not justifiable as a means to do anything but control multiple prices in multiple markets.
Content protection systems (aka DVD-CSS) are not justifiable as it does not prevent copying and only serves to control how and what players are used to access the media that, once purchased, the media companies no longer have any right or entitlement to.
And the very idea of DRM is not only a problem in the sense that it grants no rights to the user and that they literally have to "ask permission to access" each and every time the user wants to access it, but it also runs the risk of becoming theft on the part of the DRM controller as when they shut down, they deny all access to the content that was legally paid for by the consumer.
(They selleth, and then they taketh away!
)  And the extension of copyright terms to durations that can only be useful to immortal corporate "persons"?
That is more unreasonable than words can express.And before anyone can say "but that does not give you the right to steal" I have to say "so fucking what?!
"  Look.
Fighting against "wrongness" in any way available is how the USA gained its independence.
Some colonials wanted to stay connected to the crown of England and didn't want any part of it.
Sounds like the "no right to steal" crowd.And forgetting all this morality stuff, let's be plain about it.
The amount of copyright infringement is negligible and most infringers are also people who buy things when they can and when it is good enough.
These media jerks should let it quietly go on because they are still raking in tons of money and are still getting their laws passed.
They don't need the enemies they are breeding and they don't need the growing fight they are getting.
The more fight they give, the more doom they bring upon themselves.
Wait and see...  they will be wishing for "the good ole days" when they have everything nearly the way they wanted.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28384609</id>
	<title>Re:A ha!</title>
	<author>Mike610544</author>
	<datestamp>1245339180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>3) Stop loading DVD's with unskippable cr@p</p></div><p>That's one thing I don't get. I'm actively trying to skip it; I'm getting increasingly annoyed; my urge to kill is rising. Is that really the association they want to make with what they're advertising? Isn't it counterproductive to make the consumer subconsciously link your studio logo to frustration? EA does that with games and it's equally maddening.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>3 ) Stop loading DVD 's with unskippable cr @ pThat 's one thing I do n't get .
I 'm actively trying to skip it ; I 'm getting increasingly annoyed ; my urge to kill is rising .
Is that really the association they want to make with what they 're advertising ?
Is n't it counterproductive to make the consumer subconsciously link your studio logo to frustration ?
EA does that with games and it 's equally maddening .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>3) Stop loading DVD's with unskippable cr@pThat's one thing I don't get.
I'm actively trying to skip it; I'm getting increasingly annoyed; my urge to kill is rising.
Is that really the association they want to make with what they're advertising?
Isn't it counterproductive to make the consumer subconsciously link your studio logo to frustration?
EA does that with games and it's equally maddening.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28385465</id>
	<title>Re:Civil Disobedience</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1245347880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How does protection for 50 years after my death in any way give me an incentive to be creative? I can see an incentive in 10, 20, maybe 30 years (from the moment I publish, not the moment I become a worm feast) of personal, unrivaled exploitation of my creation.</p><p>But, frankly, if 10, 20 or 30 years ain't enough for you as a monetary incentive to create (not even mentioning the idea that people created their best works out of love of art, not the hunt for money), 50, 100 or 200 years won't give you any either.</p><p>Let's be sensible here. Let's assume I'm an artist. I work on a novel, a piece of music, a painting, whatever for, say, 6 months. I could earn, say, 15k, or let's say 25k (hey, let's assume I get paid well) in that time if I worked a "honest" job. So that piece of music would have to give me 25k, or else I would have been better off working a normal job.</p><p>Now, if I cannot reap those 25k in 20 years of protection, why the hell should I create in the first place? 25k in 20 years is 1.250 per YEAR. Can you live off that? I can't.</p><p>Sure, I might continue to create and have more piece of art gaining money for me. But that, again, is the point: Why should I, after a while? If I have enough art created that supplies me with 5k income <i>for my lifetime and beyond</i>, why the heck should I return to the drawing board or the composer stool and create anything at all?</p><p>All, again, assuming the money is my driving force. If it's not, then I'd create even without a single day of protection.</p><p>So, can anyone still explain to me the ludicrous protection periods? Especially, how they give the artist an incentive to create?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How does protection for 50 years after my death in any way give me an incentive to be creative ?
I can see an incentive in 10 , 20 , maybe 30 years ( from the moment I publish , not the moment I become a worm feast ) of personal , unrivaled exploitation of my creation.But , frankly , if 10 , 20 or 30 years ai n't enough for you as a monetary incentive to create ( not even mentioning the idea that people created their best works out of love of art , not the hunt for money ) , 50 , 100 or 200 years wo n't give you any either.Let 's be sensible here .
Let 's assume I 'm an artist .
I work on a novel , a piece of music , a painting , whatever for , say , 6 months .
I could earn , say , 15k , or let 's say 25k ( hey , let 's assume I get paid well ) in that time if I worked a " honest " job .
So that piece of music would have to give me 25k , or else I would have been better off working a normal job.Now , if I can not reap those 25k in 20 years of protection , why the hell should I create in the first place ?
25k in 20 years is 1.250 per YEAR .
Can you live off that ?
I ca n't.Sure , I might continue to create and have more piece of art gaining money for me .
But that , again , is the point : Why should I , after a while ?
If I have enough art created that supplies me with 5k income for my lifetime and beyond , why the heck should I return to the drawing board or the composer stool and create anything at all ? All , again , assuming the money is my driving force .
If it 's not , then I 'd create even without a single day of protection.So , can anyone still explain to me the ludicrous protection periods ?
Especially , how they give the artist an incentive to create ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does protection for 50 years after my death in any way give me an incentive to be creative?
I can see an incentive in 10, 20, maybe 30 years (from the moment I publish, not the moment I become a worm feast) of personal, unrivaled exploitation of my creation.But, frankly, if 10, 20 or 30 years ain't enough for you as a monetary incentive to create (not even mentioning the idea that people created their best works out of love of art, not the hunt for money), 50, 100 or 200 years won't give you any either.Let's be sensible here.
Let's assume I'm an artist.
I work on a novel, a piece of music, a painting, whatever for, say, 6 months.
I could earn, say, 15k, or let's say 25k (hey, let's assume I get paid well) in that time if I worked a "honest" job.
So that piece of music would have to give me 25k, or else I would have been better off working a normal job.Now, if I cannot reap those 25k in 20 years of protection, why the hell should I create in the first place?
25k in 20 years is 1.250 per YEAR.
Can you live off that?
I can't.Sure, I might continue to create and have more piece of art gaining money for me.
But that, again, is the point: Why should I, after a while?
If I have enough art created that supplies me with 5k income for my lifetime and beyond, why the heck should I return to the drawing board or the composer stool and create anything at all?All, again, assuming the money is my driving force.
If it's not, then I'd create even without a single day of protection.So, can anyone still explain to me the ludicrous protection periods?
Especially, how they give the artist an incentive to create?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381691</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382021</id>
	<title>Campaigns are pointless</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245325380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Until they start living up to their end of the copyright agreement, I don't give a fucking rat's ass what they have to say. That means putting copyrighted works into the public domain while they're still relevant, valuable, AND profitable. For most entertainment items, that would mean about 5 years or less.</p><p>They're also not helping themselves with the bullshit clips on DVDs claiming that downloading is stealing.</p><p>Word to the media distributors: when you play fair, I'll play fair. Until then, go sodomize yourselves with a retractable baton. And make sure to use a good quality one so it doesn't break during use.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Until they start living up to their end of the copyright agreement , I do n't give a fucking rat 's ass what they have to say .
That means putting copyrighted works into the public domain while they 're still relevant , valuable , AND profitable .
For most entertainment items , that would mean about 5 years or less.They 're also not helping themselves with the bullshit clips on DVDs claiming that downloading is stealing.Word to the media distributors : when you play fair , I 'll play fair .
Until then , go sodomize yourselves with a retractable baton .
And make sure to use a good quality one so it does n't break during use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Until they start living up to their end of the copyright agreement, I don't give a fucking rat's ass what they have to say.
That means putting copyrighted works into the public domain while they're still relevant, valuable, AND profitable.
For most entertainment items, that would mean about 5 years or less.They're also not helping themselves with the bullshit clips on DVDs claiming that downloading is stealing.Word to the media distributors: when you play fair, I'll play fair.
Until then, go sodomize yourselves with a retractable baton.
And make sure to use a good quality one so it doesn't break during use.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381599</id>
	<title>First step</title>
	<author>OpenSourced</author>
	<datestamp>1245323520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>unacceptable "control freakery" of DRM and regional coding, to overcharging and exploitation of the very artists the music industry claims to protect</i></p><p>As a first step I suggest they finish up with DRM, regional coding, overcharging and exploitation of artists. That will certainly leave the downloaders without arguments, and much enhance the effect of any campaign they are planning. I for one would pay more attention to any message if there was cheap, non-DRM'd, varied and easily available music and videos, and a big percentage of the money would go to the authors. Until then, the rationalization for downloading is so easy, it can be confounded with reasoning.<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>unacceptable " control freakery " of DRM and regional coding , to overcharging and exploitation of the very artists the music industry claims to protectAs a first step I suggest they finish up with DRM , regional coding , overcharging and exploitation of artists .
That will certainly leave the downloaders without arguments , and much enhance the effect of any campaign they are planning .
I for one would pay more attention to any message if there was cheap , non-DRM 'd , varied and easily available music and videos , and a big percentage of the money would go to the authors .
Until then , the rationalization for downloading is so easy , it can be confounded with reasoning .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>unacceptable "control freakery" of DRM and regional coding, to overcharging and exploitation of the very artists the music industry claims to protectAs a first step I suggest they finish up with DRM, regional coding, overcharging and exploitation of artists.
That will certainly leave the downloaders without arguments, and much enhance the effect of any campaign they are planning.
I for one would pay more attention to any message if there was cheap, non-DRM'd, varied and easily available music and videos, and a big percentage of the money would go to the authors.
Until then, the rationalization for downloading is so easy, it can be confounded with reasoning.
 </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382117</id>
	<title>Call me naive</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245325680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But I can't imagine any sort of logic, propaganda or ethical scheme which can successfully argue with Lendrick here.</p><p>And I don't believe anybody has ever tried to counter his simple points.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But I ca n't imagine any sort of logic , propaganda or ethical scheme which can successfully argue with Lendrick here.And I do n't believe anybody has ever tried to counter his simple points .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But I can't imagine any sort of logic, propaganda or ethical scheme which can successfully argue with Lendrick here.And I don't believe anybody has ever tried to counter his simple points.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28391847</id>
	<title>Re:Exactly</title>
	<author>HTH NE1</author>
	<datestamp>1245434400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We've reached the point where both sides fear that if they give an inch the other side will take a yard.</p></div><p>You just inspired me to change my signature.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We 've reached the point where both sides fear that if they give an inch the other side will take a yard.You just inspired me to change my signature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We've reached the point where both sides fear that if they give an inch the other side will take a yard.You just inspired me to change my signature.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28385261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381417</id>
	<title>Let me be the first to say:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245322740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I didn't like the article.  While it purports to examine the "other side" of the debate, it does not really seem to consider the possibility that that side might be correct.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't like the article .
While it purports to examine the " other side " of the debate , it does not really seem to consider the possibility that that side might be correct .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't like the article.
While it purports to examine the "other side" of the debate, it does not really seem to consider the possibility that that side might be correct.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28383375</id>
	<title>Re:A ha!</title>
	<author>stephanruby</author>
	<datestamp>1245331260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>7) Get rid of the copy restrictions on DVD's, HD discs, camcorders, and the other formats.</p></div></blockquote><p>
DVDs have copy restrictions? Since when? You mean I won't be able to put a DVD into my drive and make a copy anymore. That would seriously suck.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>7 ) Get rid of the copy restrictions on DVD 's , HD discs , camcorders , and the other formats .
DVDs have copy restrictions ?
Since when ?
You mean I wo n't be able to put a DVD into my drive and make a copy anymore .
That would seriously suck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>7) Get rid of the copy restrictions on DVD's, HD discs, camcorders, and the other formats.
DVDs have copy restrictions?
Since when?
You mean I won't be able to put a DVD into my drive and make a copy anymore.
That would seriously suck.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28383389</id>
	<title>Re:Civil Disobedience</title>
	<author>chrismcb</author>
	<datestamp>1245331260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The publication was been around for 19 years, and the work still isn't in public domain?

How is 20 somehow magically better than 50? Sure it is shorter, but why is that better? Better for YOU because now you can copy it for free. But if you want it, then it certainly isn't better for the creator/owner of that work.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The publication was been around for 19 years , and the work still is n't in public domain ?
How is 20 somehow magically better than 50 ?
Sure it is shorter , but why is that better ?
Better for YOU because now you can copy it for free .
But if you want it , then it certainly is n't better for the creator/owner of that work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The publication was been around for 19 years, and the work still isn't in public domain?
How is 20 somehow magically better than 50?
Sure it is shorter, but why is that better?
Better for YOU because now you can copy it for free.
But if you want it, then it certainly isn't better for the creator/owner of that work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381691</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28387181</id>
	<title>Re:Fuck'em</title>
	<author>cliffski</author>
	<datestamp>1245409200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The thing is, you are throwing all 'content providers' into the same 'useless, evil' box. There is thus bugger-all incentive to them to change their ways.</p><p>I provide almost everything that people like yourself are asking for. No DRM, free format-shifting between versions we have available, free demos, decent fast customer service, yada yada.</p><p>The fact remains, people like me who try to provide all those things that people brag about getting with pirated copies, still get pirated heavily.<br>In short, we see zero benefit from trying to 'compete' with pirated copies.</p><p>If people are serious about trying to mvoe companies towards providing a better legal service, they need to heavily support those legal services that give the customers what they want, and heavily criticise people who continue to pirate when hassle-free reasonable legal versions are openly and easily available.</p><p>I don't see that happening one tiny bit. Every news story about piracy or intellectual property here gets tagged with 'greed' automatically. If that's the attitude of slashdotters to content creators, how do they ever expect to have their demands listened to?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The thing is , you are throwing all 'content providers ' into the same 'useless , evil ' box .
There is thus bugger-all incentive to them to change their ways.I provide almost everything that people like yourself are asking for .
No DRM , free format-shifting between versions we have available , free demos , decent fast customer service , yada yada.The fact remains , people like me who try to provide all those things that people brag about getting with pirated copies , still get pirated heavily.In short , we see zero benefit from trying to 'compete ' with pirated copies.If people are serious about trying to mvoe companies towards providing a better legal service , they need to heavily support those legal services that give the customers what they want , and heavily criticise people who continue to pirate when hassle-free reasonable legal versions are openly and easily available.I do n't see that happening one tiny bit .
Every news story about piracy or intellectual property here gets tagged with 'greed ' automatically .
If that 's the attitude of slashdotters to content creators , how do they ever expect to have their demands listened to ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The thing is, you are throwing all 'content providers' into the same 'useless, evil' box.
There is thus bugger-all incentive to them to change their ways.I provide almost everything that people like yourself are asking for.
No DRM, free format-shifting between versions we have available, free demos, decent fast customer service, yada yada.The fact remains, people like me who try to provide all those things that people brag about getting with pirated copies, still get pirated heavily.In short, we see zero benefit from trying to 'compete' with pirated copies.If people are serious about trying to mvoe companies towards providing a better legal service, they need to heavily support those legal services that give the customers what they want, and heavily criticise people who continue to pirate when hassle-free reasonable legal versions are openly and easily available.I don't see that happening one tiny bit.
Every news story about piracy or intellectual property here gets tagged with 'greed' automatically.
If that's the attitude of slashdotters to content creators, how do they ever expect to have their demands listened to?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382409</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382019</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245325380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Translation:</p><p>1:  I bought an item, but because it didn't work, I had to go shoplift a working one one from a nearby store</p><p>2:  I bought a car, and it wore out, so I went out and stole another one from a dealer lot.</p><p>3:  I may have bought marijuana but I have never inhaled.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Translation : 1 : I bought an item , but because it did n't work , I had to go shoplift a working one one from a nearby store2 : I bought a car , and it wore out , so I went out and stole another one from a dealer lot.3 : I may have bought marijuana but I have never inhaled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Translation:1:  I bought an item, but because it didn't work, I had to go shoplift a working one one from a nearby store2:  I bought a car, and it wore out, so I went out and stole another one from a dealer lot.3:  I may have bought marijuana but I have never inhaled.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28416791</id>
	<title>No such thing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245605820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>      1)  There's no such thing as illegal downloading.  It's the uploading a copy that's illegal.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 2) The article is pretty well written, but they really don't explore neutraliztion well enough.  They list a "neutralization" theory; but really don't explore it well; the point of view is pretty valid that some movie or record company gets the money from your sale, and not those who actually worked on the movie or song (see: Hollywood accounting.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) There 's no such thing as illegal downloading .
It 's the uploading a copy that 's illegal .
          2 ) The article is pretty well written , but they really do n't explore neutraliztion well enough .
They list a " neutralization " theory ; but really do n't explore it well ; the point of view is pretty valid that some movie or record company gets the money from your sale , and not those who actually worked on the movie or song ( see : Hollywood accounting .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>      1)  There's no such thing as illegal downloading.
It's the uploading a copy that's illegal.
          2) The article is pretty well written, but they really don't explore neutraliztion well enough.
They list a "neutralization" theory; but really don't explore it well; the point of view is pretty valid that some movie or record company gets the money from your sale, and not those who actually worked on the movie or song (see: Hollywood accounting.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381533</id>
	<title>Good luck with that.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245323160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't justify everything I've downloaded from the pirate bay, however, there are certain instances where I don't feel the least bit sorry:</p><p>* I <i>purchased</i> Spore and then downloaded the cracked version, which I installed on my computer, and then edited the system registry to give myself a the key.  Sorry, if I purchased a piece of software, I deserve to get <i>at least</i> as good an experience as the pirates do, which means no rootkits.<br>* Several years ago, I purchased RPG Maker XP.  I've gone through several computers since the purchase, and it no longer allows me to activate the software.  I'd like to continue using the software that I legitimately paid for, and my only option is to download a cracked, pirated version.<br>* On many occasions, I've downloaded no-CD cracks for games I've purchased legitimately.</p><p>Did I violate the DMCA in these cases?  Probably.  Do I feel justified in doing so?  Absolutely.  I shouldn't be locked out of software that I purchase, and when I buy software legitimately, I shouldn't be punished for it with shitty DRM.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't justify everything I 've downloaded from the pirate bay , however , there are certain instances where I do n't feel the least bit sorry : * I purchased Spore and then downloaded the cracked version , which I installed on my computer , and then edited the system registry to give myself a the key .
Sorry , if I purchased a piece of software , I deserve to get at least as good an experience as the pirates do , which means no rootkits .
* Several years ago , I purchased RPG Maker XP .
I 've gone through several computers since the purchase , and it no longer allows me to activate the software .
I 'd like to continue using the software that I legitimately paid for , and my only option is to download a cracked , pirated version .
* On many occasions , I 've downloaded no-CD cracks for games I 've purchased legitimately.Did I violate the DMCA in these cases ?
Probably. Do I feel justified in doing so ?
Absolutely. I should n't be locked out of software that I purchase , and when I buy software legitimately , I should n't be punished for it with shitty DRM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't justify everything I've downloaded from the pirate bay, however, there are certain instances where I don't feel the least bit sorry:* I purchased Spore and then downloaded the cracked version, which I installed on my computer, and then edited the system registry to give myself a the key.
Sorry, if I purchased a piece of software, I deserve to get at least as good an experience as the pirates do, which means no rootkits.
* Several years ago, I purchased RPG Maker XP.
I've gone through several computers since the purchase, and it no longer allows me to activate the software.
I'd like to continue using the software that I legitimately paid for, and my only option is to download a cracked, pirated version.
* On many occasions, I've downloaded no-CD cracks for games I've purchased legitimately.Did I violate the DMCA in these cases?
Probably.  Do I feel justified in doing so?
Absolutely.  I shouldn't be locked out of software that I purchase, and when I buy software legitimately, I shouldn't be punished for it with shitty DRM.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28386499</id>
	<title>Re:Civil Disobedience</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245443940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>An artificial stop has always been put on the dissemination of information. It used to be the priest class who used their privileged position to gain wealth and status, now it's the corporate overlords. Same shit different assholes, there's money in control.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>An artificial stop has always been put on the dissemination of information .
It used to be the priest class who used their privileged position to gain wealth and status , now it 's the corporate overlords .
Same shit different assholes , there 's money in control .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An artificial stop has always been put on the dissemination of information.
It used to be the priest class who used their privileged position to gain wealth and status, now it's the corporate overlords.
Same shit different assholes, there's money in control.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381691</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28384077</id>
	<title>Re:Well... It is</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245335340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Call it what you want, I am going to keep doing it and no one can stop me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Call it what you want , I am going to keep doing it and no one can stop me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Call it what you want, I am going to keep doing it and no one can stop me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28397811</id>
	<title>Sorry, not hearts and minds</title>
	<author>Fujisawa Sensei</author>
	<datestamp>1245417960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They do not want the downloaders hearts and minds, they simply want their money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They do not want the downloaders hearts and minds , they simply want their money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They do not want the downloaders hearts and minds, they simply want their money.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381943</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that.</title>
	<author>syousef</author>
	<datestamp>1245325020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>* On many occasions, I've downloaded no-CD cracks for games I've purchased legitimately.</i></p><p>You wouldn't steal a handbag. You wouldn't steal a TV....but we definitely think you'd buy a broken one and then feel guilty for trying to fix it after we've ripped you off.</p><p>What a bunch of disingenuous propaganda noise. They really don't need to do much to win the "hearts and minds" of downloaders. They just need to play fair.</p><p>- Reasonably priced goods, that you can play anywhere once you've bought them WITHOUT jumping through hoops like validation and copy protection checks. Stop differentiating by zone and content player.</p><p>- The ability to take something back without hassle if it is broken out of the box.</p><p>- The ability to replace already purchased content at reasonable cost when the media breaks (scratched DVDs etc). Stop trying to prosecute people for legitimately backing things up (as opposed to giving a copy to a friend)</p><p>- Stop trying to gouge fans by releasing one season at a time, then a boxed set, then a boxed set with extra features so that you're actively trying to get a fan to re-buy the same material multiple times</p><p>- Make content quick and convenient to obtain. Downloadable for those with good net access. By mail quickly and cheaply for those that don't</p><p>- Realise that some of your potential customers STILL won't be able to afford the content and don't count them as lost sales</p><p>So long as they try to rip off the very customers they're supplying with content, a large portion of those customers will feel justified in ripping them right back off. If they're fair, there will still be piracy but not as much.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>* On many occasions , I 've downloaded no-CD cracks for games I 've purchased legitimately.You would n't steal a handbag .
You would n't steal a TV....but we definitely think you 'd buy a broken one and then feel guilty for trying to fix it after we 've ripped you off.What a bunch of disingenuous propaganda noise .
They really do n't need to do much to win the " hearts and minds " of downloaders .
They just need to play fair.- Reasonably priced goods , that you can play anywhere once you 've bought them WITHOUT jumping through hoops like validation and copy protection checks .
Stop differentiating by zone and content player.- The ability to take something back without hassle if it is broken out of the box.- The ability to replace already purchased content at reasonable cost when the media breaks ( scratched DVDs etc ) .
Stop trying to prosecute people for legitimately backing things up ( as opposed to giving a copy to a friend ) - Stop trying to gouge fans by releasing one season at a time , then a boxed set , then a boxed set with extra features so that you 're actively trying to get a fan to re-buy the same material multiple times- Make content quick and convenient to obtain .
Downloadable for those with good net access .
By mail quickly and cheaply for those that do n't- Realise that some of your potential customers STILL wo n't be able to afford the content and do n't count them as lost salesSo long as they try to rip off the very customers they 're supplying with content , a large portion of those customers will feel justified in ripping them right back off .
If they 're fair , there will still be piracy but not as much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>* On many occasions, I've downloaded no-CD cracks for games I've purchased legitimately.You wouldn't steal a handbag.
You wouldn't steal a TV....but we definitely think you'd buy a broken one and then feel guilty for trying to fix it after we've ripped you off.What a bunch of disingenuous propaganda noise.
They really don't need to do much to win the "hearts and minds" of downloaders.
They just need to play fair.- Reasonably priced goods, that you can play anywhere once you've bought them WITHOUT jumping through hoops like validation and copy protection checks.
Stop differentiating by zone and content player.- The ability to take something back without hassle if it is broken out of the box.- The ability to replace already purchased content at reasonable cost when the media breaks (scratched DVDs etc).
Stop trying to prosecute people for legitimately backing things up (as opposed to giving a copy to a friend)- Stop trying to gouge fans by releasing one season at a time, then a boxed set, then a boxed set with extra features so that you're actively trying to get a fan to re-buy the same material multiple times- Make content quick and convenient to obtain.
Downloadable for those with good net access.
By mail quickly and cheaply for those that don't- Realise that some of your potential customers STILL won't be able to afford the content and don't count them as lost salesSo long as they try to rip off the very customers they're supplying with content, a large portion of those customers will feel justified in ripping them right back off.
If they're fair, there will still be piracy but not as much.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28385411</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that.</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1245347340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You put the finger in a very sore wound here: Someone who does <i>not</i> buy the content but rather reproduces it illegaly often gets a <i>better</i> experience than someone who was honest enough to buy it.</p><p>The worst offender in this game that I encountered so far was a certain, well known music editing program. Said program's copy protection consisted of a sizable portion of their code running on a virtual machine that used an "encrypted" executable (i.e. assembler instructions used different codes. inc eax was iirc 0x70). You may imagine for yourself what that ment to execution speed.</p><p>The crack consisted of a translation of those "encrypted" instructions to normal asm and a removal of the virtual machine. Essentially, the cracked version ran faster and more stable (!) than the original.</p><p>Now, explain to me this: Why should I be honest and suffer from a worse experience than someone who is not?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You put the finger in a very sore wound here : Someone who does not buy the content but rather reproduces it illegaly often gets a better experience than someone who was honest enough to buy it.The worst offender in this game that I encountered so far was a certain , well known music editing program .
Said program 's copy protection consisted of a sizable portion of their code running on a virtual machine that used an " encrypted " executable ( i.e .
assembler instructions used different codes .
inc eax was iirc 0x70 ) .
You may imagine for yourself what that ment to execution speed.The crack consisted of a translation of those " encrypted " instructions to normal asm and a removal of the virtual machine .
Essentially , the cracked version ran faster and more stable ( !
) than the original.Now , explain to me this : Why should I be honest and suffer from a worse experience than someone who is not ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You put the finger in a very sore wound here: Someone who does not buy the content but rather reproduces it illegaly often gets a better experience than someone who was honest enough to buy it.The worst offender in this game that I encountered so far was a certain, well known music editing program.
Said program's copy protection consisted of a sizable portion of their code running on a virtual machine that used an "encrypted" executable (i.e.
assembler instructions used different codes.
inc eax was iirc 0x70).
You may imagine for yourself what that ment to execution speed.The crack consisted of a translation of those "encrypted" instructions to normal asm and a removal of the virtual machine.
Essentially, the cracked version ran faster and more stable (!
) than the original.Now, explain to me this: Why should I be honest and suffer from a worse experience than someone who is not?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28396699</id>
	<title>Ransomware is the ONLY way to sell 'files'...</title>
	<author>helpacoder</author>
	<datestamp>1245410340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because once you release your content that can be represented as a computer file, it is bound to show up somewhere on the Internet for free sooner or later.  To avoid having to waste your effort, put a pricetag on your work, collect that amount collectively from people wanting it, then follow through and make it available for downloading.</p><p>The problem with this model is that people are afraid of getting 'ripped off' and not getting anything for what they paid for.</p><p>The solution for that would be an escrow-based version of PayPal that all parties could trust and use:</p><p>1) Content creator creates something, puts a pricetag on it and posts it with the escrow service and lets people know it is there.</p><p>2) People pay the escrow service for the item until it is 'paid in full'.  The escrow service<br>pays the content producer the full price they set for their item minus a small reasonable handling fee for the escrow service for providing this service.</p><p>3) Escrow service releases the content to the masses who paid for it via a one-use-only download URL.  Everybody is happy (including the 'freehounds' who got it from somebody who paid then re-uploaded their purchase somewhere else on the internet) -- everybody involved got what they wanted: money or the item being sold.</p><p>Unless you buy stuff 'on credit' or pay your utilities 'after the fact', you 'prepay' for all other goods and services you use (like prepay gasoline for your car).  Why should 'Interlectual Property' be treated any differently?  Time, effort, and money was expended to create it just like an ear of corn, or a washing machine.</p><p>The alternative is business as usual -- the same high-stakes cat and mouse game between the 'freehounds' and the content producers wanting to be paid for their content.  This is a situation no one can win in the long run....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because once you release your content that can be represented as a computer file , it is bound to show up somewhere on the Internet for free sooner or later .
To avoid having to waste your effort , put a pricetag on your work , collect that amount collectively from people wanting it , then follow through and make it available for downloading.The problem with this model is that people are afraid of getting 'ripped off ' and not getting anything for what they paid for.The solution for that would be an escrow-based version of PayPal that all parties could trust and use : 1 ) Content creator creates something , puts a pricetag on it and posts it with the escrow service and lets people know it is there.2 ) People pay the escrow service for the item until it is 'paid in full' .
The escrow servicepays the content producer the full price they set for their item minus a small reasonable handling fee for the escrow service for providing this service.3 ) Escrow service releases the content to the masses who paid for it via a one-use-only download URL .
Everybody is happy ( including the 'freehounds ' who got it from somebody who paid then re-uploaded their purchase somewhere else on the internet ) -- everybody involved got what they wanted : money or the item being sold.Unless you buy stuff 'on credit ' or pay your utilities 'after the fact ' , you 'prepay ' for all other goods and services you use ( like prepay gasoline for your car ) .
Why should 'Interlectual Property ' be treated any differently ?
Time , effort , and money was expended to create it just like an ear of corn , or a washing machine.The alternative is business as usual -- the same high-stakes cat and mouse game between the 'freehounds ' and the content producers wanting to be paid for their content .
This is a situation no one can win in the long run... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because once you release your content that can be represented as a computer file, it is bound to show up somewhere on the Internet for free sooner or later.
To avoid having to waste your effort, put a pricetag on your work, collect that amount collectively from people wanting it, then follow through and make it available for downloading.The problem with this model is that people are afraid of getting 'ripped off' and not getting anything for what they paid for.The solution for that would be an escrow-based version of PayPal that all parties could trust and use:1) Content creator creates something, puts a pricetag on it and posts it with the escrow service and lets people know it is there.2) People pay the escrow service for the item until it is 'paid in full'.
The escrow servicepays the content producer the full price they set for their item minus a small reasonable handling fee for the escrow service for providing this service.3) Escrow service releases the content to the masses who paid for it via a one-use-only download URL.
Everybody is happy (including the 'freehounds' who got it from somebody who paid then re-uploaded their purchase somewhere else on the internet) -- everybody involved got what they wanted: money or the item being sold.Unless you buy stuff 'on credit' or pay your utilities 'after the fact', you 'prepay' for all other goods and services you use (like prepay gasoline for your car).
Why should 'Interlectual Property' be treated any differently?
Time, effort, and money was expended to create it just like an ear of corn, or a washing machine.The alternative is business as usual -- the same high-stakes cat and mouse game between the 'freehounds' and the content producers wanting to be paid for their content.
This is a situation no one can win in the long run....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28390259</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that.</title>
	<author>T Murphy</author>
	<datestamp>1245427620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I completely agree that 99\% of DRM breaks products and harms consumer experience (yes I like how Steam works, no I don't want to get into that debate right now). I am curious though: would you be so opposed to it if copyright was reasonable and lasted 7 years? You would then have the option of buying the flawed product to start using it now, or waiting for copyright to expire and get it for cheap/free then. Of course, if consumers are given that choice, DRM would have to be much more palatable since it has to compete with the prospect of a free non-DRM version.<br> <br>

Not that I like to legitimize DRM, but to me the problem with it is that there is no reasonable legal alternative.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I completely agree that 99 \ % of DRM breaks products and harms consumer experience ( yes I like how Steam works , no I do n't want to get into that debate right now ) .
I am curious though : would you be so opposed to it if copyright was reasonable and lasted 7 years ?
You would then have the option of buying the flawed product to start using it now , or waiting for copyright to expire and get it for cheap/free then .
Of course , if consumers are given that choice , DRM would have to be much more palatable since it has to compete with the prospect of a free non-DRM version .
Not that I like to legitimize DRM , but to me the problem with it is that there is no reasonable legal alternative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I completely agree that 99\% of DRM breaks products and harms consumer experience (yes I like how Steam works, no I don't want to get into that debate right now).
I am curious though: would you be so opposed to it if copyright was reasonable and lasted 7 years?
You would then have the option of buying the flawed product to start using it now, or waiting for copyright to expire and get it for cheap/free then.
Of course, if consumers are given that choice, DRM would have to be much more palatable since it has to compete with the prospect of a free non-DRM version.
Not that I like to legitimize DRM, but to me the problem with it is that there is no reasonable legal alternative.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381345</id>
	<title>A ha!</title>
	<author>SomeJoel</author>
	<datestamp>1245322440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>So they admit they want to control our minds!</htmltext>
<tokenext>So they admit they want to control our minds !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So they admit they want to control our minds!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382149</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that.</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1245325860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Did I violate the DMCA in these cases? Probably. Do I feel justified in doing so? Absolutely.</i></p><p>I violate the DMCA every time I play a legally purchased DVD on my computer that runs Linux.  I care exactly enough to occasionally mention this fact to company when I pop in the DVD and chuckle.</p><p>No-CD cracks for games I own fall in the exact same category.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did I violate the DMCA in these cases ?
Probably. Do I feel justified in doing so ?
Absolutely.I violate the DMCA every time I play a legally purchased DVD on my computer that runs Linux .
I care exactly enough to occasionally mention this fact to company when I pop in the DVD and chuckle.No-CD cracks for games I own fall in the exact same category .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did I violate the DMCA in these cases?
Probably. Do I feel justified in doing so?
Absolutely.I violate the DMCA every time I play a legally purchased DVD on my computer that runs Linux.
I care exactly enough to occasionally mention this fact to company when I pop in the DVD and chuckle.No-CD cracks for games I own fall in the exact same category.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381691</id>
	<title>Civil Disobedience</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245323940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright\_Clause" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright\_Clause</a> [wikipedia.org]<br>To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing <b>for limited Times</b> to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil\_Disobedience\_(Thoreau)" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil\_Disobedience\_(Thoreau)</a> [wikipedia.org]<br>"Resistance" also served as part of Thoreau's metaphor which compared the government to a machine, and said that <b>when the machine was working injustice it was the duty of conscientious citizens to be "a counter friction" - that is, a resistance - "to stop the machine."</b></p><p>---</p><p>Now, the current length for copyright seems to be 50 years or more after the death of an author. Are you fucking kidding me? How the hell is that limited in any way? The person has been dead for 49 years and his/her work still isn't public domain? What is that crap?</p><p>The copyright should be date of publication + 20 years and I don't care if the author is a person or a corporation, nor do I care if the art in question is a song, a tune, a movie, a videogame, a tv show, a book, whatever.</p><p>If it was published or released before 1989  then it should be public domain, no exceptions.</p><p>In fact, the governments should have web servers so that its citizens can go download the now-public-domain things for free, in open or non-proprietary formats.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright \ _Clause [ wikipedia.org ] To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts , by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil \ _Disobedience \ _ ( Thoreau ) [ wikipedia.org ] " Resistance " also served as part of Thoreau 's metaphor which compared the government to a machine , and said that when the machine was working injustice it was the duty of conscientious citizens to be " a counter friction " - that is , a resistance - " to stop the machine .
" ---Now , the current length for copyright seems to be 50 years or more after the death of an author .
Are you fucking kidding me ?
How the hell is that limited in any way ?
The person has been dead for 49 years and his/her work still is n't public domain ?
What is that crap ? The copyright should be date of publication + 20 years and I do n't care if the author is a person or a corporation , nor do I care if the art in question is a song , a tune , a movie , a videogame , a tv show , a book , whatever.If it was published or released before 1989 then it should be public domain , no exceptions.In fact , the governments should have web servers so that its citizens can go download the now-public-domain things for free , in open or non-proprietary formats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright\_Clause [wikipedia.org]To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil\_Disobedience\_(Thoreau) [wikipedia.org]"Resistance" also served as part of Thoreau's metaphor which compared the government to a machine, and said that when the machine was working injustice it was the duty of conscientious citizens to be "a counter friction" - that is, a resistance - "to stop the machine.
"---Now, the current length for copyright seems to be 50 years or more after the death of an author.
Are you fucking kidding me?
How the hell is that limited in any way?
The person has been dead for 49 years and his/her work still isn't public domain?
What is that crap?The copyright should be date of publication + 20 years and I don't care if the author is a person or a corporation, nor do I care if the art in question is a song, a tune, a movie, a videogame, a tv show, a book, whatever.If it was published or released before 1989  then it should be public domain, no exceptions.In fact, the governments should have web servers so that its citizens can go download the now-public-domain things for free, in open or non-proprietary formats.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382947</id>
	<title>You would't steal a ..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245329460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"You wouldn't steal a purse.  You wouldn't steal a TV."
</p><p>That's right.  Those things are for sale.  If I ever want one, I can buy it.
</p><p>"You wouldn't steal a movie."  Is that a Blu-ray?  You're right; I wouldn't steal one or even take one for free, because there isn't a way to play it.
</p><p>Would I pirate a HD movie?  Well, they're not for sale yet.  If downloads are the only thing on the market (i.e. sales are not currently offered) then why not?  It';s not like its impacting anyone's market.
</p><p>You want to win hearts and minds?  Start selling a product.  It's not a movie (i.e. a thing I can watch) until it's DRM-free.
</p><p>Sell movies, and I'll buy them.  And hope you <strong>enter the market</strong> in time, before my media server's disks are full.  The clock is ticking: do you accept money, or do you turn customers away?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" You would n't steal a purse .
You would n't steal a TV .
" That 's right .
Those things are for sale .
If I ever want one , I can buy it .
" You would n't steal a movie .
" Is that a Blu-ray ?
You 're right ; I would n't steal one or even take one for free , because there is n't a way to play it .
Would I pirate a HD movie ?
Well , they 're not for sale yet .
If downloads are the only thing on the market ( i.e .
sales are not currently offered ) then why not ?
It ' ; s not like its impacting anyone 's market .
You want to win hearts and minds ?
Start selling a product .
It 's not a movie ( i.e .
a thing I can watch ) until it 's DRM-free .
Sell movies , and I 'll buy them .
And hope you enter the market in time , before my media server 's disks are full .
The clock is ticking : do you accept money , or do you turn customers away ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"You wouldn't steal a purse.
You wouldn't steal a TV.
"
That's right.
Those things are for sale.
If I ever want one, I can buy it.
"You wouldn't steal a movie.
"  Is that a Blu-ray?
You're right; I wouldn't steal one or even take one for free, because there isn't a way to play it.
Would I pirate a HD movie?
Well, they're not for sale yet.
If downloads are the only thing on the market (i.e.
sales are not currently offered) then why not?
It';s not like its impacting anyone's market.
You want to win hearts and minds?
Start selling a product.
It's not a movie (i.e.
a thing I can watch) until it's DRM-free.
Sell movies, and I'll buy them.
And hope you enter the market in time, before my media server's disks are full.
The clock is ticking: do you accept money, or do you turn customers away?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28391353</id>
	<title>Re:Fuck'em</title>
	<author>mrboyd</author>
	<datestamp>1245432240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not mod point so I'll just agree with you here.<br> 

My cable provider used to have a video on demand service. Movie were cheap -- few dollars-- and put on my monthly bill, streaming began within 10 seconds of ordering the movie and could be restarted anytime for 24 hours. I watched (and paid for) all the twenty movies that I cared for over a couple of month. Then what? The service was rarely updated with new movies because the provider could not secure distribution rights and new movie where usually direct-to-dvd-sale-bin kind of crap that I would not even have watched for free.
<br> 
My plea to those idiots is the following:
<ul>
<li> Let me pay for the movie: Give me a way to get the movie for what it's worth; Right now you're getting nothing from me. Take 5 bucks and be happy. I'm pretty sure that's close from what you get in your distribution chain.</li>
<li> Give me a way that is convenient; simple and as efficient a TPB. Your site can even do better with proper category, trailers, no duplicate, guaranteed quality, subtitles, user review (yes bad review too), suggestions from you to me and from me to my friends. Make a facebook app and get hundred of thousands of teenager posting "must sees" on their friends walls and watch the cash pour-in.</li>
<li> Don't try to lock me in your crappy player, I use VLC period. I don't care that you're scared I might copy it. I am already copying it so that I can avoid the restriction you add on your player.</li>
<li> Let me watch on my TV through the tv-out of my computer; or on my projector; or on a PMP of my choosing. See above.</li>
<li> And finally <b>don't bug me if I live in the US, Canada, France or Zimbabwe</b>. I can already get your content for free before it's even on your site; or your theater even. What's the point of trying to reduce artificially your potential customer base? Market segmentation my a**; I can buy all your movies in a chinese market before the first batch of DVD hit any store in the US. Seriously once again I'm giving five bucks to a guy in the street because you're too snob to take them. We've been force fed globalization by the mega-corp worldwide and I find it perfectly fair that the small people get to benefit from it.</li>
</ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not mod point so I 'll just agree with you here .
My cable provider used to have a video on demand service .
Movie were cheap -- few dollars-- and put on my monthly bill , streaming began within 10 seconds of ordering the movie and could be restarted anytime for 24 hours .
I watched ( and paid for ) all the twenty movies that I cared for over a couple of month .
Then what ?
The service was rarely updated with new movies because the provider could not secure distribution rights and new movie where usually direct-to-dvd-sale-bin kind of crap that I would not even have watched for free .
My plea to those idiots is the following : Let me pay for the movie : Give me a way to get the movie for what it 's worth ; Right now you 're getting nothing from me .
Take 5 bucks and be happy .
I 'm pretty sure that 's close from what you get in your distribution chain .
Give me a way that is convenient ; simple and as efficient a TPB .
Your site can even do better with proper category , trailers , no duplicate , guaranteed quality , subtitles , user review ( yes bad review too ) , suggestions from you to me and from me to my friends .
Make a facebook app and get hundred of thousands of teenager posting " must sees " on their friends walls and watch the cash pour-in .
Do n't try to lock me in your crappy player , I use VLC period .
I do n't care that you 're scared I might copy it .
I am already copying it so that I can avoid the restriction you add on your player .
Let me watch on my TV through the tv-out of my computer ; or on my projector ; or on a PMP of my choosing .
See above .
And finally do n't bug me if I live in the US , Canada , France or Zimbabwe .
I can already get your content for free before it 's even on your site ; or your theater even .
What 's the point of trying to reduce artificially your potential customer base ?
Market segmentation my a * * ; I can buy all your movies in a chinese market before the first batch of DVD hit any store in the US .
Seriously once again I 'm giving five bucks to a guy in the street because you 're too snob to take them .
We 've been force fed globalization by the mega-corp worldwide and I find it perfectly fair that the small people get to benefit from it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not mod point so I'll just agree with you here.
My cable provider used to have a video on demand service.
Movie were cheap -- few dollars-- and put on my monthly bill, streaming began within 10 seconds of ordering the movie and could be restarted anytime for 24 hours.
I watched (and paid for) all the twenty movies that I cared for over a couple of month.
Then what?
The service was rarely updated with new movies because the provider could not secure distribution rights and new movie where usually direct-to-dvd-sale-bin kind of crap that I would not even have watched for free.
My plea to those idiots is the following:

 Let me pay for the movie: Give me a way to get the movie for what it's worth; Right now you're getting nothing from me.
Take 5 bucks and be happy.
I'm pretty sure that's close from what you get in your distribution chain.
Give me a way that is convenient; simple and as efficient a TPB.
Your site can even do better with proper category, trailers, no duplicate, guaranteed quality, subtitles, user review (yes bad review too), suggestions from you to me and from me to my friends.
Make a facebook app and get hundred of thousands of teenager posting "must sees" on their friends walls and watch the cash pour-in.
Don't try to lock me in your crappy player, I use VLC period.
I don't care that you're scared I might copy it.
I am already copying it so that I can avoid the restriction you add on your player.
Let me watch on my TV through the tv-out of my computer; or on my projector; or on a PMP of my choosing.
See above.
And finally don't bug me if I live in the US, Canada, France or Zimbabwe.
I can already get your content for free before it's even on your site; or your theater even.
What's the point of trying to reduce artificially your potential customer base?
Market segmentation my a**; I can buy all your movies in a chinese market before the first batch of DVD hit any store in the US.
Seriously once again I'm giving five bucks to a guy in the street because you're too snob to take them.
We've been force fed globalization by the mega-corp worldwide and I find it perfectly fair that the small people get to benefit from it.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382409</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28389265</id>
	<title>IT Crowd</title>
	<author>BiggoronSword</author>
	<datestamp>1245423420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm obligated to post this video in response to the video FTA:
<a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x570xy\_the-it-crowds02e03-downloading-is-s\_fun" title="dailymotion.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x570xy\_the-it-crowds02e03-downloading-is-s\_fun</a> [dailymotion.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm obligated to post this video in response to the video FTA : http : //www.dailymotion.com/video/x570xy \ _the-it-crowds02e03-downloading-is-s \ _fun [ dailymotion.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm obligated to post this video in response to the video FTA:
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x570xy\_the-it-crowds02e03-downloading-is-s\_fun [dailymotion.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382115</id>
	<title>Yuo Fa1l It!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245325680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">they're gOne Mac non nigger patrons</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>they 're gOne Mac non nigger patrons [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they're gOne Mac non nigger patrons [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28383107</id>
	<title>Re:Well... It is</title>
	<author>Mr2001</author>
	<datestamp>1245330000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It *is* theft. The movie was produced to make money.. and it is quite fair for them to expect that people won't just take it and not pay.</p></div><p>If I stand on the street corner playing the guitar and tambourine, hoping to make money, is it "theft" when people listen to the music without dropping a dollar in my hat?</p><p>Of course not. Just because you <i>hope</i> to make money doing something doesn't mean anyone is obligated to pay you for it.</p><p>If you want to get paid for making movies, there's a simple solution: <i>don't make movies unless someone is paying you</i>. As a professional programmer, I don't write code for free if I'm expecting to get paid for it. For every line of code I write, I know who wants it written and what they're paying me for it. This isn't a special talent I was born with; even movie producers can learn it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It * is * theft .
The movie was produced to make money.. and it is quite fair for them to expect that people wo n't just take it and not pay.If I stand on the street corner playing the guitar and tambourine , hoping to make money , is it " theft " when people listen to the music without dropping a dollar in my hat ? Of course not .
Just because you hope to make money doing something does n't mean anyone is obligated to pay you for it.If you want to get paid for making movies , there 's a simple solution : do n't make movies unless someone is paying you .
As a professional programmer , I do n't write code for free if I 'm expecting to get paid for it .
For every line of code I write , I know who wants it written and what they 're paying me for it .
This is n't a special talent I was born with ; even movie producers can learn it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It *is* theft.
The movie was produced to make money.. and it is quite fair for them to expect that people won't just take it and not pay.If I stand on the street corner playing the guitar and tambourine, hoping to make money, is it "theft" when people listen to the music without dropping a dollar in my hat?Of course not.
Just because you hope to make money doing something doesn't mean anyone is obligated to pay you for it.If you want to get paid for making movies, there's a simple solution: don't make movies unless someone is paying you.
As a professional programmer, I don't write code for free if I'm expecting to get paid for it.
For every line of code I write, I know who wants it written and what they're paying me for it.
This isn't a special talent I was born with; even movie producers can learn it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28383173</id>
	<title>nobody takes the anti-piracy movement serious</title>
	<author>RiotingPacifist</author>
	<datestamp>1245330180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>even copyrighted tv-shows <a href="http://www.dailymotion.pl/video/x3skf8\_antipiracy-ad-from-the-it-crowd\_fun" title="dailymotion.pl">don't</a> [dailymotion.pl] (same video was taken down on <a href="http://www.youtube.com/browse?ytsession=lHORpqnJuTPHmK5lqapZMY0yIkjmg6YNQclribDpkSr78\_3y6lMuOGAgi6xX3IuXtZbenKv5fmpSZecW59Aqs2KXTJ1FdUatfvpqTe3eoiqEuP1BoTsFBM6JxrJgQRC2XzvndGVNCki6\_-gYpqtOUJJHW9rh\_q2OUDXPiIqq04jgPd5tMkazLYvsLKfszbSPd0JpQ8jGlwuNP\_dmmGhtm2yY-N\_GNFNOHLPcwder4gEb4KTOoUgjW-frcVoCAMHV8SeDrLqAHbXusgRLq5wUJbKbDYJkbIVYxAk583Bzgt79898DU5V3PsH8GLYAIQTtXvuu6jkaNBR1QuRF0nZU6g" title="youtube.com">youtube</a> [youtube.com] lol).<br>why i pirate:<br>*it makes me a pirate and pirates are cool (i wouldn't be half as happy about smoking weed if it was legal)<br>*I don't feel sorry for the "victims" (record label execs, big rockstars loosing a few cents)<br>*It's easier, enter credit card details vs click link<br>*i don't have the money for an 20gb music collection (if it wasn't 20gb then most of the artists wouldn't of had me go see them)<br>*too many good artists are ruined by money when they make it big (i still pay for small bands stuff, but im probably doing  a favour as you can't right lyrics about having a hard life if your fucking loaded!)<br>*copyright law is broken (0 is closer to what it should be 14-25 than life+50)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>even copyrighted tv-shows do n't [ dailymotion.pl ] ( same video was taken down on youtube [ youtube.com ] lol ) .why i pirate : * it makes me a pirate and pirates are cool ( i would n't be half as happy about smoking weed if it was legal ) * I do n't feel sorry for the " victims " ( record label execs , big rockstars loosing a few cents ) * It 's easier , enter credit card details vs click link * i do n't have the money for an 20gb music collection ( if it was n't 20gb then most of the artists would n't of had me go see them ) * too many good artists are ruined by money when they make it big ( i still pay for small bands stuff , but im probably doing a favour as you ca n't right lyrics about having a hard life if your fucking loaded !
) * copyright law is broken ( 0 is closer to what it should be 14-25 than life + 50 )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>even copyrighted tv-shows don't [dailymotion.pl] (same video was taken down on youtube [youtube.com] lol).why i pirate:*it makes me a pirate and pirates are cool (i wouldn't be half as happy about smoking weed if it was legal)*I don't feel sorry for the "victims" (record label execs, big rockstars loosing a few cents)*It's easier, enter credit card details vs click link*i don't have the money for an 20gb music collection (if it wasn't 20gb then most of the artists wouldn't of had me go see them)*too many good artists are ruined by money when they make it big (i still pay for small bands stuff, but im probably doing  a favour as you can't right lyrics about having a hard life if your fucking loaded!
)*copyright law is broken (0 is closer to what it should be 14-25 than life+50)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381391</id>
	<title>Suuure, trust me</title>
	<author>dozer</author>
	<datestamp>1245322620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Blue Rubicon attests that 'if you do them right you can make a material impact on people's behaviour.'"</p><p>That will certainly make a material impact on Blue Rubicon's net profits.  But change people's behavior?  That's pretty unlikely.  History is not on their side.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Blue Rubicon attests that 'if you do them right you can make a material impact on people 's behaviour .
' " That will certainly make a material impact on Blue Rubicon 's net profits .
But change people 's behavior ?
That 's pretty unlikely .
History is not on their side .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Blue Rubicon attests that 'if you do them right you can make a material impact on people's behaviour.
'"That will certainly make a material impact on Blue Rubicon's net profits.
But change people's behavior?
That's pretty unlikely.
History is not on their side.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382795</id>
	<title>It's not about money any more...</title>
	<author>PottedMeat</author>
	<datestamp>1245328980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's all political.
<br> <br>
I was going to post a large list of things that piss me off about the industry but hell we all know what they are.  Every policy is driven by greed.  I won't pay anyone for that.  So yeah if they gave me a reason to want to buy from them then I would gladly do so.
<br> <br>
I will say that when I'm visiting Asia I buy music ALL THE TIME (admittedly from select labels) because the price is reasonable, the quality of mainstream music is better, you can get the music very easily and in many ways.  I also buy movies there because of the same reason.  I like that I can pick up a legit english version of a movie on VCD at the same time that the movie comes out.
<br> <br>
Meh it's the same ole western greed system that's in place in about every industry.  In Asia I can buy a killer mobile phone, pick whatever carrier I want, use prepaid or some sort of plan, not be forced into a multi-year contract just to get a decent phone or rate, have far better access to internet and other features, and get far, far, far more functionality out of the phone.  Because the opposite is true here in the states, I don't even bother having a mobile.
<br> <br>
My $0.02.  Cheap!
<br> <br>
PM</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's all political .
I was going to post a large list of things that piss me off about the industry but hell we all know what they are .
Every policy is driven by greed .
I wo n't pay anyone for that .
So yeah if they gave me a reason to want to buy from them then I would gladly do so .
I will say that when I 'm visiting Asia I buy music ALL THE TIME ( admittedly from select labels ) because the price is reasonable , the quality of mainstream music is better , you can get the music very easily and in many ways .
I also buy movies there because of the same reason .
I like that I can pick up a legit english version of a movie on VCD at the same time that the movie comes out .
Meh it 's the same ole western greed system that 's in place in about every industry .
In Asia I can buy a killer mobile phone , pick whatever carrier I want , use prepaid or some sort of plan , not be forced into a multi-year contract just to get a decent phone or rate , have far better access to internet and other features , and get far , far , far more functionality out of the phone .
Because the opposite is true here in the states , I do n't even bother having a mobile .
My $ 0.02 .
Cheap ! PM</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's all political.
I was going to post a large list of things that piss me off about the industry but hell we all know what they are.
Every policy is driven by greed.
I won't pay anyone for that.
So yeah if they gave me a reason to want to buy from them then I would gladly do so.
I will say that when I'm visiting Asia I buy music ALL THE TIME (admittedly from select labels) because the price is reasonable, the quality of mainstream music is better, you can get the music very easily and in many ways.
I also buy movies there because of the same reason.
I like that I can pick up a legit english version of a movie on VCD at the same time that the movie comes out.
Meh it's the same ole western greed system that's in place in about every industry.
In Asia I can buy a killer mobile phone, pick whatever carrier I want, use prepaid or some sort of plan, not be forced into a multi-year contract just to get a decent phone or rate, have far better access to internet and other features, and get far, far, far more functionality out of the phone.
Because the opposite is true here in the states, I don't even bother having a mobile.
My $0.02.
Cheap!
 
PM</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381545</id>
	<title>Exactly</title>
	<author>CarpetShark</author>
	<datestamp>1245323220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some honest two-way dialog is what's needed, not preaching the old way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some honest two-way dialog is what 's needed , not preaching the old way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some honest two-way dialog is what's needed, not preaching the old way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381345</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382007</id>
	<title>Re:Well... It is</title>
	<author>lenester</author>
	<datestamp>1245325320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>What it is <em>not,</em> however, is any form of lost revenue. You would never have purchased that movie in the first place. It was not physically produced, shipped or shelved. No material loss was suffered, nor any sale eliminated. The cost of piracy to the copyright industries cannot be measured by multiplying downloads times retail prices; not even close. Yet this is how they attempt to portray it. This is what "theft" means.<p>You are guilty of non-commercial copyright violation. Not theft.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What it is not , however , is any form of lost revenue .
You would never have purchased that movie in the first place .
It was not physically produced , shipped or shelved .
No material loss was suffered , nor any sale eliminated .
The cost of piracy to the copyright industries can not be measured by multiplying downloads times retail prices ; not even close .
Yet this is how they attempt to portray it .
This is what " theft " means.You are guilty of non-commercial copyright violation .
Not theft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What it is not, however, is any form of lost revenue.
You would never have purchased that movie in the first place.
It was not physically produced, shipped or shelved.
No material loss was suffered, nor any sale eliminated.
The cost of piracy to the copyright industries cannot be measured by multiplying downloads times retail prices; not even close.
Yet this is how they attempt to portray it.
This is what "theft" means.You are guilty of non-commercial copyright violation.
Not theft.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28386937</id>
	<title>They're paddling against the current</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245406440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem with any approaches that try to indoctrinate into people that copying is bad is that Intellectual Property is not a natural law. Think for a moment about the fact that if you tell somebody as joke which you heard on TV you are breaking somebody's copyright - how natural is it to <b>not</b> tell or even write down something your read or heard from others?</p><p>The truth is that we are by nature highly social animals. The sharing of and building upon the ideas of others is ingrained in our genes: it's what makes a community our of a bunch of individuals. A society's identity pretty much boils down to shared beliefs, behaviors and ideas - all things which we get from some and pass on to others.</p><p>Now bring into this picture things Copyright and Patents: these mean that you cannot freely shared ideas and build upon the ideas of others to make new ideas - in the extreme you're supposed to track who owns each and every idea you've ever heard of and read about and pay them every time your tell that idea to others.</p><p>Now consider that trying to justify things like Copyright quickly slides into vague and ill defined concepts like "encouraging" others to create.</p><p>Reducing the IP argument to the most basic concepts and it boils down to: we must track and pay for ideas in order to encourage people to have and share ideas.</p><p>This is as anti-intuitive as it gets.</p><p>At the end of the day, it's much more easy to make arguments which are anti-IP than pro-IP, especially since nowadays the most visible face of IP are rich artists (as soon as I read the article I came up with a counter advert in which people would be told that they must not whistle songs without paying the artists since they would be taking food away from the mouths of starving artists all the while showing images of wealthy artists enjoying their expensive cars, huge mansions and glamorous vacations in the Cote D'Azur)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with any approaches that try to indoctrinate into people that copying is bad is that Intellectual Property is not a natural law .
Think for a moment about the fact that if you tell somebody as joke which you heard on TV you are breaking somebody 's copyright - how natural is it to not tell or even write down something your read or heard from others ? The truth is that we are by nature highly social animals .
The sharing of and building upon the ideas of others is ingrained in our genes : it 's what makes a community our of a bunch of individuals .
A society 's identity pretty much boils down to shared beliefs , behaviors and ideas - all things which we get from some and pass on to others.Now bring into this picture things Copyright and Patents : these mean that you can not freely shared ideas and build upon the ideas of others to make new ideas - in the extreme you 're supposed to track who owns each and every idea you 've ever heard of and read about and pay them every time your tell that idea to others.Now consider that trying to justify things like Copyright quickly slides into vague and ill defined concepts like " encouraging " others to create.Reducing the IP argument to the most basic concepts and it boils down to : we must track and pay for ideas in order to encourage people to have and share ideas.This is as anti-intuitive as it gets.At the end of the day , it 's much more easy to make arguments which are anti-IP than pro-IP , especially since nowadays the most visible face of IP are rich artists ( as soon as I read the article I came up with a counter advert in which people would be told that they must not whistle songs without paying the artists since they would be taking food away from the mouths of starving artists all the while showing images of wealthy artists enjoying their expensive cars , huge mansions and glamorous vacations in the Cote D'Azur )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with any approaches that try to indoctrinate into people that copying is bad is that Intellectual Property is not a natural law.
Think for a moment about the fact that if you tell somebody as joke which you heard on TV you are breaking somebody's copyright - how natural is it to not tell or even write down something your read or heard from others?The truth is that we are by nature highly social animals.
The sharing of and building upon the ideas of others is ingrained in our genes: it's what makes a community our of a bunch of individuals.
A society's identity pretty much boils down to shared beliefs, behaviors and ideas - all things which we get from some and pass on to others.Now bring into this picture things Copyright and Patents: these mean that you cannot freely shared ideas and build upon the ideas of others to make new ideas - in the extreme you're supposed to track who owns each and every idea you've ever heard of and read about and pay them every time your tell that idea to others.Now consider that trying to justify things like Copyright quickly slides into vague and ill defined concepts like "encouraging" others to create.Reducing the IP argument to the most basic concepts and it boils down to: we must track and pay for ideas in order to encourage people to have and share ideas.This is as anti-intuitive as it gets.At the end of the day, it's much more easy to make arguments which are anti-IP than pro-IP, especially since nowadays the most visible face of IP are rich artists (as soon as I read the article I came up with a counter advert in which people would be told that they must not whistle songs without paying the artists since they would be taking food away from the mouths of starving artists all the while showing images of wealthy artists enjoying their expensive cars, huge mansions and glamorous vacations in the Cote D'Azur)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382585</id>
	<title>Well they changed my Heart and mind</title>
	<author>JumpDrive</author>
	<datestamp>1245328080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I recently purchased a Season on disc.  Got it home and found that I couldn't run it on my computer.  I was pissed.<br>
Prior to this I leaned toward being against downloading.  Now I just don't care what downloaders get.<br> <br>
Where is my return in damages?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I recently purchased a Season on disc .
Got it home and found that I could n't run it on my computer .
I was pissed .
Prior to this I leaned toward being against downloading .
Now I just do n't care what downloaders get .
Where is my return in damages ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I recently purchased a Season on disc.
Got it home and found that I couldn't run it on my computer.
I was pissed.
Prior to this I leaned toward being against downloading.
Now I just don't care what downloaders get.
Where is my return in damages?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28391325</id>
	<title>You can't stop the signal, Mal.</title>
	<author>kheldan</author>
	<datestamp>1245432120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>All their "campaigning" will fall to the floor like the useless words they are. It will continue, <i>ad infinitum</i>, and there's nothing they can do about it, muwhahahaha!</htmltext>
<tokenext>All their " campaigning " will fall to the floor like the useless words they are .
It will continue , ad infinitum , and there 's nothing they can do about it , muwhahahaha !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All their "campaigning" will fall to the floor like the useless words they are.
It will continue, ad infinitum, and there's nothing they can do about it, muwhahahaha!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28387199</id>
	<title>Re:A ha!</title>
	<author>cliffski</author>
	<datestamp>1245409440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Stop producing cr@p that nobody is interested in"</p><p>They make movies and music for people who BUY it. If you are part of a demographic that is not buying music and movies, then newsflash! no content is being produced for you.</p><p>Music and movies still sell (as slashdotters always shout about when they defend piracy) so has it occurred to you that actually the majority of people out there buying that stuff actually like it?</p><p>It costs money to make games, movies and even music. People will not make stuff that they know they can't sell unless its a hobby.<br>In short, if you want stuff you will enjoy, you need to send signals to the market by actually BUYING what you enjoy.</p><p>No movie or record company accountant gives a fuck that their product was top of the torrent chart. That cant be used to pay people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Stop producing cr @ p that nobody is interested in " They make movies and music for people who BUY it .
If you are part of a demographic that is not buying music and movies , then newsflash !
no content is being produced for you.Music and movies still sell ( as slashdotters always shout about when they defend piracy ) so has it occurred to you that actually the majority of people out there buying that stuff actually like it ? It costs money to make games , movies and even music .
People will not make stuff that they know they ca n't sell unless its a hobby.In short , if you want stuff you will enjoy , you need to send signals to the market by actually BUYING what you enjoy.No movie or record company accountant gives a fuck that their product was top of the torrent chart .
That cant be used to pay people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Stop producing cr@p that nobody is interested in"They make movies and music for people who BUY it.
If you are part of a demographic that is not buying music and movies, then newsflash!
no content is being produced for you.Music and movies still sell (as slashdotters always shout about when they defend piracy) so has it occurred to you that actually the majority of people out there buying that stuff actually like it?It costs money to make games, movies and even music.
People will not make stuff that they know they can't sell unless its a hobby.In short, if you want stuff you will enjoy, you need to send signals to the market by actually BUYING what you enjoy.No movie or record company accountant gives a fuck that their product was top of the torrent chart.
That cant be used to pay people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381793</id>
	<title>Re:Well... It is</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245324360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Define theft again? I think you'll find that something vitally important in theft is missing from piracy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Define theft again ?
I think you 'll find that something vitally important in theft is missing from piracy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Define theft again?
I think you'll find that something vitally important in theft is missing from piracy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28384347</id>
	<title>red herring</title>
	<author>DragonTHC</author>
	<datestamp>1245337080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First, downloading isn't illegal.  Uploading is.</p><p>Second, you wouldn't steal a purse or a DVD, but if you had the power to duplicate that purse or DVD at will without impacting the original, you'd do it.</p><p>Third, it's not stealing.  Is the movie industry all of a sudden, selling movie downloads in blu-ray quality?  They aren't?  Then what product am I stealing?</p><p>It's a license?  I already own the film on DVD and in some cases, VHS.  So I already have a license.</p><p>It's both?  nope, sorry not gonna work.  The FTC is seeing the glimmer of truth underneath all that industry bullshit.  Does the industry really need laws to protect it when it's seeing record profits?  Downloaders must not be making all that much of an impact on their revenues.  It is of course, a red herring to claim that every download is lost revenue.  It's not.  nine times out of ten, the downloader wouldn't ever purchase something he downloaded.  Lest we forget the whole reason that piracy exists is because a lot of people don't find your products to be worth the price your asking.  Maybe a little market research would help.  Maybe acknowledging there's a market would help.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First , downloading is n't illegal .
Uploading is.Second , you would n't steal a purse or a DVD , but if you had the power to duplicate that purse or DVD at will without impacting the original , you 'd do it.Third , it 's not stealing .
Is the movie industry all of a sudden , selling movie downloads in blu-ray quality ?
They are n't ?
Then what product am I stealing ? It 's a license ?
I already own the film on DVD and in some cases , VHS .
So I already have a license.It 's both ?
nope , sorry not gon na work .
The FTC is seeing the glimmer of truth underneath all that industry bullshit .
Does the industry really need laws to protect it when it 's seeing record profits ?
Downloaders must not be making all that much of an impact on their revenues .
It is of course , a red herring to claim that every download is lost revenue .
It 's not .
nine times out of ten , the downloader would n't ever purchase something he downloaded .
Lest we forget the whole reason that piracy exists is because a lot of people do n't find your products to be worth the price your asking .
Maybe a little market research would help .
Maybe acknowledging there 's a market would help .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First, downloading isn't illegal.
Uploading is.Second, you wouldn't steal a purse or a DVD, but if you had the power to duplicate that purse or DVD at will without impacting the original, you'd do it.Third, it's not stealing.
Is the movie industry all of a sudden, selling movie downloads in blu-ray quality?
They aren't?
Then what product am I stealing?It's a license?
I already own the film on DVD and in some cases, VHS.
So I already have a license.It's both?
nope, sorry not gonna work.
The FTC is seeing the glimmer of truth underneath all that industry bullshit.
Does the industry really need laws to protect it when it's seeing record profits?
Downloaders must not be making all that much of an impact on their revenues.
It is of course, a red herring to claim that every download is lost revenue.
It's not.
nine times out of ten, the downloader wouldn't ever purchase something he downloaded.
Lest we forget the whole reason that piracy exists is because a lot of people don't find your products to be worth the price your asking.
Maybe a little market research would help.
Maybe acknowledging there's a market would help.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381657</id>
	<title>Well... It is</title>
	<author>sctprog</author>
	<datestamp>1245323760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok this is coming from someone who actually does download a good half the movies he watches.</p><p>It *is* theft. The movie was produced to make money.. and it is quite fair for them to expect that  people won't just take it and not pay.</p><p>No matter how you water it down, you took something that you didn't pay for. If you can live with that choice, then fine.</p><p>But don't go around making up reasons why you're doing the world a favour by saying 'fuck you' to 'the man'.. You're only lying to yourself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok this is coming from someone who actually does download a good half the movies he watches.It * is * theft .
The movie was produced to make money.. and it is quite fair for them to expect that people wo n't just take it and not pay.No matter how you water it down , you took something that you did n't pay for .
If you can live with that choice , then fine.But do n't go around making up reasons why you 're doing the world a favour by saying 'fuck you ' to 'the man'.. You 're only lying to yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok this is coming from someone who actually does download a good half the movies he watches.It *is* theft.
The movie was produced to make money.. and it is quite fair for them to expect that  people won't just take it and not pay.No matter how you water it down, you took something that you didn't pay for.
If you can live with that choice, then fine.But don't go around making up reasons why you're doing the world a favour by saying 'fuck you' to 'the man'.. You're only lying to yourself.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382393</id>
	<title>Make them like you</title>
	<author>V50</author>
	<datestamp>1245327060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My personal thoughts are the best way to counter piracy is to make people like you. I can only really give examples from my experience, as I don't really know other people's piracy habits.</p><p>I am an avid gamer of all systems, although I rarely game on my PC anymore, as it's typically too much of a hassle with configurations and DRM. The DRM decreases my chance of buying a PC game, (especially if there's a good console version) and makes me more likely to pirate. As an example, I bought a copy of Spore. My bought copy of Spore thought I was pirating it. After screwing around for a bit, I decided to say screw it, and downloaded a pirated copy from the Pirate Bay. As a result, were I actually interested in the Sims 3, I feel I'd be much more likely to pirate it, now that EA's ticked me off.</p><p>I have around 200+ console + handheld games, none of them pirated. Several of my systems (DS + PSP in particular) have very active "homebrew" communities, that make it very easy to acquire "backups". Despite the ease of which I know I could get handheld games for free, I choose to buy them, because I derive a great deal of value in having the original box + manual + disc/card to display, and because I actually like the companies.</p><p>Pirating a game from, say, Nintendo to me would feel like kicking Mario in the groin. Nintendo (and others) have brought me such good times, that they seem almost like a friend. The few times I've even considered pirating DS games, I've felt very uneasy, the thought of it feels just wrong, to me. The RIAA, on the other hand, does not invoke such warm, fuzzy feelings to just about anyone. Perhaps if they stopped suing so many people, and installing rootkits on people's computers, they might have some more goodwill left.</p><p>Those are just my thoughts. I know plenty of people don't derive the same satisfaction from having a big collection of legit games/music/whatever, but I really think that if the RIAA stopped suing people and instead built up a strong relationship with its customers like many gaming companies, and Apple, they might see similar loyalty and less piracy.</p><p>Also, suing little kids is stupid on a logical level. I pirated plenty of software when I was around 12 or so because I had no money. Ten years later, I have plenty of disposable income, and provide the entertainment industries with many thousands of dollars in revenue a year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My personal thoughts are the best way to counter piracy is to make people like you .
I can only really give examples from my experience , as I do n't really know other people 's piracy habits.I am an avid gamer of all systems , although I rarely game on my PC anymore , as it 's typically too much of a hassle with configurations and DRM .
The DRM decreases my chance of buying a PC game , ( especially if there 's a good console version ) and makes me more likely to pirate .
As an example , I bought a copy of Spore .
My bought copy of Spore thought I was pirating it .
After screwing around for a bit , I decided to say screw it , and downloaded a pirated copy from the Pirate Bay .
As a result , were I actually interested in the Sims 3 , I feel I 'd be much more likely to pirate it , now that EA 's ticked me off.I have around 200 + console + handheld games , none of them pirated .
Several of my systems ( DS + PSP in particular ) have very active " homebrew " communities , that make it very easy to acquire " backups " .
Despite the ease of which I know I could get handheld games for free , I choose to buy them , because I derive a great deal of value in having the original box + manual + disc/card to display , and because I actually like the companies.Pirating a game from , say , Nintendo to me would feel like kicking Mario in the groin .
Nintendo ( and others ) have brought me such good times , that they seem almost like a friend .
The few times I 've even considered pirating DS games , I 've felt very uneasy , the thought of it feels just wrong , to me .
The RIAA , on the other hand , does not invoke such warm , fuzzy feelings to just about anyone .
Perhaps if they stopped suing so many people , and installing rootkits on people 's computers , they might have some more goodwill left.Those are just my thoughts .
I know plenty of people do n't derive the same satisfaction from having a big collection of legit games/music/whatever , but I really think that if the RIAA stopped suing people and instead built up a strong relationship with its customers like many gaming companies , and Apple , they might see similar loyalty and less piracy.Also , suing little kids is stupid on a logical level .
I pirated plenty of software when I was around 12 or so because I had no money .
Ten years later , I have plenty of disposable income , and provide the entertainment industries with many thousands of dollars in revenue a year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My personal thoughts are the best way to counter piracy is to make people like you.
I can only really give examples from my experience, as I don't really know other people's piracy habits.I am an avid gamer of all systems, although I rarely game on my PC anymore, as it's typically too much of a hassle with configurations and DRM.
The DRM decreases my chance of buying a PC game, (especially if there's a good console version) and makes me more likely to pirate.
As an example, I bought a copy of Spore.
My bought copy of Spore thought I was pirating it.
After screwing around for a bit, I decided to say screw it, and downloaded a pirated copy from the Pirate Bay.
As a result, were I actually interested in the Sims 3, I feel I'd be much more likely to pirate it, now that EA's ticked me off.I have around 200+ console + handheld games, none of them pirated.
Several of my systems (DS + PSP in particular) have very active "homebrew" communities, that make it very easy to acquire "backups".
Despite the ease of which I know I could get handheld games for free, I choose to buy them, because I derive a great deal of value in having the original box + manual + disc/card to display, and because I actually like the companies.Pirating a game from, say, Nintendo to me would feel like kicking Mario in the groin.
Nintendo (and others) have brought me such good times, that they seem almost like a friend.
The few times I've even considered pirating DS games, I've felt very uneasy, the thought of it feels just wrong, to me.
The RIAA, on the other hand, does not invoke such warm, fuzzy feelings to just about anyone.
Perhaps if they stopped suing so many people, and installing rootkits on people's computers, they might have some more goodwill left.Those are just my thoughts.
I know plenty of people don't derive the same satisfaction from having a big collection of legit games/music/whatever, but I really think that if the RIAA stopped suing people and instead built up a strong relationship with its customers like many gaming companies, and Apple, they might see similar loyalty and less piracy.Also, suing little kids is stupid on a logical level.
I pirated plenty of software when I was around 12 or so because I had no money.
Ten years later, I have plenty of disposable income, and provide the entertainment industries with many thousands of dollars in revenue a year.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28388251</id>
	<title>So Tell Me This....</title>
	<author>Musical\_Joe</author>
	<datestamp>1245418920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My company released a game called Squibs Arcade for the iPhone.  It's very polished, received great reviews and the humour (how it takes the piss out of AAA games) is very<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.

We put it out at the cheapest possible price on the app store.

3 days after release it was already hacked and available on pirate sites.  59p and its pirated...

I guess pirating can be good if it raises awareness so enough people do go out there and pay for it, but we haven't hit that mark by a long way!

Nope, I'm not having a whinge, I'm merely pointing out that for all the quite sensible comments above about DRM, price and quality which I agree with, even from a game developer / studio point of view, there's ALWAYS going to be someone who wants it for free rather than pay just 59p.

<a href="http://www.squibsarcade.com/" title="squibsarcade.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.squibsarcade.com/</a> [squibsarcade.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>My company released a game called Squibs Arcade for the iPhone .
It 's very polished , received great reviews and the humour ( how it takes the piss out of AAA games ) is very / .
We put it out at the cheapest possible price on the app store .
3 days after release it was already hacked and available on pirate sites .
59p and its pirated.. . I guess pirating can be good if it raises awareness so enough people do go out there and pay for it , but we have n't hit that mark by a long way !
Nope , I 'm not having a whinge , I 'm merely pointing out that for all the quite sensible comments above about DRM , price and quality which I agree with , even from a game developer / studio point of view , there 's ALWAYS going to be someone who wants it for free rather than pay just 59p .
http : //www.squibsarcade.com/ [ squibsarcade.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My company released a game called Squibs Arcade for the iPhone.
It's very polished, received great reviews and the humour (how it takes the piss out of AAA games) is very /.
We put it out at the cheapest possible price on the app store.
3 days after release it was already hacked and available on pirate sites.
59p and its pirated...

I guess pirating can be good if it raises awareness so enough people do go out there and pay for it, but we haven't hit that mark by a long way!
Nope, I'm not having a whinge, I'm merely pointing out that for all the quite sensible comments above about DRM, price and quality which I agree with, even from a game developer / studio point of view, there's ALWAYS going to be someone who wants it for free rather than pay just 59p.
http://www.squibsarcade.com/ [squibsarcade.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28383195</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that.</title>
	<author>Inschato</author>
	<datestamp>1245330300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>2: I bought a car, and it wore out, so I went out and stole another one from a dealer lot.</p></div><p>More like I bought a car that had a bomb that would break the engine after driving 1000 miles, so I took out the bomb.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>2 : I bought a car , and it wore out , so I went out and stole another one from a dealer lot.More like I bought a car that had a bomb that would break the engine after driving 1000 miles , so I took out the bomb .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2: I bought a car, and it wore out, so I went out and stole another one from a dealer lot.More like I bought a car that had a bomb that would break the engine after driving 1000 miles, so I took out the bomb.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382019</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28387601</id>
	<title>Propaganda</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245414180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem with all of these campaigns is that they take the stance that "not licit" implies "immoral" - which, unfortunately for them, is a non-sequitur. Plenty of law is simply there to keep society, or markets, or whatever, ticking along within reasonable bounds. Sometimes law becomes outdated or irrelevant. Sometimes it's simply just bad. In the case of copyright it's undoubtedly a technical mechanism, and as used by Big Media it is being applied in ways for which it was never conceived. That wouldn't be a problem if society as a whole were prepared and able to enter into a meaningful debate about the topic; in such a case I'd be prepared not only to argue my corner but also, even, to find myself in the minority and abide by the consensus. Sadly here simply is no meaningful such debate taking place - just corporate interests desperately trying to screw every last penny out of increasingly broken business models, and far too many uncritical politicians either unable or unwilling to stand back and actually think constructively and independently.  As a result all I get is "messages" being shoved down my throat to the effect that copyright infringement is "theft" (umm - no, I'm quite clear on what constitutes theft, thanks, and no amount of Orwellian double-speak is going to alter that) and "wrong" (no, not remotely - copyright is a technical mechanism conceived for a technical purpose, and it's far from clear that it's currently serving that purpose), And not only am I not therefore prepared to have my "heart and mind" won over to their cause, but also I see it as my duty to make sure that I do my best to ensure that my kids learn to think critically for themselves and recognise weasel words and downright propaganda for what it is (a duty of any responsible parent). If we could only could get a few politicians doing the same thing I'd be a seriously happy man.</p><p>(Oh - I'm SO glad that "they" have decided that the "You wouldn't steal a..." campaign has had its day. Sadly, that won't stop me having it shoved down my throat every time I load one of several of the DVDs that I already own. Unimpressed? That's hardly the word.<br>Actually, they were partly right. I *wouldn't* steal a DVD. But download a film that I missed on TV the previous evening and failed to - quite legally - record? In a heartbeat. And burn it to DVD to watch again later? Sure. Would I also buy it, if I enjoyed it?  Quite probably, in fact. So you see - in this as in many things, between black and white there are endless shades of grey. And no corporate interests are going to gain anything other than my scorn by trying to pretend otherwise - let alone by spurious, fallacious and insulting appeals to some non-existent moral high-ground.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with all of these campaigns is that they take the stance that " not licit " implies " immoral " - which , unfortunately for them , is a non-sequitur .
Plenty of law is simply there to keep society , or markets , or whatever , ticking along within reasonable bounds .
Sometimes law becomes outdated or irrelevant .
Sometimes it 's simply just bad .
In the case of copyright it 's undoubtedly a technical mechanism , and as used by Big Media it is being applied in ways for which it was never conceived .
That would n't be a problem if society as a whole were prepared and able to enter into a meaningful debate about the topic ; in such a case I 'd be prepared not only to argue my corner but also , even , to find myself in the minority and abide by the consensus .
Sadly here simply is no meaningful such debate taking place - just corporate interests desperately trying to screw every last penny out of increasingly broken business models , and far too many uncritical politicians either unable or unwilling to stand back and actually think constructively and independently .
As a result all I get is " messages " being shoved down my throat to the effect that copyright infringement is " theft " ( umm - no , I 'm quite clear on what constitutes theft , thanks , and no amount of Orwellian double-speak is going to alter that ) and " wrong " ( no , not remotely - copyright is a technical mechanism conceived for a technical purpose , and it 's far from clear that it 's currently serving that purpose ) , And not only am I not therefore prepared to have my " heart and mind " won over to their cause , but also I see it as my duty to make sure that I do my best to ensure that my kids learn to think critically for themselves and recognise weasel words and downright propaganda for what it is ( a duty of any responsible parent ) .
If we could only could get a few politicians doing the same thing I 'd be a seriously happy man .
( Oh - I 'm SO glad that " they " have decided that the " You would n't steal a... " campaign has had its day .
Sadly , that wo n't stop me having it shoved down my throat every time I load one of several of the DVDs that I already own .
Unimpressed ? That 's hardly the word.Actually , they were partly right .
I * would n't * steal a DVD .
But download a film that I missed on TV the previous evening and failed to - quite legally - record ?
In a heartbeat .
And burn it to DVD to watch again later ?
Sure. Would I also buy it , if I enjoyed it ?
Quite probably , in fact .
So you see - in this as in many things , between black and white there are endless shades of grey .
And no corporate interests are going to gain anything other than my scorn by trying to pretend otherwise - let alone by spurious , fallacious and insulting appeals to some non-existent moral high-ground .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with all of these campaigns is that they take the stance that "not licit" implies "immoral" - which, unfortunately for them, is a non-sequitur.
Plenty of law is simply there to keep society, or markets, or whatever, ticking along within reasonable bounds.
Sometimes law becomes outdated or irrelevant.
Sometimes it's simply just bad.
In the case of copyright it's undoubtedly a technical mechanism, and as used by Big Media it is being applied in ways for which it was never conceived.
That wouldn't be a problem if society as a whole were prepared and able to enter into a meaningful debate about the topic; in such a case I'd be prepared not only to argue my corner but also, even, to find myself in the minority and abide by the consensus.
Sadly here simply is no meaningful such debate taking place - just corporate interests desperately trying to screw every last penny out of increasingly broken business models, and far too many uncritical politicians either unable or unwilling to stand back and actually think constructively and independently.
As a result all I get is "messages" being shoved down my throat to the effect that copyright infringement is "theft" (umm - no, I'm quite clear on what constitutes theft, thanks, and no amount of Orwellian double-speak is going to alter that) and "wrong" (no, not remotely - copyright is a technical mechanism conceived for a technical purpose, and it's far from clear that it's currently serving that purpose), And not only am I not therefore prepared to have my "heart and mind" won over to their cause, but also I see it as my duty to make sure that I do my best to ensure that my kids learn to think critically for themselves and recognise weasel words and downright propaganda for what it is (a duty of any responsible parent).
If we could only could get a few politicians doing the same thing I'd be a seriously happy man.
(Oh - I'm SO glad that "they" have decided that the "You wouldn't steal a..." campaign has had its day.
Sadly, that won't stop me having it shoved down my throat every time I load one of several of the DVDs that I already own.
Unimpressed? That's hardly the word.Actually, they were partly right.
I *wouldn't* steal a DVD.
But download a film that I missed on TV the previous evening and failed to - quite legally - record?
In a heartbeat.
And burn it to DVD to watch again later?
Sure. Would I also buy it, if I enjoyed it?
Quite probably, in fact.
So you see - in this as in many things, between black and white there are endless shades of grey.
And no corporate interests are going to gain anything other than my scorn by trying to pretend otherwise - let alone by spurious, fallacious and insulting appeals to some non-existent moral high-ground.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28384039</id>
	<title>Re:Make them like you</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1245334980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Several of my systems (DS + PSP in particular) have very active "homebrew" communities [...] Pirating a game from, say, Nintendo to me would feel like kicking Mario in the groin.</p></div><p>What makes Nintendo better than, say, Capitol Records? For one thing, Nintendo and Sony sued Lik Sang out of existence for selling devices used to run homebrew.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Several of my systems ( DS + PSP in particular ) have very active " homebrew " communities [ ... ] Pirating a game from , say , Nintendo to me would feel like kicking Mario in the groin.What makes Nintendo better than , say , Capitol Records ?
For one thing , Nintendo and Sony sued Lik Sang out of existence for selling devices used to run homebrew .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Several of my systems (DS + PSP in particular) have very active "homebrew" communities [...] Pirating a game from, say, Nintendo to me would feel like kicking Mario in the groin.What makes Nintendo better than, say, Capitol Records?
For one thing, Nintendo and Sony sued Lik Sang out of existence for selling devices used to run homebrew.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382393</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381885</id>
	<title>Re:A ha!</title>
	<author>Wowsers</author>
	<datestamp>1245324780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, they want control back of your wallet. So stop spending money on computer games, mobile phones, or something else, help out those poor people in the RIAA and film industry.</p><p>If they want to win the hearts of people the solution is ALL with the RIAA / Film industry.</p><p>1) Stop producing cr@p that nobody is interested in. How many remakes of classic films can you do, do you think people don't realise a rip-off? How many formulaic "artists" are in the music charts when there's other stuff out there which does not get a look in because of the rigged radio market.</p><p>2) Stop selling the DVD's and CD's at such high prices. The market has moved on and there's competition for the money, people have more things they can buy, as I mentioned already, computer games, mobile phones etc.. It's not the 1960's where for teenagers there was music, film, and that's it.</p><p>3) Stop loading DVD's with unskippable cr@p (Disney the worst offender), stop putting idiotic unskippable trailers on copyrights - we just bought your legit DVD damn it! At least with VHS you could rewind to a spot where the actual content starts!</p><p>4) Stop putting crapware on CD's, we want Red Book Standard CD's, and we also want the cases and CD's to have the logo on it to prove they are REAL audio CD's, not the fake crap put out today.</p><p>5) Stop putting DRM on legit downloads. It p1sses me off that such and such file is restricted to what file format a device will play (with DRM built in to the player). I don't want to pay extra for a MP3 player to make some DRM licensee richer.</p><p>6) Improve the audio quality of Audio CD's, and digital downloads. Audio CD's are chasing the loudness battle - I recently bought a compilation CD and had to give it away because I had ear ache after 5 minutes of this unlistenable compressed music. Digital downloads are also not much better, where are the file formats like FLAC on ALL download sites, not just highly specialised sites. Hell, you can buy a CD then rip it to make a FLAC and it will outclass and MP3.</p><p>7) Get rid of the copy restrictions on DVD's, HD discs, camcorders, and the other formats.</p><p>MAYBE after all that, downloaders MIGHT think about buying more music and films.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , they want control back of your wallet .
So stop spending money on computer games , mobile phones , or something else , help out those poor people in the RIAA and film industry.If they want to win the hearts of people the solution is ALL with the RIAA / Film industry.1 ) Stop producing cr @ p that nobody is interested in .
How many remakes of classic films can you do , do you think people do n't realise a rip-off ?
How many formulaic " artists " are in the music charts when there 's other stuff out there which does not get a look in because of the rigged radio market.2 ) Stop selling the DVD 's and CD 's at such high prices .
The market has moved on and there 's competition for the money , people have more things they can buy , as I mentioned already , computer games , mobile phones etc.. It 's not the 1960 's where for teenagers there was music , film , and that 's it.3 ) Stop loading DVD 's with unskippable cr @ p ( Disney the worst offender ) , stop putting idiotic unskippable trailers on copyrights - we just bought your legit DVD damn it !
At least with VHS you could rewind to a spot where the actual content starts ! 4 ) Stop putting crapware on CD 's , we want Red Book Standard CD 's , and we also want the cases and CD 's to have the logo on it to prove they are REAL audio CD 's , not the fake crap put out today.5 ) Stop putting DRM on legit downloads .
It p1sses me off that such and such file is restricted to what file format a device will play ( with DRM built in to the player ) .
I do n't want to pay extra for a MP3 player to make some DRM licensee richer.6 ) Improve the audio quality of Audio CD 's , and digital downloads .
Audio CD 's are chasing the loudness battle - I recently bought a compilation CD and had to give it away because I had ear ache after 5 minutes of this unlistenable compressed music .
Digital downloads are also not much better , where are the file formats like FLAC on ALL download sites , not just highly specialised sites .
Hell , you can buy a CD then rip it to make a FLAC and it will outclass and MP3.7 ) Get rid of the copy restrictions on DVD 's , HD discs , camcorders , and the other formats.MAYBE after all that , downloaders MIGHT think about buying more music and films .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, they want control back of your wallet.
So stop spending money on computer games, mobile phones, or something else, help out those poor people in the RIAA and film industry.If they want to win the hearts of people the solution is ALL with the RIAA / Film industry.1) Stop producing cr@p that nobody is interested in.
How many remakes of classic films can you do, do you think people don't realise a rip-off?
How many formulaic "artists" are in the music charts when there's other stuff out there which does not get a look in because of the rigged radio market.2) Stop selling the DVD's and CD's at such high prices.
The market has moved on and there's competition for the money, people have more things they can buy, as I mentioned already, computer games, mobile phones etc.. It's not the 1960's where for teenagers there was music, film, and that's it.3) Stop loading DVD's with unskippable cr@p (Disney the worst offender), stop putting idiotic unskippable trailers on copyrights - we just bought your legit DVD damn it!
At least with VHS you could rewind to a spot where the actual content starts!4) Stop putting crapware on CD's, we want Red Book Standard CD's, and we also want the cases and CD's to have the logo on it to prove they are REAL audio CD's, not the fake crap put out today.5) Stop putting DRM on legit downloads.
It p1sses me off that such and such file is restricted to what file format a device will play (with DRM built in to the player).
I don't want to pay extra for a MP3 player to make some DRM licensee richer.6) Improve the audio quality of Audio CD's, and digital downloads.
Audio CD's are chasing the loudness battle - I recently bought a compilation CD and had to give it away because I had ear ache after 5 minutes of this unlistenable compressed music.
Digital downloads are also not much better, where are the file formats like FLAC on ALL download sites, not just highly specialised sites.
Hell, you can buy a CD then rip it to make a FLAC and it will outclass and MP3.7) Get rid of the copy restrictions on DVD's, HD discs, camcorders, and the other formats.MAYBE after all that, downloaders MIGHT think about buying more music and films.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381345</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28393147</id>
	<title>A Day Without Songs</title>
	<author>HTH NE1</author>
	<datestamp>1245439920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd like to see the RIAA promote a day without songs. For one 24-hour period, rescind every media outlet the right to broadcast their songs. Stations could either shut down for the day (maybe do some needed maintenance) or find something else to broadcast.</p><p>It would be a interesting litmus test on just how badly the public needs their product.</p><p>If they'd do it on the 3rd of November, they could call it Anthony Fremont Day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd like to see the RIAA promote a day without songs .
For one 24-hour period , rescind every media outlet the right to broadcast their songs .
Stations could either shut down for the day ( maybe do some needed maintenance ) or find something else to broadcast.It would be a interesting litmus test on just how badly the public needs their product.If they 'd do it on the 3rd of November , they could call it Anthony Fremont Day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd like to see the RIAA promote a day without songs.
For one 24-hour period, rescind every media outlet the right to broadcast their songs.
Stations could either shut down for the day (maybe do some needed maintenance) or find something else to broadcast.It would be a interesting litmus test on just how badly the public needs their product.If they'd do it on the 3rd of November, they could call it Anthony Fremont Day.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28383939</id>
	<title>Re:Civil Disobedience</title>
	<author>icebraining</author>
	<datestamp>1245334380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's 50 years *after he/she dies*. How is copyright helping the dead?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's 50 years * after he/she dies * .
How is copyright helping the dead ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's 50 years *after he/she dies*.
How is copyright helping the dead?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28383389</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381899</id>
	<title>Re:A ha!</title>
	<author>interkin3tic</author>
	<datestamp>1245324900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So they admit they want to control our minds!</p></div><p>Wonder what they'll do with downloaders' hearts.  Barbecue?  Kentucky fried?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So they admit they want to control our minds ! Wonder what they 'll do with downloaders ' hearts .
Barbecue ? Kentucky fried ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So they admit they want to control our minds!Wonder what they'll do with downloaders' hearts.
Barbecue?  Kentucky fried?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381345</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382037</id>
	<title>Summary doesn't cover counterarguments well.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245325440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For a more sophisticated response which has nothing to do with how control-freaky DRM is, or how much artists do or don't deserve:</p><p><a href="http://www.piratpartiet.se/wiki/Why\_We\_Are\_Right" title="piratpartiet.se" rel="nofollow">http://www.piratpartiet.se/wiki/Why\_We\_Are\_Right</a> [piratpartiet.se]</p><p>As long as the basic premise fails to shift from the idea that information is property, we will keep running into an ideological wall.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For a more sophisticated response which has nothing to do with how control-freaky DRM is , or how much artists do or do n't deserve : http : //www.piratpartiet.se/wiki/Why \ _We \ _Are \ _Right [ piratpartiet.se ] As long as the basic premise fails to shift from the idea that information is property , we will keep running into an ideological wall .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For a more sophisticated response which has nothing to do with how control-freaky DRM is, or how much artists do or don't deserve:http://www.piratpartiet.se/wiki/Why\_We\_Are\_Right [piratpartiet.se]As long as the basic premise fails to shift from the idea that information is property, we will keep running into an ideological wall.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382873</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that.</title>
	<author>Schuthrax</author>
	<datestamp>1245329220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>#2 sounds a little more like this to me:</p><p>2. I bought a stereo for my car, when the car died I took the stereo with me.</p><p>The conclusion being that, the way things currently work, I would not be allowed to take my stereo with me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext># 2 sounds a little more like this to me : 2 .
I bought a stereo for my car , when the car died I took the stereo with me.The conclusion being that , the way things currently work , I would not be allowed to take my stereo with me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>#2 sounds a little more like this to me:2.
I bought a stereo for my car, when the car died I took the stereo with me.The conclusion being that, the way things currently work, I would not be allowed to take my stereo with me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382019</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381365</id>
	<title>fixed the quote</title>
	<author>u4ya</author>
	<datestamp>1245322500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>'fear campaigns can change hearts and minds... If you do them right you can make a material impact on people's behaviour.'</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>'fear campaigns can change hearts and minds... If you do them right you can make a material impact on people 's behaviour .
'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'fear campaigns can change hearts and minds... If you do them right you can make a material impact on people's behaviour.
'</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382813</id>
	<title>How to solve 50\% of the problem</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1245329040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>1) Stop forcing people to watch through "piracy is a crime and teh FBI will jail you for 10 years if you bring your camera phone into a movie theater" for 5 minutes before every movie. Doing that just makes the TPB version a <i>superior</i> product to your version. It's basic capitalism - don't cripple your own product. It's that simple.</htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) Stop forcing people to watch through " piracy is a crime and teh FBI will jail you for 10 years if you bring your camera phone into a movie theater " for 5 minutes before every movie .
Doing that just makes the TPB version a superior product to your version .
It 's basic capitalism - do n't cripple your own product .
It 's that simple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) Stop forcing people to watch through "piracy is a crime and teh FBI will jail you for 10 years if you bring your camera phone into a movie theater" for 5 minutes before every movie.
Doing that just makes the TPB version a superior product to your version.
It's basic capitalism - don't cripple your own product.
It's that simple.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28388593</id>
	<title>Re:Civil Disobedience</title>
	<author>Dog-Cow</author>
	<datestamp>1245420660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are correct that 20 years is somewhat arbitrary (though that's the same or close to the same length as patents), but you missed a crucial point:  50 years now is AFTER the creator has died.  It is completely impossible to claim that the current term length is to encourage the creation of new works.  Unless there are a lot more zombies out there creating art than I would have believed.</p><p>And that is why current copyright law is immoral and it is only immoral people who follow such laws.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are correct that 20 years is somewhat arbitrary ( though that 's the same or close to the same length as patents ) , but you missed a crucial point : 50 years now is AFTER the creator has died .
It is completely impossible to claim that the current term length is to encourage the creation of new works .
Unless there are a lot more zombies out there creating art than I would have believed.And that is why current copyright law is immoral and it is only immoral people who follow such laws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are correct that 20 years is somewhat arbitrary (though that's the same or close to the same length as patents), but you missed a crucial point:  50 years now is AFTER the creator has died.
It is completely impossible to claim that the current term length is to encourage the creation of new works.
Unless there are a lot more zombies out there creating art than I would have believed.And that is why current copyright law is immoral and it is only immoral people who follow such laws.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28383389</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28391425</id>
	<title>Re:A ha!</title>
	<author>mrboyd</author>
	<datestamp>1245432600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh yes the "unskippable" bits. I bought a DVD for the first time in months last week and I almost threw my dvd player out the window after 10 long minutes of FBI warning in twenty languages and three force-fed trailers for completely unrelated shit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh yes the " unskippable " bits .
I bought a DVD for the first time in months last week and I almost threw my dvd player out the window after 10 long minutes of FBI warning in twenty languages and three force-fed trailers for completely unrelated shit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh yes the "unskippable" bits.
I bought a DVD for the first time in months last week and I almost threw my dvd player out the window after 10 long minutes of FBI warning in twenty languages and three force-fed trailers for completely unrelated shit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28384205</id>
	<title>Re:A campaign won't make a change</title>
	<author>thePowerOfGrayskull</author>
	<datestamp>1245336120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And before anyone can say "but that does not give you the right to steal" I have to say "so fucking what?!" Look. Fighting against "wrongness" in any way available is how the USA gained its independence. Some colonials wanted to stay connected to the crown of England and didn't want any part of it. Sounds like the "no right to steal" crowd.</p></div><p>I'm sorry, are you really drawing parallels between the American Revolution and your petty downloading?  Please.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And before anyone can say " but that does not give you the right to steal " I have to say " so fucking what ? !
" Look .
Fighting against " wrongness " in any way available is how the USA gained its independence .
Some colonials wanted to stay connected to the crown of England and did n't want any part of it .
Sounds like the " no right to steal " crowd.I 'm sorry , are you really drawing parallels between the American Revolution and your petty downloading ?
Please .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And before anyone can say "but that does not give you the right to steal" I have to say "so fucking what?!
" Look.
Fighting against "wrongness" in any way available is how the USA gained its independence.
Some colonials wanted to stay connected to the crown of England and didn't want any part of it.
Sounds like the "no right to steal" crowd.I'm sorry, are you really drawing parallels between the American Revolution and your petty downloading?
Please.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381893</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28383137</id>
	<title>Re:Well... It is</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245330060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The movie was produced to make money..</p></div> </blockquote><p>
You sure would think so, wouldn't you?  On the face of it, your statement is common sense.
</p><p>
But go to the store and try to find a DRM-free movie for sale.  It's not there.  Common sense says they want money, but their behavior says they aren't even slightly interested.
</p><p>
I'll look at what they do, not what they say.  The movie was produced to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. uh<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. beats the fuck outta me.  Sell me a movie that I can play, and I'll believe that your business involves selling.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The movie was produced to make money. . You sure would think so , would n't you ?
On the face of it , your statement is common sense .
But go to the store and try to find a DRM-free movie for sale .
It 's not there .
Common sense says they want money , but their behavior says they are n't even slightly interested .
I 'll look at what they do , not what they say .
The movie was produced to .. uh .. beats the fuck outta me .
Sell me a movie that I can play , and I 'll believe that your business involves selling .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The movie was produced to make money.. 
You sure would think so, wouldn't you?
On the face of it, your statement is common sense.
But go to the store and try to find a DRM-free movie for sale.
It's not there.
Common sense says they want money, but their behavior says they aren't even slightly interested.
I'll look at what they do, not what they say.
The movie was produced to .. uh .. beats the fuck outta me.
Sell me a movie that I can play, and I'll believe that your business involves selling.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28387351</id>
	<title>Re:A campaign won't make a change</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245411060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And before anyone can say "but that does not give you the right to steal" I have to say "so fucking what?!"  Look.  Fighting against "wrongness" in any way available is how the USA gained its independence.  Some colonials wanted to stay connected to the crown of England and didn't want any part of it.  Sounds like the "no right to steal" crowd.</p></div><p>There were pirates of copyrighted material before DRM. So the music industry is just fighting wrongness any way available.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And before anyone can say " but that does not give you the right to steal " I have to say " so fucking what ? !
" Look .
Fighting against " wrongness " in any way available is how the USA gained its independence .
Some colonials wanted to stay connected to the crown of England and did n't want any part of it .
Sounds like the " no right to steal " crowd.There were pirates of copyrighted material before DRM .
So the music industry is just fighting wrongness any way available .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And before anyone can say "but that does not give you the right to steal" I have to say "so fucking what?!
"  Look.
Fighting against "wrongness" in any way available is how the USA gained its independence.
Some colonials wanted to stay connected to the crown of England and didn't want any part of it.
Sounds like the "no right to steal" crowd.There were pirates of copyrighted material before DRM.
So the music industry is just fighting wrongness any way available.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381893</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28386869</id>
	<title>Re:A ha!</title>
	<author>gsslay</author>
	<datestamp>1245405480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>1) Stop producing cr@p that nobody is interested in.</p></div><p>But people <i>are</i> interested in it, otherwise why do you think it sells?  Face it; most people have unadventurous, unoriginal, formulaic tastes in movies and music. The lowest common denominator sells best and get most exposure <i>because</i> it is the lowest common denominator.  The sooner the people who whine about this kind of thing realise this, the sooner we can move on and discuss the real issues.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>2) Stop selling the DVD's and CD's at such high prices.</p></div><p>Market forces have consistently driven down the price of both over the last 10 years.  No-one needs to be told to do this, market forces obliges them to.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>6) Improve the audio quality of Audio CD's, and digital downloads.</p></div><p>If you don't like the quality, don't buy it. They'll get the message. This is how market forces work.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>MAYBE after all that, downloaders MIGHT think about buying more music and films.</p></div><p>Don't count on it.  As long as downloading is free, and buying isn't, I think you'll find that there'll always be reasons given for not buying.  Just not necessarily the honest ones.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) Stop producing cr @ p that nobody is interested in.But people are interested in it , otherwise why do you think it sells ?
Face it ; most people have unadventurous , unoriginal , formulaic tastes in movies and music .
The lowest common denominator sells best and get most exposure because it is the lowest common denominator .
The sooner the people who whine about this kind of thing realise this , the sooner we can move on and discuss the real issues.2 ) Stop selling the DVD 's and CD 's at such high prices.Market forces have consistently driven down the price of both over the last 10 years .
No-one needs to be told to do this , market forces obliges them to.6 ) Improve the audio quality of Audio CD 's , and digital downloads.If you do n't like the quality , do n't buy it .
They 'll get the message .
This is how market forces work.MAYBE after all that , downloaders MIGHT think about buying more music and films.Do n't count on it .
As long as downloading is free , and buying is n't , I think you 'll find that there 'll always be reasons given for not buying .
Just not necessarily the honest ones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) Stop producing cr@p that nobody is interested in.But people are interested in it, otherwise why do you think it sells?
Face it; most people have unadventurous, unoriginal, formulaic tastes in movies and music.
The lowest common denominator sells best and get most exposure because it is the lowest common denominator.
The sooner the people who whine about this kind of thing realise this, the sooner we can move on and discuss the real issues.2) Stop selling the DVD's and CD's at such high prices.Market forces have consistently driven down the price of both over the last 10 years.
No-one needs to be told to do this, market forces obliges them to.6) Improve the audio quality of Audio CD's, and digital downloads.If you don't like the quality, don't buy it.
They'll get the message.
This is how market forces work.MAYBE after all that, downloaders MIGHT think about buying more music and films.Don't count on it.
As long as downloading is free, and buying isn't, I think you'll find that there'll always be reasons given for not buying.
Just not necessarily the honest ones.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381831</id>
	<title>Re:Well... It is</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245324600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok, this is coming from someone who <i>does not</i> download the music or movies he watches.</p><p>It *IS NOT* theft.  Theft has a precise legal definition to which downloading does not apply, according to the American courts of law.</p><p>No matter how dress up your straw man, the producer of downloaded content <i>still has that content.</i></p><p>But don't go around making up reasons why it is morally wrong to treat information (which does not follow the same laws of physics as physical property) differently than how one treats physical property.  You are only lying to yourself.</p><p>I will add that this is not a problem of morality, but of economics.  It is morally wrong to steal because doing so deprives the owner of the item stolen.  That is why it is wrong.  Whether or not you paid for it means nothing, morally speaking.  Whether or not you paid for something means <i>everything</i> economically (and legally) speaking (and that provided the item in question was actually for sale).</p><p>Theft is not illegal because it is morally wrong.  It is illegal because of the severe economic consequences that it has.  Downloading does not have these same severe economic consequences, and can actually be very economically beneficial (according to Harvard, anyway).</p><p>Don't confuse morality and legality, don't confuse theft and copyright infringement, don't try to absolutize your obviously subjective moral positions, and don't be surprised when people who are more intelligent than you take philosophical objection to the shallow, oversimplified tripe you are spouting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , this is coming from someone who does not download the music or movies he watches.It * IS NOT * theft .
Theft has a precise legal definition to which downloading does not apply , according to the American courts of law.No matter how dress up your straw man , the producer of downloaded content still has that content.But do n't go around making up reasons why it is morally wrong to treat information ( which does not follow the same laws of physics as physical property ) differently than how one treats physical property .
You are only lying to yourself.I will add that this is not a problem of morality , but of economics .
It is morally wrong to steal because doing so deprives the owner of the item stolen .
That is why it is wrong .
Whether or not you paid for it means nothing , morally speaking .
Whether or not you paid for something means everything economically ( and legally ) speaking ( and that provided the item in question was actually for sale ) .Theft is not illegal because it is morally wrong .
It is illegal because of the severe economic consequences that it has .
Downloading does not have these same severe economic consequences , and can actually be very economically beneficial ( according to Harvard , anyway ) .Do n't confuse morality and legality , do n't confuse theft and copyright infringement , do n't try to absolutize your obviously subjective moral positions , and do n't be surprised when people who are more intelligent than you take philosophical objection to the shallow , oversimplified tripe you are spouting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, this is coming from someone who does not download the music or movies he watches.It *IS NOT* theft.
Theft has a precise legal definition to which downloading does not apply, according to the American courts of law.No matter how dress up your straw man, the producer of downloaded content still has that content.But don't go around making up reasons why it is morally wrong to treat information (which does not follow the same laws of physics as physical property) differently than how one treats physical property.
You are only lying to yourself.I will add that this is not a problem of morality, but of economics.
It is morally wrong to steal because doing so deprives the owner of the item stolen.
That is why it is wrong.
Whether or not you paid for it means nothing, morally speaking.
Whether or not you paid for something means everything economically (and legally) speaking (and that provided the item in question was actually for sale).Theft is not illegal because it is morally wrong.
It is illegal because of the severe economic consequences that it has.
Downloading does not have these same severe economic consequences, and can actually be very economically beneficial (according to Harvard, anyway).Don't confuse morality and legality, don't confuse theft and copyright infringement, don't try to absolutize your obviously subjective moral positions, and don't be surprised when people who are more intelligent than you take philosophical objection to the shallow, oversimplified tripe you are spouting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382307</id>
	<title>Re:Fuck'em</title>
	<author>paazin</author>
	<datestamp>1245326580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Information wants to be free. Don't be Jewish with the knowledge.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Why, are you suggesting that knowledge is catholic?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Information wants to be free .
Do n't be Jewish with the knowledge .
Why , are you suggesting that knowledge is catholic ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Information wants to be free.
Don't be Jewish with the knowledge.
Why, are you suggesting that knowledge is catholic?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381339</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381785</id>
	<title>Re:Well... It is</title>
	<author>iron-kurton</author>
	<datestamp>1245324300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Would you have bought/rented/paid for admission for the movies you downloaded if they weren't available for download?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would you have bought/rented/paid for admission for the movies you downloaded if they were n't available for download ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would you have bought/rented/paid for admission for the movies you downloaded if they weren't available for download?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381529</id>
	<title>They mention the old campaign against home taping</title>
	<author>Space\_Pirate\_Arrr</author>
	<datestamp>1245323160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>...but it seems to escape them that home taping did not kill the music industry!  I guess they just think it means their campaign worked.<br> <br>
And of course I could also mention VHS (aka "The Boston Strangler").</htmltext>
<tokenext>...but it seems to escape them that home taping did not kill the music industry !
I guess they just think it means their campaign worked .
And of course I could also mention VHS ( aka " The Boston Strangler " ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...but it seems to escape them that home taping did not kill the music industry!
I guess they just think it means their campaign worked.
And of course I could also mention VHS (aka "The Boston Strangler").</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28391915</id>
	<title>It will never work for the RIAA and co...</title>
	<author>KingAlanI</author>
	<datestamp>1245434700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Halfassed propaganda campaigns can only go so far<br>The RIAA "well" is "beyond poisoned".</p><p>How to "win hearts and minds" as an artist? Behave properly. It's that simple. I suppose the RIAA interferes with 'their' artists' behavior in this manner</p><p>I don't want to name names because I don't want to get involved in a 'shameless plug' situation, but:</p><p>Step 1. Cousin tells me about a certain music artist that she figured I'd like.<br>Step 2. I check out a couple of the guy's music videos on YouTube, this stuff seems good enough to bother pirating. So I BitTorrent one of his albums<br>Step 3. Listen to whole album a few times, like it.<br>Step 4. Buy his new album [FWIW, the album does 'pass' at RIAARadar]<br>Step 5. (He) Profit!(s)</p><p>This artist has demonstrated that he's cool with this mode of behavior - tone album (the one I downloaded) has a song discussing the "new music industry business model" [is funny], and he goes right out and puts MP3 versions of some of his back catalogue up on the website.</p><p>Note: Not referring to Weird Al here.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Halfassed propaganda campaigns can only go so farThe RIAA " well " is " beyond poisoned " .How to " win hearts and minds " as an artist ?
Behave properly .
It 's that simple .
I suppose the RIAA interferes with 'their ' artists ' behavior in this mannerI do n't want to name names because I do n't want to get involved in a 'shameless plug ' situation , but : Step 1 .
Cousin tells me about a certain music artist that she figured I 'd like.Step 2 .
I check out a couple of the guy 's music videos on YouTube , this stuff seems good enough to bother pirating .
So I BitTorrent one of his albumsStep 3 .
Listen to whole album a few times , like it.Step 4 .
Buy his new album [ FWIW , the album does 'pass ' at RIAARadar ] Step 5 .
( He ) Profit !
( s ) This artist has demonstrated that he 's cool with this mode of behavior - tone album ( the one I downloaded ) has a song discussing the " new music industry business model " [ is funny ] , and he goes right out and puts MP3 versions of some of his back catalogue up on the website.Note : Not referring to Weird Al here .
: P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Halfassed propaganda campaigns can only go so farThe RIAA "well" is "beyond poisoned".How to "win hearts and minds" as an artist?
Behave properly.
It's that simple.
I suppose the RIAA interferes with 'their' artists' behavior in this mannerI don't want to name names because I don't want to get involved in a 'shameless plug' situation, but:Step 1.
Cousin tells me about a certain music artist that she figured I'd like.Step 2.
I check out a couple of the guy's music videos on YouTube, this stuff seems good enough to bother pirating.
So I BitTorrent one of his albumsStep 3.
Listen to whole album a few times, like it.Step 4.
Buy his new album [FWIW, the album does 'pass' at RIAARadar]Step 5.
(He) Profit!
(s)This artist has demonstrated that he's cool with this mode of behavior - tone album (the one I downloaded) has a song discussing the "new music industry business model" [is funny], and he goes right out and puts MP3 versions of some of his back catalogue up on the website.Note: Not referring to Weird Al here.
:P</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28385261</id>
	<title>Re:Exactly</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1245345900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think that's an option anymore.</p><p>We've reached the point where both sides fear that if they give an inch the other side will take a yard. So both sides demand more, by the creed that if you demand something outragous, something you actually want might become reality. In fact, though, the outragous demands you make anger the other side into making even more ludicrous demands. Reaching a middle ground is becoming more and more impossible.</p><p>So you now have on both side people arguing extremes. You have the content industry, demanding heavy DRM, plugging the analog hole, asking for registering your watermarked copy and whatnot, and then they MAY consider stopping treating you, their customer, like a criminal. On the other hand you have people arguing for DRM free CDs that cost practically nothing, filled to the brim with content that they may use as they see fit, and they MAY consider buying it.</p><p>How do you want to meet in the middle there?</p><p>"Peace talks" (and, frankly, the only reason we don't see people shooting at each other here is that neither side sees a benefit in it) have never been led by the extremist parties of warring sides. We'd need to find people on both sides actually willing to find a truce rather than "being right". And even if we could achive an agreement, the extremists on both sides will try to pull it towards their side because they're not happy and satisfied, and the fighting continues.</p><p>There is no solution. It ends when either the RIAA and the Big 5 file for Chapter 7 or every possible consumer of music is in prison.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think that 's an option anymore.We 've reached the point where both sides fear that if they give an inch the other side will take a yard .
So both sides demand more , by the creed that if you demand something outragous , something you actually want might become reality .
In fact , though , the outragous demands you make anger the other side into making even more ludicrous demands .
Reaching a middle ground is becoming more and more impossible.So you now have on both side people arguing extremes .
You have the content industry , demanding heavy DRM , plugging the analog hole , asking for registering your watermarked copy and whatnot , and then they MAY consider stopping treating you , their customer , like a criminal .
On the other hand you have people arguing for DRM free CDs that cost practically nothing , filled to the brim with content that they may use as they see fit , and they MAY consider buying it.How do you want to meet in the middle there ?
" Peace talks " ( and , frankly , the only reason we do n't see people shooting at each other here is that neither side sees a benefit in it ) have never been led by the extremist parties of warring sides .
We 'd need to find people on both sides actually willing to find a truce rather than " being right " .
And even if we could achive an agreement , the extremists on both sides will try to pull it towards their side because they 're not happy and satisfied , and the fighting continues.There is no solution .
It ends when either the RIAA and the Big 5 file for Chapter 7 or every possible consumer of music is in prison .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think that's an option anymore.We've reached the point where both sides fear that if they give an inch the other side will take a yard.
So both sides demand more, by the creed that if you demand something outragous, something you actually want might become reality.
In fact, though, the outragous demands you make anger the other side into making even more ludicrous demands.
Reaching a middle ground is becoming more and more impossible.So you now have on both side people arguing extremes.
You have the content industry, demanding heavy DRM, plugging the analog hole, asking for registering your watermarked copy and whatnot, and then they MAY consider stopping treating you, their customer, like a criminal.
On the other hand you have people arguing for DRM free CDs that cost practically nothing, filled to the brim with content that they may use as they see fit, and they MAY consider buying it.How do you want to meet in the middle there?
"Peace talks" (and, frankly, the only reason we don't see people shooting at each other here is that neither side sees a benefit in it) have never been led by the extremist parties of warring sides.
We'd need to find people on both sides actually willing to find a truce rather than "being right".
And even if we could achive an agreement, the extremists on both sides will try to pull it towards their side because they're not happy and satisfied, and the fighting continues.There is no solution.
It ends when either the RIAA and the Big 5 file for Chapter 7 or every possible consumer of music is in prison.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381545</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28388705</id>
	<title>Any time anyone...</title>
	<author>Tikkun</author>
	<datestamp>1245421080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>... uses the word 'pirate' in a sentence, replace it with 'amateur librarian'. You now know how pirates think, if only subconsciously.<br> <br>

We can spend the next few decades trying to recreate the scarcity of information. Seriously, we can. There is no magical reason why copyright laws have to get more liberal, or that the rent seeking industries of the world will start producing things that people are willing to pay for, or that the government will 'get' file sharing as the baby boomers are replaced by people that have been trading information since the mid 90's.<br> <br>

This won't put humpty dumpty back together. Everyone has their own printing press/itunes store/app store, and has had one since end of the last century. The incredible utility of having computers that can run whatever software a user wants will not be dulled. A business model based on scarcity that used to exist *will* fail. As in the flunky working for $big\_media\_conglomerate that says 'hai guise wii can prevent people from steeling are stuff bi suing people and passing laws to make p2p moar eleegal' is wasting everyone's time and money.<br> <br>

There is no scarcity of information. This is the point of the Internet. Build a business around the artificial creation of scarcity at your job's peril.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... uses the word 'pirate ' in a sentence , replace it with 'amateur librarian' .
You now know how pirates think , if only subconsciously .
We can spend the next few decades trying to recreate the scarcity of information .
Seriously , we can .
There is no magical reason why copyright laws have to get more liberal , or that the rent seeking industries of the world will start producing things that people are willing to pay for , or that the government will 'get ' file sharing as the baby boomers are replaced by people that have been trading information since the mid 90 's .
This wo n't put humpty dumpty back together .
Everyone has their own printing press/itunes store/app store , and has had one since end of the last century .
The incredible utility of having computers that can run whatever software a user wants will not be dulled .
A business model based on scarcity that used to exist * will * fail .
As in the flunky working for $ big \ _media \ _conglomerate that says 'hai guise wii can prevent people from steeling are stuff bi suing people and passing laws to make p2p moar eleegal ' is wasting everyone 's time and money .
There is no scarcity of information .
This is the point of the Internet .
Build a business around the artificial creation of scarcity at your job 's peril .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... uses the word 'pirate' in a sentence, replace it with 'amateur librarian'.
You now know how pirates think, if only subconsciously.
We can spend the next few decades trying to recreate the scarcity of information.
Seriously, we can.
There is no magical reason why copyright laws have to get more liberal, or that the rent seeking industries of the world will start producing things that people are willing to pay for, or that the government will 'get' file sharing as the baby boomers are replaced by people that have been trading information since the mid 90's.
This won't put humpty dumpty back together.
Everyone has their own printing press/itunes store/app store, and has had one since end of the last century.
The incredible utility of having computers that can run whatever software a user wants will not be dulled.
A business model based on scarcity that used to exist *will* fail.
As in the flunky working for $big\_media\_conglomerate that says 'hai guise wii can prevent people from steeling are stuff bi suing people and passing laws to make p2p moar eleegal' is wasting everyone's time and money.
There is no scarcity of information.
This is the point of the Internet.
Build a business around the artificial creation of scarcity at your job's peril.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28389729</id>
	<title>Re:A ha!</title>
	<author>plague3106</author>
	<datestamp>1245425400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>1) Stop producing cr@p that nobody is interested in. How many remakes of classic films can you do, do you think people don't realise a rip-off? How many formulaic "artists" are in the music charts when there's other stuff out there which does not get a look in because of the rigged radio market.</i></p><p>Apparently they aren't producing crap though.  Otherwise, people wouldn't either spend money to see, or spend time to download it.  If nobody listened to the "forumlaic artists" which fill the charts, they wouldn't be filling the charts, would they?  Clearly enough people LIKE the content that they are willingly consuming it.</p><p><i>2) Stop selling the DVD's and CD's at such high prices. The market has moved on and there's competition for the money, people have more things they can buy, as I mentioned already, computer games, mobile phones etc.. It's not the 1960's where for teenagers there was music, film, and that's it.</i></p><p>$1.00 for an unrestricted MP3 is a "high price?"  $20 for a DVD is too expensive?  Especially compared to a PS3 game, which runs around $60 new, or even Wii games, which run around $40 new.</p><p><i>3) Stop loading DVD's with unskippable cr@p (Disney the worst offender), stop putting idiotic unskippable trailers on copyrights - we just bought your legit DVD damn it! At least with VHS you could rewind to a spot where the actual content starts!</i></p><p>I rarely find a DVD where I can't skip the previews.  Of course, sometimes I actually want to watch them, because they advertise similar films I would likely enjoy.  Then again, I'm a bit too mature to be watching Disney movies, so maybe that's the difference.</p><p><i>4) Stop putting crapware on CD's, we want Red Book Standard CD's, and we also want the cases and CD's to have the logo on it to prove they are REAL audio CD's, not the fake crap put out today.</i></p><p>Um, most CDs are redbook.  And at any rate, you can build the full MP3 album of just about anything over at Amazon.com.  But then, that's how I've been buying music exclusively for a while now... I didn't realize anyone actually bought CDs anymore.</p><p><i>5) Stop putting DRM on legit downloads. It p1sses me off that such and such file is restricted to what file format a device will play (with DRM built in to the player). I don't want to pay extra for a MP3 player to make some DRM licensee richer.</i></p><p>Again, have you heard of Amazon.com?  $1 per song isn't anymore than iTunes.</p><p><i>6) Improve the audio quality of Audio CD's, and digital downloads. Audio CD's are chasing the loudness battle - I recently bought a compilation CD and had to give it away because I had ear ache after 5 minutes of this unlistenable compressed music. Digital downloads are also not much better, where are the file formats like FLAC on ALL download sites, not just highly specialised sites. Hell, you can buy a CD then rip it to make a FLAC and it will outclass and MP3.</i></p><p>MP3 is fine as long as the bitrate is high enough.  I think amazon's are 256, and sound perfectly fine to me.  As far as loudness... you have a volume control on your audio device, right?</p><p><i>7) Get rid of the copy restrictions on DVD's, HD discs, camcorders, and the other formats.</i></p><p>Don't have any BR discs, but I've been able to move a DVD onto my PSP so I have something to wath on the plane.  My camcorder doesn't have any restrictions I know of.</p><p><i>MAYBE after all that, downloaders MIGHT think about buying more music and films.</i></p><p>Oh, so you expect them to do everything you want, on the hope that you MIGHT stop stealing their content?  Sorry, but it seems things are improving, and more and more content is available for legal download.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) Stop producing cr @ p that nobody is interested in .
How many remakes of classic films can you do , do you think people do n't realise a rip-off ?
How many formulaic " artists " are in the music charts when there 's other stuff out there which does not get a look in because of the rigged radio market.Apparently they are n't producing crap though .
Otherwise , people would n't either spend money to see , or spend time to download it .
If nobody listened to the " forumlaic artists " which fill the charts , they would n't be filling the charts , would they ?
Clearly enough people LIKE the content that they are willingly consuming it.2 ) Stop selling the DVD 's and CD 's at such high prices .
The market has moved on and there 's competition for the money , people have more things they can buy , as I mentioned already , computer games , mobile phones etc.. It 's not the 1960 's where for teenagers there was music , film , and that 's it. $ 1.00 for an unrestricted MP3 is a " high price ?
" $ 20 for a DVD is too expensive ?
Especially compared to a PS3 game , which runs around $ 60 new , or even Wii games , which run around $ 40 new.3 ) Stop loading DVD 's with unskippable cr @ p ( Disney the worst offender ) , stop putting idiotic unskippable trailers on copyrights - we just bought your legit DVD damn it !
At least with VHS you could rewind to a spot where the actual content starts ! I rarely find a DVD where I ca n't skip the previews .
Of course , sometimes I actually want to watch them , because they advertise similar films I would likely enjoy .
Then again , I 'm a bit too mature to be watching Disney movies , so maybe that 's the difference.4 ) Stop putting crapware on CD 's , we want Red Book Standard CD 's , and we also want the cases and CD 's to have the logo on it to prove they are REAL audio CD 's , not the fake crap put out today.Um , most CDs are redbook .
And at any rate , you can build the full MP3 album of just about anything over at Amazon.com .
But then , that 's how I 've been buying music exclusively for a while now... I did n't realize anyone actually bought CDs anymore.5 ) Stop putting DRM on legit downloads .
It p1sses me off that such and such file is restricted to what file format a device will play ( with DRM built in to the player ) .
I do n't want to pay extra for a MP3 player to make some DRM licensee richer.Again , have you heard of Amazon.com ?
$ 1 per song is n't anymore than iTunes.6 ) Improve the audio quality of Audio CD 's , and digital downloads .
Audio CD 's are chasing the loudness battle - I recently bought a compilation CD and had to give it away because I had ear ache after 5 minutes of this unlistenable compressed music .
Digital downloads are also not much better , where are the file formats like FLAC on ALL download sites , not just highly specialised sites .
Hell , you can buy a CD then rip it to make a FLAC and it will outclass and MP3.MP3 is fine as long as the bitrate is high enough .
I think amazon 's are 256 , and sound perfectly fine to me .
As far as loudness... you have a volume control on your audio device , right ? 7 ) Get rid of the copy restrictions on DVD 's , HD discs , camcorders , and the other formats.Do n't have any BR discs , but I 've been able to move a DVD onto my PSP so I have something to wath on the plane .
My camcorder does n't have any restrictions I know of.MAYBE after all that , downloaders MIGHT think about buying more music and films.Oh , so you expect them to do everything you want , on the hope that you MIGHT stop stealing their content ?
Sorry , but it seems things are improving , and more and more content is available for legal download .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) Stop producing cr@p that nobody is interested in.
How many remakes of classic films can you do, do you think people don't realise a rip-off?
How many formulaic "artists" are in the music charts when there's other stuff out there which does not get a look in because of the rigged radio market.Apparently they aren't producing crap though.
Otherwise, people wouldn't either spend money to see, or spend time to download it.
If nobody listened to the "forumlaic artists" which fill the charts, they wouldn't be filling the charts, would they?
Clearly enough people LIKE the content that they are willingly consuming it.2) Stop selling the DVD's and CD's at such high prices.
The market has moved on and there's competition for the money, people have more things they can buy, as I mentioned already, computer games, mobile phones etc.. It's not the 1960's where for teenagers there was music, film, and that's it.$1.00 for an unrestricted MP3 is a "high price?
"  $20 for a DVD is too expensive?
Especially compared to a PS3 game, which runs around $60 new, or even Wii games, which run around $40 new.3) Stop loading DVD's with unskippable cr@p (Disney the worst offender), stop putting idiotic unskippable trailers on copyrights - we just bought your legit DVD damn it!
At least with VHS you could rewind to a spot where the actual content starts!I rarely find a DVD where I can't skip the previews.
Of course, sometimes I actually want to watch them, because they advertise similar films I would likely enjoy.
Then again, I'm a bit too mature to be watching Disney movies, so maybe that's the difference.4) Stop putting crapware on CD's, we want Red Book Standard CD's, and we also want the cases and CD's to have the logo on it to prove they are REAL audio CD's, not the fake crap put out today.Um, most CDs are redbook.
And at any rate, you can build the full MP3 album of just about anything over at Amazon.com.
But then, that's how I've been buying music exclusively for a while now... I didn't realize anyone actually bought CDs anymore.5) Stop putting DRM on legit downloads.
It p1sses me off that such and such file is restricted to what file format a device will play (with DRM built in to the player).
I don't want to pay extra for a MP3 player to make some DRM licensee richer.Again, have you heard of Amazon.com?
$1 per song isn't anymore than iTunes.6) Improve the audio quality of Audio CD's, and digital downloads.
Audio CD's are chasing the loudness battle - I recently bought a compilation CD and had to give it away because I had ear ache after 5 minutes of this unlistenable compressed music.
Digital downloads are also not much better, where are the file formats like FLAC on ALL download sites, not just highly specialised sites.
Hell, you can buy a CD then rip it to make a FLAC and it will outclass and MP3.MP3 is fine as long as the bitrate is high enough.
I think amazon's are 256, and sound perfectly fine to me.
As far as loudness... you have a volume control on your audio device, right?7) Get rid of the copy restrictions on DVD's, HD discs, camcorders, and the other formats.Don't have any BR discs, but I've been able to move a DVD onto my PSP so I have something to wath on the plane.
My camcorder doesn't have any restrictions I know of.MAYBE after all that, downloaders MIGHT think about buying more music and films.Oh, so you expect them to do everything you want, on the hope that you MIGHT stop stealing their content?
Sorry, but it seems things are improving, and more and more content is available for legal download.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28387943</id>
	<title>Use "South Park" method to change hearts and minds</title>
	<author>walterbyrd</author>
	<datestamp>1245417060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Show people the true horrors caused by illegal downloading. Like Britney Spears having to fly on a Gulfstream III, when she wanted a Gulfstream IV.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Show people the true horrors caused by illegal downloading .
Like Britney Spears having to fly on a Gulfstream III , when she wanted a Gulfstream IV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Show people the true horrors caused by illegal downloading.
Like Britney Spears having to fly on a Gulfstream III, when she wanted a Gulfstream IV.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382409</id>
	<title>Re:Fuck'em</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245327120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not really. Information only wants to be cheap enough, and that includes transaction costs.</p><p>I don't watch that many films, but when I do, my requirements are as follows: I don't want to decide early on what I want to watch (ideally, I want to make up my mind at dinner, and watch it after the coffee), I don't want to spend more time on getting what I want then the time spent deciding what to see (i.e. buh-bye shop), and I want to be able to have at least two alternatives for the evening, in case I get bored with my first choice.</p><p>So, in my heart and mind the situation looks like this:</p><p>(a) I can download legally: There is little choice in services, they have various requirements for software (meaning it is limited to OS and browser I don't use), they have ridiculously little choice, half of that without language support I require and the price for what is available is also kind of high (a movie download cost about $20-ish last I bothered to check).</p><p>(b) I can downloading illegally: I can choose OS and player as I see fit, the availability of content is unsurpassed, even rare films, which will never make it legally here, or have been out of commercial circulation for decades are available; and there is usually someone helpful who has provided subtitles in my language, and in the language of the significant other, for even the weirdest movie and language. besides, it is really fast.</p><p>So, again, why should I bother with the "legal" downloads? Why should I put up with crappy customer service? Just because someone bribed some politico types and bought themselves a monopoly? It isn't like the "legal" provider cannot do for me for the same $20 what any private tracker does for free. If they would, I'd be happy to subscribe. I'd be even happier to watch for $5, or (less happy probably) for a fixed monthly subscription of sorts.</p><p>It is so simple to win my heart and mind, that I am at a huge loss as to why it is still unwon. The problem isn't it is hard. The problem is no one wants to win me. Well, if you suck, I'll damn right go where they treat me better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not really .
Information only wants to be cheap enough , and that includes transaction costs.I do n't watch that many films , but when I do , my requirements are as follows : I do n't want to decide early on what I want to watch ( ideally , I want to make up my mind at dinner , and watch it after the coffee ) , I do n't want to spend more time on getting what I want then the time spent deciding what to see ( i.e .
buh-bye shop ) , and I want to be able to have at least two alternatives for the evening , in case I get bored with my first choice.So , in my heart and mind the situation looks like this : ( a ) I can download legally : There is little choice in services , they have various requirements for software ( meaning it is limited to OS and browser I do n't use ) , they have ridiculously little choice , half of that without language support I require and the price for what is available is also kind of high ( a movie download cost about $ 20-ish last I bothered to check ) .
( b ) I can downloading illegally : I can choose OS and player as I see fit , the availability of content is unsurpassed , even rare films , which will never make it legally here , or have been out of commercial circulation for decades are available ; and there is usually someone helpful who has provided subtitles in my language , and in the language of the significant other , for even the weirdest movie and language .
besides , it is really fast.So , again , why should I bother with the " legal " downloads ?
Why should I put up with crappy customer service ?
Just because someone bribed some politico types and bought themselves a monopoly ?
It is n't like the " legal " provider can not do for me for the same $ 20 what any private tracker does for free .
If they would , I 'd be happy to subscribe .
I 'd be even happier to watch for $ 5 , or ( less happy probably ) for a fixed monthly subscription of sorts.It is so simple to win my heart and mind , that I am at a huge loss as to why it is still unwon .
The problem is n't it is hard .
The problem is no one wants to win me .
Well , if you suck , I 'll damn right go where they treat me better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not really.
Information only wants to be cheap enough, and that includes transaction costs.I don't watch that many films, but when I do, my requirements are as follows: I don't want to decide early on what I want to watch (ideally, I want to make up my mind at dinner, and watch it after the coffee), I don't want to spend more time on getting what I want then the time spent deciding what to see (i.e.
buh-bye shop), and I want to be able to have at least two alternatives for the evening, in case I get bored with my first choice.So, in my heart and mind the situation looks like this:(a) I can download legally: There is little choice in services, they have various requirements for software (meaning it is limited to OS and browser I don't use), they have ridiculously little choice, half of that without language support I require and the price for what is available is also kind of high (a movie download cost about $20-ish last I bothered to check).
(b) I can downloading illegally: I can choose OS and player as I see fit, the availability of content is unsurpassed, even rare films, which will never make it legally here, or have been out of commercial circulation for decades are available; and there is usually someone helpful who has provided subtitles in my language, and in the language of the significant other, for even the weirdest movie and language.
besides, it is really fast.So, again, why should I bother with the "legal" downloads?
Why should I put up with crappy customer service?
Just because someone bribed some politico types and bought themselves a monopoly?
It isn't like the "legal" provider cannot do for me for the same $20 what any private tracker does for free.
If they would, I'd be happy to subscribe.
I'd be even happier to watch for $5, or (less happy probably) for a fixed monthly subscription of sorts.It is so simple to win my heart and mind, that I am at a huge loss as to why it is still unwon.
The problem isn't it is hard.
The problem is no one wants to win me.
Well, if you suck, I'll damn right go where they treat me better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381339</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382025</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that.</title>
	<author>Kjella</author>
	<datestamp>1245325380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Activation sucks, ran into the same issue with a game I purchased (online delivery) that I tried to track down a regression in WINE with. It had quite a few activations (never checked how many, probably in the forever long EULA). Reactivation after that was an email form that took two days to get a response. And if I ever needed to reinstall, I'd have to do that again. My response to that email "Thanks, but I already found a quicker, easier, permanent and probably illegal solution, but I don't care. Have a nice day." I found the DVD version + crack and had it downloaded in about an hour. I'm planning to buy the sequel too because the game is great, but I might as well get the uncrippled version to begin with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Activation sucks , ran into the same issue with a game I purchased ( online delivery ) that I tried to track down a regression in WINE with .
It had quite a few activations ( never checked how many , probably in the forever long EULA ) .
Reactivation after that was an email form that took two days to get a response .
And if I ever needed to reinstall , I 'd have to do that again .
My response to that email " Thanks , but I already found a quicker , easier , permanent and probably illegal solution , but I do n't care .
Have a nice day .
" I found the DVD version + crack and had it downloaded in about an hour .
I 'm planning to buy the sequel too because the game is great , but I might as well get the uncrippled version to begin with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Activation sucks, ran into the same issue with a game I purchased (online delivery) that I tried to track down a regression in WINE with.
It had quite a few activations (never checked how many, probably in the forever long EULA).
Reactivation after that was an email form that took two days to get a response.
And if I ever needed to reinstall, I'd have to do that again.
My response to that email "Thanks, but I already found a quicker, easier, permanent and probably illegal solution, but I don't care.
Have a nice day.
" I found the DVD version + crack and had it downloaded in about an hour.
I'm planning to buy the sequel too because the game is great, but I might as well get the uncrippled version to begin with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28384143</id>
	<title>Bullshit.</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1245335760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sell an item for $20, pay the original creator 5 cents. despite all the while reproduction and distribution costs are a few dimes. send the artist to world tours to earn the money, overstress them and they will start using drugs to relax.</p><p>then preach how beautiful a system this is.</p><p>is there any difference between this, and some feudal lord preaching what a beautiful system feudal system was, back in middle ages ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sell an item for $ 20 , pay the original creator 5 cents .
despite all the while reproduction and distribution costs are a few dimes .
send the artist to world tours to earn the money , overstress them and they will start using drugs to relax.then preach how beautiful a system this is.is there any difference between this , and some feudal lord preaching what a beautiful system feudal system was , back in middle ages ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sell an item for $20, pay the original creator 5 cents.
despite all the while reproduction and distribution costs are a few dimes.
send the artist to world tours to earn the money, overstress them and they will start using drugs to relax.then preach how beautiful a system this is.is there any difference between this, and some feudal lord preaching what a beautiful system feudal system was, back in middle ages ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28385113</id>
	<title>Good luck...</title>
	<author>hitmark</author>
	<datestamp>1245343800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When girls will cut holes in the back pocket of a pair of perfectly good jeans to make them look like they have been stolen, and the alarm removed, this will be a hard sell...</p><p>Basically, the entertainment industry have made the criminal the hero, or rather the anti-hero. And now they expect the kids to follow the law, after being feed rebellion and might makes right for as long as they can remember the content of something?</p><p>Hurray for mixed messages...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When girls will cut holes in the back pocket of a pair of perfectly good jeans to make them look like they have been stolen , and the alarm removed , this will be a hard sell...Basically , the entertainment industry have made the criminal the hero , or rather the anti-hero .
And now they expect the kids to follow the law , after being feed rebellion and might makes right for as long as they can remember the content of something ? Hurray for mixed messages.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When girls will cut holes in the back pocket of a pair of perfectly good jeans to make them look like they have been stolen, and the alarm removed, this will be a hard sell...Basically, the entertainment industry have made the criminal the hero, or rather the anti-hero.
And now they expect the kids to follow the law, after being feed rebellion and might makes right for as long as they can remember the content of something?Hurray for mixed messages...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381911</id>
	<title>Re:Well... It is</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245324900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"But don't go around making up reasons why you're doing the world a favour by saying 'fuck you' to 'the man'."</p><p>I don't. I download because 1. I'm poor and cannot afford to buy all the media I download. The media cartels can suck it. And 2. because *I CAN*. There no technical reason why I can't download a movie from TPB or wherever (or get it from Netflix or my local library), make a copy for my iPod and then enjoy it at my leisure. None. The media cartels are, once again, cordially invited to suck it, and mind the teeth this time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" But do n't go around making up reasons why you 're doing the world a favour by saying 'fuck you ' to 'the man' .
" I do n't .
I download because 1 .
I 'm poor and can not afford to buy all the media I download .
The media cartels can suck it .
And 2. because * I CAN * .
There no technical reason why I ca n't download a movie from TPB or wherever ( or get it from Netflix or my local library ) , make a copy for my iPod and then enjoy it at my leisure .
None. The media cartels are , once again , cordially invited to suck it , and mind the teeth this time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"But don't go around making up reasons why you're doing the world a favour by saying 'fuck you' to 'the man'.
"I don't.
I download because 1.
I'm poor and cannot afford to buy all the media I download.
The media cartels can suck it.
And 2. because *I CAN*.
There no technical reason why I can't download a movie from TPB or wherever (or get it from Netflix or my local library), make a copy for my iPod and then enjoy it at my leisure.
None. The media cartels are, once again, cordially invited to suck it, and mind the teeth this time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382301</id>
	<title>Breaking News!</title>
	<author>asolidvoid</author>
	<datestamp>1245326520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Stop the presses!

A PR Firm promotes the value of running a PR campaign!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Stop the presses !
A PR Firm promotes the value of running a PR campaign !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stop the presses!
A PR Firm promotes the value of running a PR campaign!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381479</id>
	<title>They will fail...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245322980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...because downloading IS NOT wrong!</htmltext>
<tokenext>...because downloading IS NOT wrong !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...because downloading IS NOT wrong!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382191</id>
	<title>Wasting a life with each popular movie sold</title>
	<author>bennomatic</author>
	<datestamp>1245326100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You know what burns me most about the DRM stuff?  That it gives the **AA the right to wast millions of person hours every day.  I'm not going to steal their film; why should I be forced to sit through the legal warnings?  The people who are going to steal it won't pay attention when they're ripping it.
<br> <br>
The way I see it, if an average lifetime is 75 years, then that's 39.4 million minutes.  Assuming that any DVDs that are sold are watched at least twice, then any movie that sells 20 million copies has wasted an entire human life with these stupid warnings.
<br> <br>
Maybe it wouldn't annoy me so much if the warnings actually did anything, but it's so clear they do not.  It's just a huge freaking waste.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You know what burns me most about the DRM stuff ?
That it gives the * * AA the right to wast millions of person hours every day .
I 'm not going to steal their film ; why should I be forced to sit through the legal warnings ?
The people who are going to steal it wo n't pay attention when they 're ripping it .
The way I see it , if an average lifetime is 75 years , then that 's 39.4 million minutes .
Assuming that any DVDs that are sold are watched at least twice , then any movie that sells 20 million copies has wasted an entire human life with these stupid warnings .
Maybe it would n't annoy me so much if the warnings actually did anything , but it 's so clear they do not .
It 's just a huge freaking waste .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know what burns me most about the DRM stuff?
That it gives the **AA the right to wast millions of person hours every day.
I'm not going to steal their film; why should I be forced to sit through the legal warnings?
The people who are going to steal it won't pay attention when they're ripping it.
The way I see it, if an average lifetime is 75 years, then that's 39.4 million minutes.
Assuming that any DVDs that are sold are watched at least twice, then any movie that sells 20 million copies has wasted an entire human life with these stupid warnings.
Maybe it wouldn't annoy me so much if the warnings actually did anything, but it's so clear they do not.
It's just a huge freaking waste.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28389917</id>
	<title>Re:A ha!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245426120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Quality piracy hubs and private trackers seem to address all these issues. EAC FLAC+Log+Cue ftw</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Quality piracy hubs and private trackers seem to address all these issues .
EAC FLAC + Log + Cue ftw</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quality piracy hubs and private trackers seem to address all these issues.
EAC FLAC+Log+Cue ftw</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381783</id>
	<title>Re:Well... It is</title>
	<author>91degrees</author>
	<datestamp>1245324300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>While I broadly agree with you - my justification for downloading is I like to get stuff for free and before it's released in this country - I'll still disagree that it's theft.  <br> <br>
Legally it's different from theft, and argue whatever you want about the morality of it, the main problem is that theft is a loaded word that distracts from the point.  There's lots of arguments as to why piracy is wrong.  Make the arguments.  "Piracy is theft" is nothing but rhetoric.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While I broadly agree with you - my justification for downloading is I like to get stuff for free and before it 's released in this country - I 'll still disagree that it 's theft .
Legally it 's different from theft , and argue whatever you want about the morality of it , the main problem is that theft is a loaded word that distracts from the point .
There 's lots of arguments as to why piracy is wrong .
Make the arguments .
" Piracy is theft " is nothing but rhetoric .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I broadly agree with you - my justification for downloading is I like to get stuff for free and before it's released in this country - I'll still disagree that it's theft.
Legally it's different from theft, and argue whatever you want about the morality of it, the main problem is that theft is a loaded word that distracts from the point.
There's lots of arguments as to why piracy is wrong.
Make the arguments.
"Piracy is theft" is nothing but rhetoric.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28385575</id>
	<title>Re:Well... It is</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245348780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Would you have bought/rented/paid for admission for the movies you downloaded if they weren't available for download?</p></div><p>Yes. I pay to go to the theater (full price) all the time. I value the experience over watching it on a comparatively tiny monitor.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would you have bought/rented/paid for admission for the movies you downloaded if they were n't available for download ? Yes .
I pay to go to the theater ( full price ) all the time .
I value the experience over watching it on a comparatively tiny monitor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would you have bought/rented/paid for admission for the movies you downloaded if they weren't available for download?Yes.
I pay to go to the theater (full price) all the time.
I value the experience over watching it on a comparatively tiny monitor.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381785</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381923</id>
	<title>sharing is not theft</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245324960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems the BBC has forgotten about the last time it forgot that sharing is not a crime! : <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/4758636.stm" title="bbc.co.uk" rel="nofollow">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/4758636.stm</a> [bbc.co.uk]</p><p>'First though, an apology. File sharing is not theft. It has never been theft. Anyone who says it is theft is wrong and has unthinkingly absorbed too many Recording Industry Association of America press releases. We know that script line was wrong. It was a mistake. We're very, very sorry.'</p><p>Not sorry enough to remember...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems the BBC has forgotten about the last time it forgot that sharing is not a crime !
: http : //news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/4758636.stm [ bbc.co.uk ] 'First though , an apology .
File sharing is not theft .
It has never been theft .
Anyone who says it is theft is wrong and has unthinkingly absorbed too many Recording Industry Association of America press releases .
We know that script line was wrong .
It was a mistake .
We 're very , very sorry .
'Not sorry enough to remember.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems the BBC has forgotten about the last time it forgot that sharing is not a crime!
: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/4758636.stm [bbc.co.uk]'First though, an apology.
File sharing is not theft.
It has never been theft.
Anyone who says it is theft is wrong and has unthinkingly absorbed too many Recording Industry Association of America press releases.
We know that script line was wrong.
It was a mistake.
We're very, very sorry.
'Not sorry enough to remember...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28392363</id>
	<title>too much overhead</title>
	<author>amoeba1911</author>
	<datestamp>1245436620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The old system has too much overhead. It's just like a really old installation of Windows XP, over time the registry gets bloated, you have excess drivers, old files, corrupt files and they're all taking up system resources making the whole thing less usable. I think this is good analogy, the system they're trying to defend has too much overhead. The corrupt executives have way too much compensation for doing very little, there is way too much creative accounting going on, way too much bribery and of course then they need to spend a lot of money to keep that business going, in the end the legitimate artists suffer as well the consumer. They want a solution that will allow them to maintain their bloated business model and retain their highly excessive compensations, but that is not going to happen.
<br> <br>
There are already plenty of alternatives to big music, recently I found this <a href="http://www.magnatune.com/" title="magnatune.com">gem</a> [magnatune.com] where you get to set your own price for what you believe the music is worth, and they give you the music in drm free formats such as mp3, flac, ogg as well as uncompressed wav... and this is at a fraction of the cost of big labels.
<br> <br>
In any and every industry: when the small upstart who doesn't have access to mass distribution channels can afford to give you the same product for less, you got a major problem with your business model.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The old system has too much overhead .
It 's just like a really old installation of Windows XP , over time the registry gets bloated , you have excess drivers , old files , corrupt files and they 're all taking up system resources making the whole thing less usable .
I think this is good analogy , the system they 're trying to defend has too much overhead .
The corrupt executives have way too much compensation for doing very little , there is way too much creative accounting going on , way too much bribery and of course then they need to spend a lot of money to keep that business going , in the end the legitimate artists suffer as well the consumer .
They want a solution that will allow them to maintain their bloated business model and retain their highly excessive compensations , but that is not going to happen .
There are already plenty of alternatives to big music , recently I found this gem [ magnatune.com ] where you get to set your own price for what you believe the music is worth , and they give you the music in drm free formats such as mp3 , flac , ogg as well as uncompressed wav... and this is at a fraction of the cost of big labels .
In any and every industry : when the small upstart who does n't have access to mass distribution channels can afford to give you the same product for less , you got a major problem with your business model .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The old system has too much overhead.
It's just like a really old installation of Windows XP, over time the registry gets bloated, you have excess drivers, old files, corrupt files and they're all taking up system resources making the whole thing less usable.
I think this is good analogy, the system they're trying to defend has too much overhead.
The corrupt executives have way too much compensation for doing very little, there is way too much creative accounting going on, way too much bribery and of course then they need to spend a lot of money to keep that business going, in the end the legitimate artists suffer as well the consumer.
They want a solution that will allow them to maintain their bloated business model and retain their highly excessive compensations, but that is not going to happen.
There are already plenty of alternatives to big music, recently I found this gem [magnatune.com] where you get to set your own price for what you believe the music is worth, and they give you the music in drm free formats such as mp3, flac, ogg as well as uncompressed wav... and this is at a fraction of the cost of big labels.
In any and every industry: when the small upstart who doesn't have access to mass distribution channels can afford to give you the same product for less, you got a major problem with your business model.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28384783</id>
	<title>Want in my mind?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245340320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Its all gooey in there and knee deep in bong water.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its all gooey in there and knee deep in bong water .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its all gooey in there and knee deep in bong water.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381339</id>
	<title>Fuck'em</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245322380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Information wants to be free. Don't be Jewish with the knowledge.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Information wants to be free .
Do n't be Jewish with the knowledge .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Information wants to be free.
Don't be Jewish with the knowledge.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28390005</id>
	<title>Re:A ha!</title>
	<author>DarthVain</author>
	<datestamp>1245426480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the solution is pretty easy. The fact of the matter is due to some monopolistic tendencies they are rather inflexible and trying to force consumers to their will and business model.</p><p>What I find funny is that the problem those industries are having is actually being slowed or moderated by the monopolistic tendencies of the telecommunications industry, which if there was competition would likely have greater speeds and penetration, meaning an even bigger problem for them.</p><p>Regardless, the problem will get worse. The actions they have taken (suing the bejesus out of people) hasn't exactly worked well. The future marches on. iTunes is the only initiative that has made any inroads, and they have the model more less correct. Their problem is that Apple is pretty much one of the worst companies for protectionist practices, which while protecting their stuff, also limits the amount of public acceptance.</p><p>The model I am talking of is the EASY acquisition (search and download) of QUALITY media over the internet. Sounds pretty common sense eh? The key is ease of use. Currently pretty much anyone can without too much trouble find whatever they want and download it. Competing with that is hard. So what you do, is make it even easier for Joe public to say go to your site, which will have EVERYTHING. On this site you would have many means to find what you are looking for. You would also have something on there to suggest to the user, things they might like. Then you make it a seamless download experience, and charge a small fee. The key here is not to charge a lot of money. You want people to use it often and make money from many sales. This will also help grow the brand. Do NOT use any DRM BS, or make it hard to use media, or degrade quality, as that is counter productive. Do not try and use streaming or protectionist BS, people do not want. The key here is people generally speaking are lazy. I like lazy. I prefer to call it "efficient". If I have the opportunity to go to one place to do all my online internet one stop shopping, where it is easy, the media is of high quality, and doesn't really cost all that much, it is a no brainer. I mean I think most would be there in a second. They have to stop trying to protect their business models, and start reacting to what the market currently is. If they do not, it will change anyway, but they will simply not be part of it. This all happening in the next decade I don't think is that big a stretch.</p><p>Anyway it will obviously take some coordination of the various players out there, and that might be the hardest part, but its not like they don't have a central association that might facilitate this sort of thing. However they are too busy alienating their consumers to be of much help sadly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the solution is pretty easy .
The fact of the matter is due to some monopolistic tendencies they are rather inflexible and trying to force consumers to their will and business model.What I find funny is that the problem those industries are having is actually being slowed or moderated by the monopolistic tendencies of the telecommunications industry , which if there was competition would likely have greater speeds and penetration , meaning an even bigger problem for them.Regardless , the problem will get worse .
The actions they have taken ( suing the bejesus out of people ) has n't exactly worked well .
The future marches on .
iTunes is the only initiative that has made any inroads , and they have the model more less correct .
Their problem is that Apple is pretty much one of the worst companies for protectionist practices , which while protecting their stuff , also limits the amount of public acceptance.The model I am talking of is the EASY acquisition ( search and download ) of QUALITY media over the internet .
Sounds pretty common sense eh ?
The key is ease of use .
Currently pretty much anyone can without too much trouble find whatever they want and download it .
Competing with that is hard .
So what you do , is make it even easier for Joe public to say go to your site , which will have EVERYTHING .
On this site you would have many means to find what you are looking for .
You would also have something on there to suggest to the user , things they might like .
Then you make it a seamless download experience , and charge a small fee .
The key here is not to charge a lot of money .
You want people to use it often and make money from many sales .
This will also help grow the brand .
Do NOT use any DRM BS , or make it hard to use media , or degrade quality , as that is counter productive .
Do not try and use streaming or protectionist BS , people do not want .
The key here is people generally speaking are lazy .
I like lazy .
I prefer to call it " efficient " .
If I have the opportunity to go to one place to do all my online internet one stop shopping , where it is easy , the media is of high quality , and does n't really cost all that much , it is a no brainer .
I mean I think most would be there in a second .
They have to stop trying to protect their business models , and start reacting to what the market currently is .
If they do not , it will change anyway , but they will simply not be part of it .
This all happening in the next decade I do n't think is that big a stretch.Anyway it will obviously take some coordination of the various players out there , and that might be the hardest part , but its not like they do n't have a central association that might facilitate this sort of thing .
However they are too busy alienating their consumers to be of much help sadly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the solution is pretty easy.
The fact of the matter is due to some monopolistic tendencies they are rather inflexible and trying to force consumers to their will and business model.What I find funny is that the problem those industries are having is actually being slowed or moderated by the monopolistic tendencies of the telecommunications industry, which if there was competition would likely have greater speeds and penetration, meaning an even bigger problem for them.Regardless, the problem will get worse.
The actions they have taken (suing the bejesus out of people) hasn't exactly worked well.
The future marches on.
iTunes is the only initiative that has made any inroads, and they have the model more less correct.
Their problem is that Apple is pretty much one of the worst companies for protectionist practices, which while protecting their stuff, also limits the amount of public acceptance.The model I am talking of is the EASY acquisition (search and download) of QUALITY media over the internet.
Sounds pretty common sense eh?
The key is ease of use.
Currently pretty much anyone can without too much trouble find whatever they want and download it.
Competing with that is hard.
So what you do, is make it even easier for Joe public to say go to your site, which will have EVERYTHING.
On this site you would have many means to find what you are looking for.
You would also have something on there to suggest to the user, things they might like.
Then you make it a seamless download experience, and charge a small fee.
The key here is not to charge a lot of money.
You want people to use it often and make money from many sales.
This will also help grow the brand.
Do NOT use any DRM BS, or make it hard to use media, or degrade quality, as that is counter productive.
Do not try and use streaming or protectionist BS, people do not want.
The key here is people generally speaking are lazy.
I like lazy.
I prefer to call it "efficient".
If I have the opportunity to go to one place to do all my online internet one stop shopping, where it is easy, the media is of high quality, and doesn't really cost all that much, it is a no brainer.
I mean I think most would be there in a second.
They have to stop trying to protect their business models, and start reacting to what the market currently is.
If they do not, it will change anyway, but they will simply not be part of it.
This all happening in the next decade I don't think is that big a stretch.Anyway it will obviously take some coordination of the various players out there, and that might be the hardest part, but its not like they don't have a central association that might facilitate this sort of thing.
However they are too busy alienating their consumers to be of much help sadly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28385345</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that.</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1245346860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Stop trying to gouge fans by releasing one season at a time, then a boxed set, then a boxed set with extra features so that you're actively trying to get a fan to re-buy the same material multiple times</i></p><p>Well, be fair. They can't sell you season 1-5 after season 3 just finished.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Stop trying to gouge fans by releasing one season at a time , then a boxed set , then a boxed set with extra features so that you 're actively trying to get a fan to re-buy the same material multiple timesWell , be fair .
They ca n't sell you season 1-5 after season 3 just finished .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stop trying to gouge fans by releasing one season at a time, then a boxed set, then a boxed set with extra features so that you're actively trying to get a fan to re-buy the same material multiple timesWell, be fair.
They can't sell you season 1-5 after season 3 just finished.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381943</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28384871</id>
	<title>Re:A ha!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245340980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's be real for a moment. None of this would increase a downloader's chance of purchasing something. Downloaders download for convenience and cost, not because of some ambient disgruntledness with the quality, DRM or the fact that so many movies are remakes.</p><p>DRM is like a debt collection department - a necessary evil of any corporation to protect their income stream.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's be real for a moment .
None of this would increase a downloader 's chance of purchasing something .
Downloaders download for convenience and cost , not because of some ambient disgruntledness with the quality , DRM or the fact that so many movies are remakes.DRM is like a debt collection department - a necessary evil of any corporation to protect their income stream .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's be real for a moment.
None of this would increase a downloader's chance of purchasing something.
Downloaders download for convenience and cost, not because of some ambient disgruntledness with the quality, DRM or the fact that so many movies are remakes.DRM is like a debt collection department - a necessary evil of any corporation to protect their income stream.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28392283</id>
	<title>Another worthless article?</title>
	<author>Dripdry</author>
	<datestamp>1245436380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's something to chew on, but come on! It's a PR FIRM pushing its agenda about how PR firms can help failing industries. They're just vultures looking to pick at the bones, and I don't feel this article is anything more than that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's something to chew on , but come on !
It 's a PR FIRM pushing its agenda about how PR firms can help failing industries .
They 're just vultures looking to pick at the bones , and I do n't feel this article is anything more than that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's something to chew on, but come on!
It's a PR FIRM pushing its agenda about how PR firms can help failing industries.
They're just vultures looking to pick at the bones, and I don't feel this article is anything more than that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381851</id>
	<title>Acceptable dissent</title>
	<author>Chris Acheson</author>
	<datestamp>1245324660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>there are plenty, even among the young, who can be eloquent about why they believe illegal downloading is not wrong. These can include everything from what they see as the unacceptable "control freakery" of DRM and regional coding, to overcharging and exploitation of the very artists the music industry claims to protect.</p></div><p>"Principled opposition to copyright itself" is, of course, left out of their range of acceptable dissent.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>there are plenty , even among the young , who can be eloquent about why they believe illegal downloading is not wrong .
These can include everything from what they see as the unacceptable " control freakery " of DRM and regional coding , to overcharging and exploitation of the very artists the music industry claims to protect .
" Principled opposition to copyright itself " is , of course , left out of their range of acceptable dissent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>there are plenty, even among the young, who can be eloquent about why they believe illegal downloading is not wrong.
These can include everything from what they see as the unacceptable "control freakery" of DRM and regional coding, to overcharging and exploitation of the very artists the music industry claims to protect.
"Principled opposition to copyright itself" is, of course, left out of their range of acceptable dissent.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28387297</id>
	<title>Re:Fuck'em</title>
	<author>AtomicJake</author>
	<datestamp>1245410460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, you're in the inconvenient situation to not have a VoD provider that can deliver the movie as stream (to your TV - or STB). This is actually the best option, provided that the VoD provider has a big archive and also new movies.</p><p>Fortunately for me,  I have a great IPTV provider with fair pricing.  Unfortunately for me, I am based in France (Europe), and the choice of (US) series is rather limited and mostly seasons behind what you can download.  Supply of movies, at the other end, is OK.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , you 're in the inconvenient situation to not have a VoD provider that can deliver the movie as stream ( to your TV - or STB ) .
This is actually the best option , provided that the VoD provider has a big archive and also new movies.Fortunately for me , I have a great IPTV provider with fair pricing .
Unfortunately for me , I am based in France ( Europe ) , and the choice of ( US ) series is rather limited and mostly seasons behind what you can download .
Supply of movies , at the other end , is OK .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, you're in the inconvenient situation to not have a VoD provider that can deliver the movie as stream (to your TV - or STB).
This is actually the best option, provided that the VoD provider has a big archive and also new movies.Fortunately for me,  I have a great IPTV provider with fair pricing.
Unfortunately for me, I am based in France (Europe), and the choice of (US) series is rather limited and mostly seasons behind what you can download.
Supply of movies, at the other end, is OK.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382409</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28385223</id>
	<title>Re:Well... It is</title>
	<author>Runaway1956</author>
	<datestamp>1245345300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Candidates run for office in the expectation of becoming control freaks, and making mountains of money for themselves and their friends.  It is quite fair for them to expect people to put them in office, and reward their efforts put forth during the campaign.</p><p>No matter how you water it down, failing to put that candidate into office, especially when you laugh yourself silly at his feeble attempts, means you failed to reward his efforts.  If you can live with that choice, fine.</p><p>But, don't go around making up reasons why you've done the world a favor by saying "Fuck you" to the candidate.  You're only lying to yourself.</p><p>REMEMBER, BOYS &amp; GIRLS: the distributors are more like politicians than they are like working men and women.  Like politicians, they will sink millions of dollars into sinking ships, and refuse you and I the right to make up our own minds that it's time to abandon ship, instead demanding that WE PAY for repairs to the rusted out hulk.</p><p>Fuck 'em all.  When they actually enrich my life, I'll consider enriching theirs.  Boycott Hollywood, boycott the music industry, and boycott the game industry until they wise up.  Just fuck 'em all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Candidates run for office in the expectation of becoming control freaks , and making mountains of money for themselves and their friends .
It is quite fair for them to expect people to put them in office , and reward their efforts put forth during the campaign.No matter how you water it down , failing to put that candidate into office , especially when you laugh yourself silly at his feeble attempts , means you failed to reward his efforts .
If you can live with that choice , fine.But , do n't go around making up reasons why you 've done the world a favor by saying " Fuck you " to the candidate .
You 're only lying to yourself.REMEMBER , BOYS &amp; GIRLS : the distributors are more like politicians than they are like working men and women .
Like politicians , they will sink millions of dollars into sinking ships , and refuse you and I the right to make up our own minds that it 's time to abandon ship , instead demanding that WE PAY for repairs to the rusted out hulk.Fuck 'em all .
When they actually enrich my life , I 'll consider enriching theirs .
Boycott Hollywood , boycott the music industry , and boycott the game industry until they wise up .
Just fuck 'em all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Candidates run for office in the expectation of becoming control freaks, and making mountains of money for themselves and their friends.
It is quite fair for them to expect people to put them in office, and reward their efforts put forth during the campaign.No matter how you water it down, failing to put that candidate into office, especially when you laugh yourself silly at his feeble attempts, means you failed to reward his efforts.
If you can live with that choice, fine.But, don't go around making up reasons why you've done the world a favor by saying "Fuck you" to the candidate.
You're only lying to yourself.REMEMBER, BOYS &amp; GIRLS: the distributors are more like politicians than they are like working men and women.
Like politicians, they will sink millions of dollars into sinking ships, and refuse you and I the right to make up our own minds that it's time to abandon ship, instead demanding that WE PAY for repairs to the rusted out hulk.Fuck 'em all.
When they actually enrich my life, I'll consider enriching theirs.
Boycott Hollywood, boycott the music industry, and boycott the game industry until they wise up.
Just fuck 'em all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381657</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382149
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28383375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28384609
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28389917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28384077
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28391847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28385261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381545
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28383195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382019
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28387199
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28383107
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28385411
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28385465
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381691
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28389729
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28387181
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382409
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381339
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28384205
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381893
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28383137
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381911
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381831
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28383939
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28383389
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381691
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28388593
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28383389
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381691
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28385575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381785
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28387297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382409
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381339
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28385345
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381943
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382307
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381339
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28384715
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381529
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28384039
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382393
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382025
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381783
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28390259
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28387351
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381893
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28391425
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381793
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28390005
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382007
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28384871
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28390437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28386869
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382019
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28386499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381691
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28391353
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382409
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381339
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_2111209_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28385223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_2111209.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381599
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_2111209.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381851
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_2111209.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381391
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_2111209.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381339
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382409
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28387297
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28387181
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28391353
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382307
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_2111209.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381893
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28387351
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28384205
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_2111209.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382021
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28390437
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_2111209.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381345
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381899
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381545
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28385261
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28391847
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381885
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28391425
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28384871
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28386869
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28389917
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28384609
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28390005
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28383375
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28387199
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28389729
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_2111209.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28386937
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_2111209.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381657
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381783
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382007
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28385223
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381785
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28385575
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381911
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28384077
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381793
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28383137
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381831
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28383107
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_2111209.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381365
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_2111209.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381691
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28386499
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28383389
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28383939
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28388593
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28385465
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_2111209.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381533
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382025
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381943
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28385345
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382019
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28383195
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382873
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28385411
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28390259
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382149
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382117
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_2111209.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381529
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28384715
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_2111209.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28381479
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_2111209.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28382393
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_2111209.28384039
</commentlist>
</conversation>
