<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_19_1941241</id>
	<title>Obama Taps IBM Open Source Advocate For USPTO</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1245407160000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>langelgjm writes <i>"President Obama has announced his intent to <a href="http://www.uspto.gov/main/homepagenews/2009jun19.htm">nominate David Kappos,</a> a VP and general counsel at IBM, to head the US Patent and Trademark Office. This move is particularly notable not only because of IBM's much friendlier attitudes towards open source compared with some of their rivals, but also because Kappos himself is open source-friendly: 'We are now the biggest supporters of the open source development project,' explains David. 'Admittedly this policy is not easily reconcilable with our traditional IP strategy, but we are convinced that it is the way to go for the future.'  Not just a lawyer, Kappos earned an engineering degree before working in the legal field. Kappos has been described as '<a href="http://www.cpaglobal.com/ip-review-online/widgets/interview/more/2360/managing\_ip\_the\_ibm\_way">critical of the American approach to patent policy</a>.' Given his background, could this mean a new era for US patent policy?"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>langelgjm writes " President Obama has announced his intent to nominate David Kappos , a VP and general counsel at IBM , to head the US Patent and Trademark Office .
This move is particularly notable not only because of IBM 's much friendlier attitudes towards open source compared with some of their rivals , but also because Kappos himself is open source-friendly : 'We are now the biggest supporters of the open source development project, ' explains David .
'Admittedly this policy is not easily reconcilable with our traditional IP strategy , but we are convinced that it is the way to go for the future .
' Not just a lawyer , Kappos earned an engineering degree before working in the legal field .
Kappos has been described as 'critical of the American approach to patent policy .
' Given his background , could this mean a new era for US patent policy ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>langelgjm writes "President Obama has announced his intent to nominate David Kappos, a VP and general counsel at IBM, to head the US Patent and Trademark Office.
This move is particularly notable not only because of IBM's much friendlier attitudes towards open source compared with some of their rivals, but also because Kappos himself is open source-friendly: 'We are now the biggest supporters of the open source development project,' explains David.
'Admittedly this policy is not easily reconcilable with our traditional IP strategy, but we are convinced that it is the way to go for the future.
'  Not just a lawyer, Kappos earned an engineering degree before working in the legal field.
Kappos has been described as 'critical of the American approach to patent policy.
' Given his background, could this mean a new era for US patent policy?
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396833</id>
	<title>By Neruos</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245411060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The fact that IBM has applied for about every known patent over the past 9 years never came up either.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The fact that IBM has applied for about every known patent over the past 9 years never came up either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The fact that IBM has applied for about every known patent over the past 9 years never came up either.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397441</id>
	<title>I suppose I can't karma whore with</title>
	<author>Nautical Insanity</author>
	<datestamp>1245415020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>saying "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss," and expect the automatic stamp of +5 insightful on this story can I.</htmltext>
<tokenext>saying " Meet the new boss , same as the old boss , " and expect the automatic stamp of + 5 insightful on this story can I .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>saying "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss," and expect the automatic stamp of +5 insightful on this story can I.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397591</id>
	<title>Re:Isn't that required?</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1245416520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You don't need to have a degree. See section C on the qualifications document.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't need to have a degree .
See section C on the qualifications document .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't need to have a degree.
See section C on the qualifications document.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396953</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397519</id>
	<title>Re:Change</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245415800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> careful and intelligent</p> </div><p>Some how those words sitting next to Obama seems like an oxymoron.</p><p>There I did it, that negative you were looking for.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>careful and intelligent Some how those words sitting next to Obama seems like an oxymoron.There I did it , that negative you were looking for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> careful and intelligent Some how those words sitting next to Obama seems like an oxymoron.There I did it, that negative you were looking for.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396847</id>
	<title>"could this mean a new era for US patent policy?"</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1245411120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe.  The USPTO must operate within the constraints set by Congress and the courts.  Software patents were forced on them by the First Circuit: they opposed them initially.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe .
The USPTO must operate within the constraints set by Congress and the courts .
Software patents were forced on them by the First Circuit : they opposed them initially .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe.
The USPTO must operate within the constraints set by Congress and the courts.
Software patents were forced on them by the First Circuit: they opposed them initially.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398545</id>
	<title>Is this really good?</title>
	<author>dreemernj</author>
	<datestamp>1245424800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>He's vice president and assistant general counsel for intellectual property at the company that patents more than <i>anybody else</i>.  And they've been patenting more than anybody else for a long time (20 years?  30 years?).  Companies like Microsoft wish they were patenting as much stuff as IBM does and I firmly believe the drive to patent everything in sight that we see in so many companies is spurred on by the fact that they are all trying to catch up with IBM.
<br> <br>
I don't automatically believe this will be bad, but its hard to ignore the possibility that this could be giving the fat kid the key to the candy store.<br> <br>

The pessimist in me can't stop thinking that the only reason people don't seem to be as critical of IBM's massive patenting efforts despite the gap between them and 2nd place (Samsung now I believe) in the patenting world is that they've done the good PR of supporting OSS publicly while grabbing up all the IP they can for themselves.</htmltext>
<tokenext>He 's vice president and assistant general counsel for intellectual property at the company that patents more than anybody else .
And they 've been patenting more than anybody else for a long time ( 20 years ?
30 years ? ) .
Companies like Microsoft wish they were patenting as much stuff as IBM does and I firmly believe the drive to patent everything in sight that we see in so many companies is spurred on by the fact that they are all trying to catch up with IBM .
I do n't automatically believe this will be bad , but its hard to ignore the possibility that this could be giving the fat kid the key to the candy store .
The pessimist in me ca n't stop thinking that the only reason people do n't seem to be as critical of IBM 's massive patenting efforts despite the gap between them and 2nd place ( Samsung now I believe ) in the patenting world is that they 've done the good PR of supporting OSS publicly while grabbing up all the IP they can for themselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He's vice president and assistant general counsel for intellectual property at the company that patents more than anybody else.
And they've been patenting more than anybody else for a long time (20 years?
30 years?).
Companies like Microsoft wish they were patenting as much stuff as IBM does and I firmly believe the drive to patent everything in sight that we see in so many companies is spurred on by the fact that they are all trying to catch up with IBM.
I don't automatically believe this will be bad, but its hard to ignore the possibility that this could be giving the fat kid the key to the candy store.
The pessimist in me can't stop thinking that the only reason people don't seem to be as critical of IBM's massive patenting efforts despite the gap between them and 2nd place (Samsung now I believe) in the patenting world is that they've done the good PR of supporting OSS publicly while grabbing up all the IP they can for themselves.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28407987</id>
	<title>Re:Some other points...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245522000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>It is not unusual that a patent lawyer would hold an engineering degree; in fact, to sit for the patent bar, one needs typically needs an engineering or science degree, and some patent lawyers have advanced degrees in their areas of specialty.</i></p><p>A point which most of Slashdot often forgets.  "Oh, but what stupid attorney would write this?  Any engineer would know better!"  Earth to Slashdot -- the successful patent attorneys were successful engineers and scientists before they even thought of going to law school.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is not unusual that a patent lawyer would hold an engineering degree ; in fact , to sit for the patent bar , one needs typically needs an engineering or science degree , and some patent lawyers have advanced degrees in their areas of specialty.A point which most of Slashdot often forgets .
" Oh , but what stupid attorney would write this ?
Any engineer would know better !
" Earth to Slashdot -- the successful patent attorneys were successful engineers and scientists before they even thought of going to law school .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is not unusual that a patent lawyer would hold an engineering degree; in fact, to sit for the patent bar, one needs typically needs an engineering or science degree, and some patent lawyers have advanced degrees in their areas of specialty.A point which most of Slashdot often forgets.
"Oh, but what stupid attorney would write this?
Any engineer would know better!
"  Earth to Slashdot -- the successful patent attorneys were successful engineers and scientists before they even thought of going to law school.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396807</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396953</id>
	<title>Re:Isn't that required?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245411540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I thought an engineering degree, as well as passing the bar, was a requirement to practice patent law (at least in engineering-related branches if not in general).</i></p><p>Ah, here we go.  From the US section of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent\_attorney" title="wikipedia.org">wikipedia article on patent attorneys</a> [wikipedia.org]:</p><p><i>Both Patent Attorneys and Patent Agents are generally required to have a technical degree (such as engineering, chemistry or physics) and must take and pass the Examination for Registration to Practice in Patent Cases Before the United States Patent and Trademark Office.</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought an engineering degree , as well as passing the bar , was a requirement to practice patent law ( at least in engineering-related branches if not in general ) .Ah , here we go .
From the US section of the wikipedia article on patent attorneys [ wikipedia.org ] : Both Patent Attorneys and Patent Agents are generally required to have a technical degree ( such as engineering , chemistry or physics ) and must take and pass the Examination for Registration to Practice in Patent Cases Before the United States Patent and Trademark Office .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought an engineering degree, as well as passing the bar, was a requirement to practice patent law (at least in engineering-related branches if not in general).Ah, here we go.
From the US section of the wikipedia article on patent attorneys [wikipedia.org]:Both Patent Attorneys and Patent Agents are generally required to have a technical degree (such as engineering, chemistry or physics) and must take and pass the Examination for Registration to Practice in Patent Cases Before the United States Patent and Trademark Office.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396845</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396889</id>
	<title>Omaha</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245411300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now I KNOW I'm not the only one who read it as "Omaha".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now I KNOW I 'm not the only one who read it as " Omaha " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now I KNOW I'm not the only one who read it as "Omaha".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397369</id>
	<title>Re:Tapped?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245414480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They have been using tapped in this context for at least 40 years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They have been using tapped in this context for at least 40 years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They have been using tapped in this context for at least 40 years.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396845</id>
	<title>Isn't that required?</title>
	<author>Ungrounded Lightning</author>
	<datestamp>1245411060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Not just a lawyer, Kappos earned an engineering degree before working in the legal field.</i></p><p>I thought an engineering degree, as well as passing the bar, was a requirement to practice patent law (at least in engineering-related branches if not in general).</p><p>So, given that he was a patent lawyer, that double degree is neither surprising nor unique.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not just a lawyer , Kappos earned an engineering degree before working in the legal field.I thought an engineering degree , as well as passing the bar , was a requirement to practice patent law ( at least in engineering-related branches if not in general ) .So , given that he was a patent lawyer , that double degree is neither surprising nor unique .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not just a lawyer, Kappos earned an engineering degree before working in the legal field.I thought an engineering degree, as well as passing the bar, was a requirement to practice patent law (at least in engineering-related branches if not in general).So, given that he was a patent lawyer, that double degree is neither surprising nor unique.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398263</id>
	<title>Re:Tapped?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245421680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <i>Tapped? What's with the Mainstream Media's latest buzzword?</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>Sigh. I guess anybody that reports actual news (as opposed to bloviating idiots) is "mainstream media."  I've heard this use of "tap" for as long as I can remember. The OED says it goes back to the middle of the last century (that they can document):</p><blockquote><div><p>1952 E. O'NEILL <i>Moon for Misbegotten</i> I. 55 He was tapped for an exclusive Senior Society at the Ivy university to which his father had given millions. <b>1972</b> J. MOSEDALE <i>Football</i> ii. 13 <i>Sports Illustrated</i> magazine tapped him..as its 'Sportsman of the Year'. <b>1977</b> <i>Time</i> 23 May 13/3 Britain's youthful Foreign Secretary David Owen announced last week that he had tapped Jay, at 40, to serve as Ambassador to Washington.</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Tapped ?
What 's with the Mainstream Media 's latest buzzword ?
Sigh. I guess anybody that reports actual news ( as opposed to bloviating idiots ) is " mainstream media .
" I 've heard this use of " tap " for as long as I can remember .
The OED says it goes back to the middle of the last century ( that they can document ) : 1952 E. O'NEILL Moon for Misbegotten I .
55 He was tapped for an exclusive Senior Society at the Ivy university to which his father had given millions .
1972 J. MOSEDALE Football ii .
13 Sports Illustrated magazine tapped him..as its 'Sportsman of the Year' .
1977 Time 23 May 13/3 Britain 's youthful Foreign Secretary David Owen announced last week that he had tapped Jay , at 40 , to serve as Ambassador to Washington .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Tapped?
What's with the Mainstream Media's latest buzzword?
Sigh. I guess anybody that reports actual news (as opposed to bloviating idiots) is "mainstream media.
"  I've heard this use of "tap" for as long as I can remember.
The OED says it goes back to the middle of the last century (that they can document):1952 E. O'NEILL Moon for Misbegotten I.
55 He was tapped for an exclusive Senior Society at the Ivy university to which his father had given millions.
1972 J. MOSEDALE Football ii.
13 Sports Illustrated magazine tapped him..as its 'Sportsman of the Year'.
1977 Time 23 May 13/3 Britain's youthful Foreign Secretary David Owen announced last week that he had tapped Jay, at 40, to serve as Ambassador to Washington.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28399025</id>
	<title>Re:"could this mean a new era for US patent policy</title>
	<author>Grond</author>
	<datestamp>1245430320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><em>Software patents were forced on them by the First Circuit</em></p><p>I think you mean either the Federal Circuit (e.g., <em>In re Alappat</em> and <em>State Street</em>) or the Supreme Court, depending on how broadly one reads <em>Benson</em>, <em>Flook</em>, and <em>Diehr</em>.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Software patents were forced on them by the First CircuitI think you mean either the Federal Circuit ( e.g. , In re Alappat and State Street ) or the Supreme Court , depending on how broadly one reads Benson , Flook , and Diehr .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Software patents were forced on them by the First CircuitI think you mean either the Federal Circuit (e.g., In re Alappat and State Street) or the Supreme Court, depending on how broadly one reads Benson, Flook, and Diehr.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397161</id>
	<title>Tapped?</title>
	<author>CuteSteveJobs</author>
	<datestamp>1245412920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tapped? What's with the Mainstream Media's latest buzzword?</p><p>"I was at the supermarket and I tapped the bottle of flavored milk. Then I decided to tap Checkout #6."</p><p>Last years MSM buzzword was "Lockdown."</p><p>"When I go to bed, I lockdown the house."</p><p>If the MSM wants to lift its flagging fortunes, it should work on the news rather than focusing on stupid buzzwords.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tapped ?
What 's with the Mainstream Media 's latest buzzword ?
" I was at the supermarket and I tapped the bottle of flavored milk .
Then I decided to tap Checkout # 6 .
" Last years MSM buzzword was " Lockdown .
" " When I go to bed , I lockdown the house .
" If the MSM wants to lift its flagging fortunes , it should work on the news rather than focusing on stupid buzzwords .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tapped?
What's with the Mainstream Media's latest buzzword?
"I was at the supermarket and I tapped the bottle of flavored milk.
Then I decided to tap Checkout #6.
"Last years MSM buzzword was "Lockdown.
""When I go to bed, I lockdown the house.
"If the MSM wants to lift its flagging fortunes, it should work on the news rather than focusing on stupid buzzwords.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28399015</id>
	<title>I'm supposed to think this is a good thing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245430080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I think Kappos having been brought up in IBM will make him more open to (or at least less skeptical of) open source-type ideas than any of the other former directors, and his computer/engineering background will also make him more critical of our patent system, and not as focused on ratcheting protections up as far as they can go.</p></div></blockquote><p>I don't know what being "more open to open source-type ideas" means.  Nor would I use the term "IP" as you did.  Software patents hurt all developers except those at IBM because IBM holds the most patents.  Holding the most patents means IBM can cross-license far more easily than any other patent holder.  In fact, we know how valuable cross-licensing is to IBM because IBM has told us.  <a href="http://progfree.org/Links/prep.ai.mit.edu/ibm.think.article" title="progfree.org">IBM has told us cross-licensing outweighs the value of collecting patent license fees by an order of magnitude</a> [progfree.org].  IBM got ten times the value of using patents held by others than licensing its own patents.  This means IBM alone can skirt the trouble the patent system causes everyone else.  IBM can completely undo the alleged advantage the patent system is supposed to give smaller organizations trying to commercially launch their work.  You really should <a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/software-patents.html" title="gnu.org">read Richard Stallman's examination of the US patent system as it applies to software development</a> [gnu.org] for a fuller description of the details on how IBM's statement in 1990 reveals the harm done to all software developers under the USPTO's thumb.</p><p>The solution is to <a href="http://en.swpat.org/" title="swpat.org">completely deny anyone software patents</a> [swpat.org] so software developers can go back to relying on trademark and copyright law which is sufficient to avoid defrauding consumers and enforcing licenses, respectively.  But I doubt the world's largest patent holder is in favor of disempowerment, and now that they have a man running the USPTO I doubt we'll see that office seeking to make software algorithms unpatentable.</p><p>I think what we're seeing here is just another instance of how corporate-friendly President Obama is.  The more I read self-identified "open source" adherents saying how good this move is, the more I think that the open source movement is too corporate-friendly as well.  Mere affiliation with a movement that isn't fighting for software freedom isn't doing you any favors; raise your critical standards and keep on fighting for the end of software patents.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think Kappos having been brought up in IBM will make him more open to ( or at least less skeptical of ) open source-type ideas than any of the other former directors , and his computer/engineering background will also make him more critical of our patent system , and not as focused on ratcheting protections up as far as they can go.I do n't know what being " more open to open source-type ideas " means .
Nor would I use the term " IP " as you did .
Software patents hurt all developers except those at IBM because IBM holds the most patents .
Holding the most patents means IBM can cross-license far more easily than any other patent holder .
In fact , we know how valuable cross-licensing is to IBM because IBM has told us .
IBM has told us cross-licensing outweighs the value of collecting patent license fees by an order of magnitude [ progfree.org ] .
IBM got ten times the value of using patents held by others than licensing its own patents .
This means IBM alone can skirt the trouble the patent system causes everyone else .
IBM can completely undo the alleged advantage the patent system is supposed to give smaller organizations trying to commercially launch their work .
You really should read Richard Stallman 's examination of the US patent system as it applies to software development [ gnu.org ] for a fuller description of the details on how IBM 's statement in 1990 reveals the harm done to all software developers under the USPTO 's thumb.The solution is to completely deny anyone software patents [ swpat.org ] so software developers can go back to relying on trademark and copyright law which is sufficient to avoid defrauding consumers and enforcing licenses , respectively .
But I doubt the world 's largest patent holder is in favor of disempowerment , and now that they have a man running the USPTO I doubt we 'll see that office seeking to make software algorithms unpatentable.I think what we 're seeing here is just another instance of how corporate-friendly President Obama is .
The more I read self-identified " open source " adherents saying how good this move is , the more I think that the open source movement is too corporate-friendly as well .
Mere affiliation with a movement that is n't fighting for software freedom is n't doing you any favors ; raise your critical standards and keep on fighting for the end of software patents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think Kappos having been brought up in IBM will make him more open to (or at least less skeptical of) open source-type ideas than any of the other former directors, and his computer/engineering background will also make him more critical of our patent system, and not as focused on ratcheting protections up as far as they can go.I don't know what being "more open to open source-type ideas" means.
Nor would I use the term "IP" as you did.
Software patents hurt all developers except those at IBM because IBM holds the most patents.
Holding the most patents means IBM can cross-license far more easily than any other patent holder.
In fact, we know how valuable cross-licensing is to IBM because IBM has told us.
IBM has told us cross-licensing outweighs the value of collecting patent license fees by an order of magnitude [progfree.org].
IBM got ten times the value of using patents held by others than licensing its own patents.
This means IBM alone can skirt the trouble the patent system causes everyone else.
IBM can completely undo the alleged advantage the patent system is supposed to give smaller organizations trying to commercially launch their work.
You really should read Richard Stallman's examination of the US patent system as it applies to software development [gnu.org] for a fuller description of the details on how IBM's statement in 1990 reveals the harm done to all software developers under the USPTO's thumb.The solution is to completely deny anyone software patents [swpat.org] so software developers can go back to relying on trademark and copyright law which is sufficient to avoid defrauding consumers and enforcing licenses, respectively.
But I doubt the world's largest patent holder is in favor of disempowerment, and now that they have a man running the USPTO I doubt we'll see that office seeking to make software algorithms unpatentable.I think what we're seeing here is just another instance of how corporate-friendly President Obama is.
The more I read self-identified "open source" adherents saying how good this move is, the more I think that the open source movement is too corporate-friendly as well.
Mere affiliation with a movement that isn't fighting for software freedom isn't doing you any favors; raise your critical standards and keep on fighting for the end of software patents.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396807</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28400421</id>
	<title>Well at least he was not from Microsoft</title>
	<author>Dollyknot</author>
	<datestamp>1245494700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Imagine the comments if he had been from Microsoft, unless he was this guy.<p>

<a href="http://www.techflash.com/How\_a\_Microsoft\_veteran\_learned\_to\_love\_Linux\_and\_why\_it\_matters\_48542167.html" title="techflash.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.techflash.com/How\_a\_Microsoft\_veteran\_learned\_to\_love\_Linux\_and\_why\_it\_matters\_48542167.html</a> [techflash.com] </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Imagine the comments if he had been from Microsoft , unless he was this guy .
http : //www.techflash.com/How \ _a \ _Microsoft \ _veteran \ _learned \ _to \ _love \ _Linux \ _and \ _why \ _it \ _matters \ _48542167.html [ techflash.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Imagine the comments if he had been from Microsoft, unless he was this guy.
http://www.techflash.com/How\_a\_Microsoft\_veteran\_learned\_to\_love\_Linux\_and\_why\_it\_matters\_48542167.html [techflash.com] </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397525</id>
	<title>Re:Tapped?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245415920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As in "Tapped on the shoulder"...</p><p>You probably have to be an old fart to have heard its common usage.</p><p>HTH</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As in " Tapped on the shoulder " ...You probably have to be an old fart to have heard its common usage.HTH</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As in "Tapped on the shoulder"...You probably have to be an old fart to have heard its common usage.HTH</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396807</id>
	<title>Some other points...</title>
	<author>langelgjm</author>
	<datestamp>1245410940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really, my summary is hyped up a bit. I doubt that Kappos will usher in a new era on his own; so much of

patent law depends on Congress and the courts anyway. However, given the views of his predecessor (Dudas is

<a href="http://www.ogc.doc.gov/ogc/legreg/testimon/109f/Dudas042105.htm" title="doc.gov">on record</a> [doc.gov] as saying that "we must

also actively educate the world that it [our patent system] is fundamentally the best system"), Kappos is <a href="http://www.cpaglobal.com/ip-review-online/widgets/interview/more/2360/managing\_ip\_the\_ibm\_way" title="cpaglobal.com">on

record</a> [cpaglobal.com] as saying that in the U.S., "Trivial patents are being granted. By contrast, the system is better

in Europe."</p><p>I think Kappos' background is also notable. He's really the first director of the computer generation: got

an engineering degree, began working at IBM as an engineer, and then went over to law as a patent lawyer. By

contrast, previous directors have either not had technical backgrounds, or have jumped around in the IP

fields (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q.\_Todd\_Dickinson" title="wikipedia.org">Q. Todd Dickinson</a> [wikipedia.org] began work at Baxter, a

healthcare company). I think Kappos having been brought up in IBM will make him more open to (or at least

less skeptical of) open source-type ideas than any of the other former directors, and his

computer/engineering background will also make him more critical of our patent system, and not as focused on

ratcheting protections up as far as they can go. Imagine, on the other hand, if the appointee had been

someone from PhRMA.</p><p>It is not unusual that a patent lawyer would hold an engineering degree; in fact, to sit for the patent

bar, one needs typically needs an engineering or science degree, and some patent lawyers have advanced

degrees in their areas of specialty. However, I thought it worth mentioning given that the former director of

the USPTO, Jon Dudas, did not have any engineering or science background, but rather a <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20030304191746/http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ddir/" title="archive.org">degree in

finance.</a> [archive.org] </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really , my summary is hyped up a bit .
I doubt that Kappos will usher in a new era on his own ; so much of patent law depends on Congress and the courts anyway .
However , given the views of his predecessor ( Dudas is on record [ doc.gov ] as saying that " we must also actively educate the world that it [ our patent system ] is fundamentally the best system " ) , Kappos is on record [ cpaglobal.com ] as saying that in the U.S. , " Trivial patents are being granted .
By contrast , the system is better in Europe .
" I think Kappos ' background is also notable .
He 's really the first director of the computer generation : got an engineering degree , began working at IBM as an engineer , and then went over to law as a patent lawyer .
By contrast , previous directors have either not had technical backgrounds , or have jumped around in the IP fields ( Q. Todd Dickinson [ wikipedia.org ] began work at Baxter , a healthcare company ) .
I think Kappos having been brought up in IBM will make him more open to ( or at least less skeptical of ) open source-type ideas than any of the other former directors , and his computer/engineering background will also make him more critical of our patent system , and not as focused on ratcheting protections up as far as they can go .
Imagine , on the other hand , if the appointee had been someone from PhRMA.It is not unusual that a patent lawyer would hold an engineering degree ; in fact , to sit for the patent bar , one needs typically needs an engineering or science degree , and some patent lawyers have advanced degrees in their areas of specialty .
However , I thought it worth mentioning given that the former director of the USPTO , Jon Dudas , did not have any engineering or science background , but rather a degree in finance .
[ archive.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really, my summary is hyped up a bit.
I doubt that Kappos will usher in a new era on his own; so much of

patent law depends on Congress and the courts anyway.
However, given the views of his predecessor (Dudas is

on record [doc.gov] as saying that "we must

also actively educate the world that it [our patent system] is fundamentally the best system"), Kappos is on

record [cpaglobal.com] as saying that in the U.S., "Trivial patents are being granted.
By contrast, the system is better

in Europe.
"I think Kappos' background is also notable.
He's really the first director of the computer generation: got

an engineering degree, began working at IBM as an engineer, and then went over to law as a patent lawyer.
By

contrast, previous directors have either not had technical backgrounds, or have jumped around in the IP

fields (Q. Todd Dickinson [wikipedia.org] began work at Baxter, a

healthcare company).
I think Kappos having been brought up in IBM will make him more open to (or at least

less skeptical of) open source-type ideas than any of the other former directors, and his

computer/engineering background will also make him more critical of our patent system, and not as focused on

ratcheting protections up as far as they can go.
Imagine, on the other hand, if the appointee had been

someone from PhRMA.It is not unusual that a patent lawyer would hold an engineering degree; in fact, to sit for the patent

bar, one needs typically needs an engineering or science degree, and some patent lawyers have advanced

degrees in their areas of specialty.
However, I thought it worth mentioning given that the former director of

the USPTO, Jon Dudas, did not have any engineering or science background, but rather a degree in

finance.
[archive.org] </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28399493</id>
	<title>Very Short Answer</title>
	<author>mqduck</author>
	<datestamp>1245436500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Given his background, could this mean a new era for US patent policy?</p></div><p>VERY SHORT ANSWER: No.<br>But it sounds like a nice development.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Given his background , could this mean a new era for US patent policy ? VERY SHORT ANSWER : No.But it sounds like a nice development .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given his background, could this mean a new era for US patent policy?VERY SHORT ANSWER: No.But it sounds like a nice development.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396843</id>
	<title>I'm sure he'll be great...</title>
	<author>RobVB</author>
	<datestamp>1245411060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Obama's decisions never hurt a fly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Obama 's decisions never hurt a fly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Obama's decisions never hurt a fly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398017</id>
	<title>And now for some patriotic verse....</title>
	<author>fm6</author>
	<datestamp>1245419820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>O! say can you see by the dawn's early light<br>What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming.<br>Whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight,<br>O'er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming.<br>And the rockets' red glare, the bombs bursting in air,<br>Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there.<br>O! say does that star-spangled banner yet wave<br>O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?</p><p>On the shore, dimly seen through the mists of the deep,<br><b>Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,</b><br>What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep,<br>As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?<br>Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam,<br>In full glory reflected now shines in the stream:<br>'Tis the star-spangled banner! Oh long may it wave<br>O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.</p><p>And where is that band who so vauntingly swore<br>That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion,<br>A home and a country should leave us no more!<br>Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps' pollution.<br><b>No refuge could save the hireling and slave<br>From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:</b><br>And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave<br>O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.</p><p>O! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand<br>Between their loved home and the war's desolation!<br>Blest with victory and peace, may the heav'n rescued land<br>Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.<br><b>Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,</b><br>And this be our motto: 'In God is our trust.'<br>And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave<br>O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>O !
say can you see by the dawn 's early lightWhat so proudly we hailed at the twilight 's last gleaming.Whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight,O'er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming.And the rockets ' red glare , the bombs bursting in air,Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there.O !
say does that star-spangled banner yet waveO'er the land of the free and the home of the brave ? On the shore , dimly seen through the mists of the deep,Where the foe 's haughty host in dread silence reposes,What is that which the breeze , o'er the towering steep,As it fitfully blows , half conceals , half discloses ? Now it catches the gleam of the morning 's first beam,In full glory reflected now shines in the stream : 'T is the star-spangled banner !
Oh long may it waveO'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.And where is that band who so vauntingly sworeThat the havoc of war and the battle 's confusion,A home and a country should leave us no more ! Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps ' pollution.No refuge could save the hireling and slaveFrom the terror of flight , or the gloom of the grave : And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth waveO'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.O !
thus be it ever , when freemen shall standBetween their loved home and the war 's desolation ! Blest with victory and peace , may the heav'n rescued landPraise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.Then conquer we must , when our cause it is just,And this be our motto : 'In God is our trust .
'And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall waveO'er the land of the free and the home of the brave !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>O!
say can you see by the dawn's early lightWhat so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming.Whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight,O'er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming.And the rockets' red glare, the bombs bursting in air,Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there.O!
say does that star-spangled banner yet waveO'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?On the shore, dimly seen through the mists of the deep,Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep,As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam,In full glory reflected now shines in the stream:'Tis the star-spangled banner!
Oh long may it waveO'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.And where is that band who so vauntingly sworeThat the havoc of war and the battle's confusion,A home and a country should leave us no more!Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps' pollution.No refuge could save the hireling and slaveFrom the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth waveO'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.O!
thus be it ever, when freemen shall standBetween their loved home and the war's desolation!Blest with victory and peace, may the heav'n rescued landPraise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,And this be our motto: 'In God is our trust.
'And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall waveO'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397461</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398373</id>
	<title>Spare Change?</title>
	<author>fm6</author>
	<datestamp>1245422820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since you're the rare Obama critic who doesn't see Pure Evil in his every move (such as his <a href="http://www.theweek.com/article/index/96304/Video\_Sean\_Hannitys\_review\_of\_Obamas\_cheeseburger" title="theweek.com">choice of condiments</a> [theweek.com]!) perhaps you could share some of your list of O's "many mistakes". I think he's actually done surprisingly well.</p><p>But more to the point, I crave  an intelligent argument with a  right-winger whose rhetoric goes beyond infantile insults and weird conspiracy mongering. When the conservatives were in charge, their abuse of logic and rhetoric would drive me up the wall. But now that they're out of power, their arguments are just a depressing sign of intellectual sloth. I guess they've had it too easy for too long.</p><p>People, get it together! It's your job as the opposition to keep us liberals honest! And it's a job you're not doing! Come one! Start pulling your weight! Isn't Personal Responsibility one of those Bennettish Virtues you keep harping on?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since you 're the rare Obama critic who does n't see Pure Evil in his every move ( such as his choice of condiments [ theweek.com ] !
) perhaps you could share some of your list of O 's " many mistakes " .
I think he 's actually done surprisingly well.But more to the point , I crave an intelligent argument with a right-winger whose rhetoric goes beyond infantile insults and weird conspiracy mongering .
When the conservatives were in charge , their abuse of logic and rhetoric would drive me up the wall .
But now that they 're out of power , their arguments are just a depressing sign of intellectual sloth .
I guess they 've had it too easy for too long.People , get it together !
It 's your job as the opposition to keep us liberals honest !
And it 's a job you 're not doing !
Come one !
Start pulling your weight !
Is n't Personal Responsibility one of those Bennettish Virtues you keep harping on ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since you're the rare Obama critic who doesn't see Pure Evil in his every move (such as his choice of condiments [theweek.com]!
) perhaps you could share some of your list of O's "many mistakes".
I think he's actually done surprisingly well.But more to the point, I crave  an intelligent argument with a  right-winger whose rhetoric goes beyond infantile insults and weird conspiracy mongering.
When the conservatives were in charge, their abuse of logic and rhetoric would drive me up the wall.
But now that they're out of power, their arguments are just a depressing sign of intellectual sloth.
I guess they've had it too easy for too long.People, get it together!
It's your job as the opposition to keep us liberals honest!
And it's a job you're not doing!
Come one!
Start pulling your weight!
Isn't Personal Responsibility one of those Bennettish Virtues you keep harping on?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397461</id>
	<title>Re:Some other points...</title>
	<author>Daniel Dvorkin</author>
	<datestamp>1245415260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Kappos is on record as saying that in the U.S., "Trivial patents are being granted. By contrast, the system is better in Europe."</i></p><p>He's saying something in Europe is better than in the US?  My God, what kind of monster is this guy?  He must be a socialist atheist gay-marrying cheese-eating surrender monkey terrorist lover!  The Senate should not only deny his confirmation, they should kick him out of the country!</p><p>America, love it or leave it!  God's country!  U-S-A!  U-S-A!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Kappos is on record as saying that in the U.S. , " Trivial patents are being granted .
By contrast , the system is better in Europe .
" He 's saying something in Europe is better than in the US ?
My God , what kind of monster is this guy ?
He must be a socialist atheist gay-marrying cheese-eating surrender monkey terrorist lover !
The Senate should not only deny his confirmation , they should kick him out of the country ! America , love it or leave it !
God 's country !
U-S-A ! U-S-A !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Kappos is on record as saying that in the U.S., "Trivial patents are being granted.
By contrast, the system is better in Europe.
"He's saying something in Europe is better than in the US?
My God, what kind of monster is this guy?
He must be a socialist atheist gay-marrying cheese-eating surrender monkey terrorist lover!
The Senate should not only deny his confirmation, they should kick him out of the country!America, love it or leave it!
God's country!
U-S-A!  U-S-A!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396807</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397389</id>
	<title>IBM is the Record-Setter</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245414660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the linked article:</p><p><i>IBM has a worldwide portfolio of 40,000 patents. About half are lodged in the USA and the remainder split between Europe and Asia (where, of course, China is increasingly featuring). So far this year, IBM has filed 3,000 patents and is on target, says David, to maintain its record for the past 14 years of consistently filing more patents than anyone else.</i></p><p>So, if the definition of "new era for patent policy" is "more software patents", then yes (though I fail to see how that is "new" except that it is pressing harder on the accelerator down this destructive road). Granted, IBM is opposed to business method patents, but that is no surprise since their ability to innovate in business models is legendarily lackluster.</p><p>Nothing to see here. Same old moneyed interests using their monopoly-built position to buy more government access so they can create more monopoly rent opportunities for themselves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From the linked article : IBM has a worldwide portfolio of 40,000 patents .
About half are lodged in the USA and the remainder split between Europe and Asia ( where , of course , China is increasingly featuring ) .
So far this year , IBM has filed 3,000 patents and is on target , says David , to maintain its record for the past 14 years of consistently filing more patents than anyone else.So , if the definition of " new era for patent policy " is " more software patents " , then yes ( though I fail to see how that is " new " except that it is pressing harder on the accelerator down this destructive road ) .
Granted , IBM is opposed to business method patents , but that is no surprise since their ability to innovate in business models is legendarily lackluster.Nothing to see here .
Same old moneyed interests using their monopoly-built position to buy more government access so they can create more monopoly rent opportunities for themselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the linked article:IBM has a worldwide portfolio of 40,000 patents.
About half are lodged in the USA and the remainder split between Europe and Asia (where, of course, China is increasingly featuring).
So far this year, IBM has filed 3,000 patents and is on target, says David, to maintain its record for the past 14 years of consistently filing more patents than anyone else.So, if the definition of "new era for patent policy" is "more software patents", then yes (though I fail to see how that is "new" except that it is pressing harder on the accelerator down this destructive road).
Granted, IBM is opposed to business method patents, but that is no surprise since their ability to innovate in business models is legendarily lackluster.Nothing to see here.
Same old moneyed interests using their monopoly-built position to buy more government access so they can create more monopoly rent opportunities for themselves.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398737</id>
	<title>NW is better than W but it still ain't true N.</title>
	<author>Wolfbone</author>
	<datestamp>1245426840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One day maybe they'll get it right and appoint someone with a working compass but it seems to me (from reading the article you linked) that Kappos' thinking is just as devoid of the empirically informed economic theory necessary to navigate patent system issues rationally and ethically as any of his predecessors'. Ironically, Dudas was probably slightly better placed background-wise to grasp why it's so extremely dubious that software should be patent eligible subject matter at all. A further irony is that IBM once (in the 1960s) at least seemed to understand patent system economics well enough to have made it their policy "...to be sure that nobody bottled up software and algorithms by getting patents on them.":  <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20060426151241/http://www.siam.org/siamnews/mtc/mtc593.htm" title="archive.org">http://web.archive.org/web/20060426151241/http://www.siam.org/siamnews/mtc/mtc593.htm</a> [archive.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One day maybe they 'll get it right and appoint someone with a working compass but it seems to me ( from reading the article you linked ) that Kappos ' thinking is just as devoid of the empirically informed economic theory necessary to navigate patent system issues rationally and ethically as any of his predecessors' .
Ironically , Dudas was probably slightly better placed background-wise to grasp why it 's so extremely dubious that software should be patent eligible subject matter at all .
A further irony is that IBM once ( in the 1960s ) at least seemed to understand patent system economics well enough to have made it their policy " ...to be sure that nobody bottled up software and algorithms by getting patents on them .
" : http : //web.archive.org/web/20060426151241/http : //www.siam.org/siamnews/mtc/mtc593.htm [ archive.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One day maybe they'll get it right and appoint someone with a working compass but it seems to me (from reading the article you linked) that Kappos' thinking is just as devoid of the empirically informed economic theory necessary to navigate patent system issues rationally and ethically as any of his predecessors'.
Ironically, Dudas was probably slightly better placed background-wise to grasp why it's so extremely dubious that software should be patent eligible subject matter at all.
A further irony is that IBM once (in the 1960s) at least seemed to understand patent system economics well enough to have made it their policy "...to be sure that nobody bottled up software and algorithms by getting patents on them.
":  http://web.archive.org/web/20060426151241/http://www.siam.org/siamnews/mtc/mtc593.htm [archive.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396807</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396959</id>
	<title>Re:Isn't that required?</title>
	<author>Gerocrack</author>
	<datestamp>1245411600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Patent prosecution (writing patents) requires you pass the US patent bar, which is different from a state bar.  To sit for the patent bar, you must have an engineering/science degree.  Patent litigation, however, only requires you be certified by the bar of the state in which you are practicing; Patent Bar and technical degrees are not required.

You can also take the patent bar w/o going to law school, and become a patent agent.  Still need the technical background, though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Patent prosecution ( writing patents ) requires you pass the US patent bar , which is different from a state bar .
To sit for the patent bar , you must have an engineering/science degree .
Patent litigation , however , only requires you be certified by the bar of the state in which you are practicing ; Patent Bar and technical degrees are not required .
You can also take the patent bar w/o going to law school , and become a patent agent .
Still need the technical background , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Patent prosecution (writing patents) requires you pass the US patent bar, which is different from a state bar.
To sit for the patent bar, you must have an engineering/science degree.
Patent litigation, however, only requires you be certified by the bar of the state in which you are practicing; Patent Bar and technical degrees are not required.
You can also take the patent bar w/o going to law school, and become a patent agent.
Still need the technical background, though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396845</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397439</id>
	<title>Shit</title>
	<author>Mr\_eX9</author>
	<datestamp>1245415020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Now IBM is going to patent the USPTO itself!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now IBM is going to patent the USPTO itself !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now IBM is going to patent the USPTO itself!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397561</id>
	<title>new era for US patent policy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245416340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"<i>Given his background, could this mean a new era for US patent policy?</i>"</p><p>I hope. But I doubt it...HE will become a politician and then forget about the common good to all citizens.....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Given his background , could this mean a new era for US patent policy ?
" I hope .
But I doubt it...HE will become a politician and then forget about the common good to all citizens.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Given his background, could this mean a new era for US patent policy?
"I hope.
But I doubt it...HE will become a politician and then forget about the common good to all citizens.....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28407095</id>
	<title>Re:IBM is the Record-Setter</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245513480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>From the linked article:</p><p> <i>IBM has a worldwide portfolio of 40,000 patents. About half are lodged in the USA and the remainder split between Europe and Asia (where, of course, China is increasingly featuring). So far this year, IBM has filed 3,000 patents and is on target, says David, to maintain its record for the past 14 years of consistently filing more patents than anyone else.</i> </p><p>So, if the definition of "new era for patent policy" is "more software patents", then yes (though I fail to see how that is "new" except that it is pressing harder on the accelerator down this destructive road). Granted, IBM is opposed to business method patents, but that is no surprise since their ability to innovate in business models is legendarily lackluster.</p><p>Nothing to see here. Same old moneyed interests using their monopoly-built position to buy more government access so they can create more monopoly rent opportunities for themselves.</p></div><p>I see "40,000 patents".  What I don't see is "40,000 software patents".  IBM is fundamentally a hardware company, after all.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the linked article : IBM has a worldwide portfolio of 40,000 patents .
About half are lodged in the USA and the remainder split between Europe and Asia ( where , of course , China is increasingly featuring ) .
So far this year , IBM has filed 3,000 patents and is on target , says David , to maintain its record for the past 14 years of consistently filing more patents than anyone else .
So , if the definition of " new era for patent policy " is " more software patents " , then yes ( though I fail to see how that is " new " except that it is pressing harder on the accelerator down this destructive road ) .
Granted , IBM is opposed to business method patents , but that is no surprise since their ability to innovate in business models is legendarily lackluster.Nothing to see here .
Same old moneyed interests using their monopoly-built position to buy more government access so they can create more monopoly rent opportunities for themselves.I see " 40,000 patents " .
What I do n't see is " 40,000 software patents " .
IBM is fundamentally a hardware company , after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the linked article: IBM has a worldwide portfolio of 40,000 patents.
About half are lodged in the USA and the remainder split between Europe and Asia (where, of course, China is increasingly featuring).
So far this year, IBM has filed 3,000 patents and is on target, says David, to maintain its record for the past 14 years of consistently filing more patents than anyone else.
So, if the definition of "new era for patent policy" is "more software patents", then yes (though I fail to see how that is "new" except that it is pressing harder on the accelerator down this destructive road).
Granted, IBM is opposed to business method patents, but that is no surprise since their ability to innovate in business models is legendarily lackluster.Nothing to see here.
Same old moneyed interests using their monopoly-built position to buy more government access so they can create more monopoly rent opportunities for themselves.I see "40,000 patents".
What I don't see is "40,000 software patents".
IBM is fundamentally a hardware company, after all.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397389</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28400867</id>
	<title>Re:Tapped?</title>
	<author>Ginger Unicorn</author>
	<datestamp>1245502380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The question is, why didn't they summon a creature with vigilance, to avoid having to tap him in the first place.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The question is , why did n't they summon a creature with vigilance , to avoid having to tap him in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The question is, why didn't they summon a creature with vigilance, to avoid having to tap him in the first place.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398171</id>
	<title>Re:Some other points...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245420780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>He must be a socialist atheist gay-marrying <i>cheese-eating</i> surrender monkey terrorist lover!</p></div><p>Dude, Wisconsin is gonna be so pissed off at you for this.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>He must be a socialist atheist gay-marrying cheese-eating surrender monkey terrorist lover ! Dude , Wisconsin is gon na be so pissed off at you for this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He must be a socialist atheist gay-marrying cheese-eating surrender monkey terrorist lover!Dude, Wisconsin is gonna be so pissed off at you for this.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397461</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398225</id>
	<title>Re:Tapped?</title>
	<author>GaryOlson</author>
	<datestamp>1245421320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Tapped is a mechanical term relating to the creation of screw threads in a [solid] material. In order to be properly tapped, material must be removed to create a cavity, the hole gets chamfered to provide a proper thread lead-in, and the threads created by forming or cutting.<br> <br>So David Kappos has been properly drilled, edged, and rolled with precision.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Tapped is a mechanical term relating to the creation of screw threads in a [ solid ] material .
In order to be properly tapped , material must be removed to create a cavity , the hole gets chamfered to provide a proper thread lead-in , and the threads created by forming or cutting .
So David Kappos has been properly drilled , edged , and rolled with precision .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tapped is a mechanical term relating to the creation of screw threads in a [solid] material.
In order to be properly tapped, material must be removed to create a cavity, the hole gets chamfered to provide a proper thread lead-in, and the threads created by forming or cutting.
So David Kappos has been properly drilled, edged, and rolled with precision.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397089</id>
	<title>IBM</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245412320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IBM:</p><p>I am<br>BASICALLY a<br>MORON</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IBM : I amBASICALLY aMORON</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IBM:I amBASICALLY aMORON</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397131</id>
	<title>Re:Some other points...</title>
	<author>sribe</author>
	<datestamp>1245412680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Really, my summary is hyped up a bit. I doubt that Kappos will usher in a new era on his own; so much of patent law depends on Congress and the courts anyway.</p></div><p>A lot of what we think of as the really bad stuff, was undertaken by the patent office on its own with neither authorization from Congress nor truly applicable court ruling, but at the direction of an ambitiously expansive director.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Really , my summary is hyped up a bit .
I doubt that Kappos will usher in a new era on his own ; so much of patent law depends on Congress and the courts anyway.A lot of what we think of as the really bad stuff , was undertaken by the patent office on its own with neither authorization from Congress nor truly applicable court ruling , but at the direction of an ambitiously expansive director .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really, my summary is hyped up a bit.
I doubt that Kappos will usher in a new era on his own; so much of patent law depends on Congress and the courts anyway.A lot of what we think of as the really bad stuff, was undertaken by the patent office on its own with neither authorization from Congress nor truly applicable court ruling, but at the direction of an ambitiously expansive director.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396807</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398591</id>
	<title>Re:I suppose I can't karma whore with</title>
	<author>tsm\_sf</author>
	<datestamp>1245425280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>saying "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss," and expect the automatic stamp of +5 insightful on this story can I.</i> <br> <br>

We'll let the market sort that out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>saying " Meet the new boss , same as the old boss , " and expect the automatic stamp of + 5 insightful on this story can I . We 'll let the market sort that out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>saying "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss," and expect the automatic stamp of +5 insightful on this story can I.  

We'll let the market sort that out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397031</id>
	<title>Only an era in u.s. policy ? hell.</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1245412020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it will be a new era for i.t. globally.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it will be a new era for i.t .
globally .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it will be a new era for i.t.
globally.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397325</id>
	<title>Good choice</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245414120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If I were American, I think I would be a Democrat.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I were American , I think I would be a Democrat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I were American, I think I would be a Democrat.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28401991</id>
	<title>Re:Some other points...</title>
	<author>guyminuslife</author>
	<datestamp>1245514200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think they'd be <i>cheesed</i>, even.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think they 'd be cheesed , even .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think they'd be cheesed, even.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398171</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396933</id>
	<title>Morons.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245411480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IBM is one of the worst trivial patent spammers out there.<br>Anyone who claims that this will mean any change in the USPTO policy is a clueless moron.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IBM is one of the worst trivial patent spammers out there.Anyone who claims that this will mean any change in the USPTO policy is a clueless moron .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IBM is one of the worst trivial patent spammers out there.Anyone who claims that this will mean any change in the USPTO policy is a clueless moron.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397887</id>
	<title>Actually . . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245418620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You <i>could</i> say that, and be modded way up.  Slashdotters will come up with all kinds of spurious reasons why this is just terrible and why it means Obama is "OMG against our freedoms!"  The actual <i>truth</i> doesn't matter to them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You could say that , and be modded way up .
Slashdotters will come up with all kinds of spurious reasons why this is just terrible and why it means Obama is " OMG against our freedoms !
" The actual truth does n't matter to them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You could say that, and be modded way up.
Slashdotters will come up with all kinds of spurious reasons why this is just terrible and why it means Obama is "OMG against our freedoms!
"  The actual truth doesn't matter to them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397413</id>
	<title>Change</title>
	<author>slimjim8094</author>
	<datestamp>1245414840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I sympathize for (but don't agree with) people who call out Obama's (admittedly many) poor decisions and shout "Is this the change you voted for? That was one hell of a marketing scheme"</p><p>Well I'm proud to say that, yes, this <i>is</i> the change I voted for. This is exactly the type of decision that makes me happy of my choice. Go Obama! I'm not thrilled about all of your decisions, but it's things like this that make me guardedly optimistic that the future of our country is in careful and intelligent</p><p>(Though I can't see at the moment how this will be spun as a negative, I'm sure it will be).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I sympathize for ( but do n't agree with ) people who call out Obama 's ( admittedly many ) poor decisions and shout " Is this the change you voted for ?
That was one hell of a marketing scheme " Well I 'm proud to say that , yes , this is the change I voted for .
This is exactly the type of decision that makes me happy of my choice .
Go Obama !
I 'm not thrilled about all of your decisions , but it 's things like this that make me guardedly optimistic that the future of our country is in careful and intelligent ( Though I ca n't see at the moment how this will be spun as a negative , I 'm sure it will be ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I sympathize for (but don't agree with) people who call out Obama's (admittedly many) poor decisions and shout "Is this the change you voted for?
That was one hell of a marketing scheme"Well I'm proud to say that, yes, this is the change I voted for.
This is exactly the type of decision that makes me happy of my choice.
Go Obama!
I'm not thrilled about all of your decisions, but it's things like this that make me guardedly optimistic that the future of our country is in careful and intelligent(Though I can't see at the moment how this will be spun as a negative, I'm sure it will be).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396835</id>
	<title>But</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245411060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>what will become of my patented karate chop to the face?</htmltext>
<tokenext>what will become of my patented karate chop to the face ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>what will become of my patented karate chop to the face?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28399721</id>
	<title>Re:Some other points...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245440100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"...Congress nor truly applicable court ruling, but at the direction of an ambitiously expansive director."</p><p>You mean bribed by the private sector.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...Congress nor truly applicable court ruling , but at the direction of an ambitiously expansive director .
" You mean bribed by the private sector .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...Congress nor truly applicable court ruling, but at the direction of an ambitiously expansive director.
"You mean bribed by the private sector.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398607</id>
	<title>It's Better Manually</title>
	<author>Fished</author>
	<datestamp>1245425520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>IBM: It's Better Manually</htmltext>
<tokenext>IBM : It 's Better Manually</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IBM: It's Better Manually</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397089</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28400757</id>
	<title>Re:Tapped?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245500100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And before that, it was "Price Point"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And before that , it was " Price Point "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And before that, it was "Price Point"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28408539</id>
	<title>Re:Some other points...</title>
	<author>dave87656</author>
	<datestamp>1245614820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interesting points and very informative. Thanks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting points and very informative .
Thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting points and very informative.
Thanks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396807</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28399073</id>
	<title>Afro-American Racism Against Whites and Asians</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245430860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>During the election, about 95\% of African-Americans voted for Barack Hussein Obama due solely to the color of his skin.  See the <a href="http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#USP00p1" title="cnn.com" rel="nofollow">exit-polling data</a> [cnn.com] by CNN.
<p>
Note the voting pattern of Hispanics, Asian-Americans, etc.  These non-Black minorities serve as a measurement of African-American racism against non-Blacks.  Neither Barack Hussein Obama nor John McCain is a non-Black minority.  So, Hispanics and Asian-Americans used only non-racial criteria in selecting a candidate and, hence, serve as the reference by which we detect a racist voting pattern.  Only about 65\% of Hispanics and Asian-Americans supported Obama.  In other words, a maximum of 65\% support by any ethnic or racial group for either McCain or Obama is not racist and, hence, is acceptable.
</p><p>
If African-Americans were not racist, then at most 65\% of them would have supported Obama.  At that level of support, McCain would have won the presidential race.
</p><p>
At this point, African-American supremacists (and apologists) claim that African-Americans voted for Obama because he (1) is a member of the Democratic party and (2) supports its ideals.  That claim is an outright lie.  Look at the <a href="http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/#NCDEM" title="cnn.com" rel="nofollow">exit-polling data</a> [cnn.com] for the Democratic primaries.  Consider the case of North Carolina.  Again, about 95\% of African-Americans voted for him and against Hillary Clinton.  Both Clinton and Obama are Democrats, and their official political positions on the campaign trail were nearly identical.  Yet, 95\% of African-Americans voted for Obama and against Hillary Clinton.  Why?  African-Americans supported Obama due solely to the color of his skin.
</p><p>
Here is the bottom line.  Barack Hussein Obama does not represent mainstream America.  He won the election due to the racist voting pattern exhibited by African-Americans.
</p><p>
African-Americans have established that expressing "racial pride" by voting on the basis of skin color is 100\% acceptable.  Neither the "Wall Street Journal" nor the "New York Times" complained about this racist behavior.  Therefore, in future elections, please feel free to express your racial pride by voting on the basis of skin color.  Feel free to vote for the non-Black candidates and against the Black candidates if you are not African-American.  You need not defend your actions in any way.  Voting on the basis of skin is quite acceptable by the standards of today's moral values.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>During the election , about 95 \ % of African-Americans voted for Barack Hussein Obama due solely to the color of his skin .
See the exit-polling data [ cnn.com ] by CNN .
Note the voting pattern of Hispanics , Asian-Americans , etc .
These non-Black minorities serve as a measurement of African-American racism against non-Blacks .
Neither Barack Hussein Obama nor John McCain is a non-Black minority .
So , Hispanics and Asian-Americans used only non-racial criteria in selecting a candidate and , hence , serve as the reference by which we detect a racist voting pattern .
Only about 65 \ % of Hispanics and Asian-Americans supported Obama .
In other words , a maximum of 65 \ % support by any ethnic or racial group for either McCain or Obama is not racist and , hence , is acceptable .
If African-Americans were not racist , then at most 65 \ % of them would have supported Obama .
At that level of support , McCain would have won the presidential race .
At this point , African-American supremacists ( and apologists ) claim that African-Americans voted for Obama because he ( 1 ) is a member of the Democratic party and ( 2 ) supports its ideals .
That claim is an outright lie .
Look at the exit-polling data [ cnn.com ] for the Democratic primaries .
Consider the case of North Carolina .
Again , about 95 \ % of African-Americans voted for him and against Hillary Clinton .
Both Clinton and Obama are Democrats , and their official political positions on the campaign trail were nearly identical .
Yet , 95 \ % of African-Americans voted for Obama and against Hillary Clinton .
Why ? African-Americans supported Obama due solely to the color of his skin .
Here is the bottom line .
Barack Hussein Obama does not represent mainstream America .
He won the election due to the racist voting pattern exhibited by African-Americans .
African-Americans have established that expressing " racial pride " by voting on the basis of skin color is 100 \ % acceptable .
Neither the " Wall Street Journal " nor the " New York Times " complained about this racist behavior .
Therefore , in future elections , please feel free to express your racial pride by voting on the basis of skin color .
Feel free to vote for the non-Black candidates and against the Black candidates if you are not African-American .
You need not defend your actions in any way .
Voting on the basis of skin is quite acceptable by the standards of today 's moral values .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>During the election, about 95\% of African-Americans voted for Barack Hussein Obama due solely to the color of his skin.
See the exit-polling data [cnn.com] by CNN.
Note the voting pattern of Hispanics, Asian-Americans, etc.
These non-Black minorities serve as a measurement of African-American racism against non-Blacks.
Neither Barack Hussein Obama nor John McCain is a non-Black minority.
So, Hispanics and Asian-Americans used only non-racial criteria in selecting a candidate and, hence, serve as the reference by which we detect a racist voting pattern.
Only about 65\% of Hispanics and Asian-Americans supported Obama.
In other words, a maximum of 65\% support by any ethnic or racial group for either McCain or Obama is not racist and, hence, is acceptable.
If African-Americans were not racist, then at most 65\% of them would have supported Obama.
At that level of support, McCain would have won the presidential race.
At this point, African-American supremacists (and apologists) claim that African-Americans voted for Obama because he (1) is a member of the Democratic party and (2) supports its ideals.
That claim is an outright lie.
Look at the exit-polling data [cnn.com] for the Democratic primaries.
Consider the case of North Carolina.
Again, about 95\% of African-Americans voted for him and against Hillary Clinton.
Both Clinton and Obama are Democrats, and their official political positions on the campaign trail were nearly identical.
Yet, 95\% of African-Americans voted for Obama and against Hillary Clinton.
Why?  African-Americans supported Obama due solely to the color of his skin.
Here is the bottom line.
Barack Hussein Obama does not represent mainstream America.
He won the election due to the racist voting pattern exhibited by African-Americans.
African-Americans have established that expressing "racial pride" by voting on the basis of skin color is 100\% acceptable.
Neither the "Wall Street Journal" nor the "New York Times" complained about this racist behavior.
Therefore, in future elections, please feel free to express your racial pride by voting on the basis of skin color.
Feel free to vote for the non-Black candidates and against the Black candidates if you are not African-American.
You need not defend your actions in any way.
Voting on the basis of skin is quite acceptable by the standards of today's moral values.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396807</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398473</id>
	<title>Re:Tapped?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245424020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hell, I'd tap that then put it in a lockbox and sell it for mad money my friend.  I am not a criminal, knock down this wall!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hell , I 'd tap that then put it in a lockbox and sell it for mad money my friend .
I am not a criminal , knock down this wall !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hell, I'd tap that then put it in a lockbox and sell it for mad money my friend.
I am not a criminal, knock down this wall!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28409985</id>
	<title>IBM in Trillion Dollar Patent Theft Lawsuit</title>
	<author>iviewit</author>
	<datestamp>1245592380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>MADOFF + STANFORD + DREIER + SATYAM + FISERV + ALBERT HU + The 1031 Tax Group LLC - Edward H. Okun = PROSKAUER ROSE, FOLEY &amp; LARDNER, IBM, INTEL, SGI and others.
Can all these crimes be related to the theft of Intellectual Property by former IBM patent counsel and employees, could this be the reason Obama is tapping IBM executives and Foley &amp; Lardner attorneys to key commerce positions, in effect to continue the cover up of the crimes against the United States Patent &amp; Trademark Offices and inventors?  At the heart of the matter are technologies that revolutionized the digital imaging and video content creation and distribution channels in almost every product that utilizes such technologies.

The technologies opened the door for things like Internet and Cell Phone full screen, full frame rate video over low bandwidths.  They solved for image pixel distortion on zoom of low resolution images and now are commonly found on all Digital Cameras, the Hubble, Space Simulators, Medical Imaging Devices, Televisions, Graphic Chips, Internet Video Players (i.e. Microsoft Media Player, Apple Quicktime, Real Player, etc.), Satellite and Military Imaging Applications.  Coined the &#226;oeHoly Grail&#226; of digital imaging and video by leading experts and engineers, from Intel, SGI and Lockheed, including Hassan Miah, the technologies were then alleged stolen by the very patent attorneys that were supposed to be patenting them, read on.

I personally have been trying to notify regulators and authorities of a ONE TRILLION DOLLAR patent theft that is putting investors in certain tech companies at huge risk.  Companies involved in the alleged crimes and now in a TRILLION dollar federal lawsuit include Intel, Lockheed, SGI and IBM. The companies involved in the fraud fail to acknowledge the risk exposing shareholders and citizens to impending liabilities as required by FASB accounting Rule 5, hiding the impending liabilities. A SEC complaint has been filed against Intel and Lockheed for failure to notify shareholders of liability @ <a href="http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20090325\%20FINAL\%20Intel\%20SEC\%20Complaint\%20SIGNED2073.pdf" title="iviewit.tv" rel="nofollow">http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20090325\%20FINAL\%20Intel\%20SEC\%20Complaint\%20SIGNED2073.pdf</a> [iviewit.tv]

Investigators, courts and federal agents have been notified of the crimes and evidence, including a car-bombing attempt on my life and the US Patent Office has now suspended the Iviewit Intellectual Properties pending investigations by the USPTO, the attorney disciplinary of the USPTO the Office of Enrollment and Discipline and Federal Authorities. I know how Harry Markopolos felt trying to expose Madoff in a world without regulation and where government agencies have been infiltrated to subterfuge the crimes by the law firms involved.

Many of today&#226;(TM)s biggest crimes like Madoff, Allen Stanford and Marc Drier are alleged tied to the thefts, as money laundering vehicles for the stolen inventor royalties.  Did I hear Proskauer Rose is involved in Madoff (involved many clients too) and acted as Allen Stanford's attorney. Investors who lost money in these scams should start looking at the law firms, like Proskauer's assets for recovery. First, Proskauer partner Gregg Mashberg claims Madoff is a financial 9/11 for their clients, if they directed you to Madoff sue them. Then, Proskauer partner Thomas Sjoblom former enforcement dude for SEC and Allen Stanford attorney, declares PARTY IS OVER to Stanford employees and advises them to PRAY, this two days before SEC hearings. Then at the SEC hearings, he lies with Holt to SEC saying she only prepared with him but fails to mention Miami meeting at airport hanger which witnesses state was held to mislead SEC investigators. Then Sjoblom resigns as Stanford counsel and sends an email to the SEC disaffirming all statements made by him and Proskauer, his butt on fire. If you were burned in Stanford sue Proskauer.  The FBI has arrested Stanford and the indictment clearly points to Sjoblom and Proskauer as the legal counsel involved in committing Fraud on th</htmltext>
<tokenext>MADOFF + STANFORD + DREIER + SATYAM + FISERV + ALBERT HU + The 1031 Tax Group LLC - Edward H. Okun = PROSKAUER ROSE , FOLEY &amp; LARDNER , IBM , INTEL , SGI and others .
Can all these crimes be related to the theft of Intellectual Property by former IBM patent counsel and employees , could this be the reason Obama is tapping IBM executives and Foley &amp; Lardner attorneys to key commerce positions , in effect to continue the cover up of the crimes against the United States Patent &amp; Trademark Offices and inventors ?
At the heart of the matter are technologies that revolutionized the digital imaging and video content creation and distribution channels in almost every product that utilizes such technologies .
The technologies opened the door for things like Internet and Cell Phone full screen , full frame rate video over low bandwidths .
They solved for image pixel distortion on zoom of low resolution images and now are commonly found on all Digital Cameras , the Hubble , Space Simulators , Medical Imaging Devices , Televisions , Graphic Chips , Internet Video Players ( i.e .
Microsoft Media Player , Apple Quicktime , Real Player , etc .
) , Satellite and Military Imaging Applications .
Coined the   oeHoly Grail   of digital imaging and video by leading experts and engineers , from Intel , SGI and Lockheed , including Hassan Miah , the technologies were then alleged stolen by the very patent attorneys that were supposed to be patenting them , read on .
I personally have been trying to notify regulators and authorities of a ONE TRILLION DOLLAR patent theft that is putting investors in certain tech companies at huge risk .
Companies involved in the alleged crimes and now in a TRILLION dollar federal lawsuit include Intel , Lockheed , SGI and IBM .
The companies involved in the fraud fail to acknowledge the risk exposing shareholders and citizens to impending liabilities as required by FASB accounting Rule 5 , hiding the impending liabilities .
A SEC complaint has been filed against Intel and Lockheed for failure to notify shareholders of liability @ http : //www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20090325 \ % 20FINAL \ % 20Intel \ % 20SEC \ % 20Complaint \ % 20SIGNED2073.pdf [ iviewit.tv ] Investigators , courts and federal agents have been notified of the crimes and evidence , including a car-bombing attempt on my life and the US Patent Office has now suspended the Iviewit Intellectual Properties pending investigations by the USPTO , the attorney disciplinary of the USPTO the Office of Enrollment and Discipline and Federal Authorities .
I know how Harry Markopolos felt trying to expose Madoff in a world without regulation and where government agencies have been infiltrated to subterfuge the crimes by the law firms involved .
Many of today   ( TM ) s biggest crimes like Madoff , Allen Stanford and Marc Drier are alleged tied to the thefts , as money laundering vehicles for the stolen inventor royalties .
Did I hear Proskauer Rose is involved in Madoff ( involved many clients too ) and acted as Allen Stanford 's attorney .
Investors who lost money in these scams should start looking at the law firms , like Proskauer 's assets for recovery .
First , Proskauer partner Gregg Mashberg claims Madoff is a financial 9/11 for their clients , if they directed you to Madoff sue them .
Then , Proskauer partner Thomas Sjoblom former enforcement dude for SEC and Allen Stanford attorney , declares PARTY IS OVER to Stanford employees and advises them to PRAY , this two days before SEC hearings .
Then at the SEC hearings , he lies with Holt to SEC saying she only prepared with him but fails to mention Miami meeting at airport hanger which witnesses state was held to mislead SEC investigators .
Then Sjoblom resigns as Stanford counsel and sends an email to the SEC disaffirming all statements made by him and Proskauer , his butt on fire .
If you were burned in Stanford sue Proskauer .
The FBI has arrested Stanford and the indictment clearly points to Sjoblom and Proskauer as the legal counsel involved in committing Fraud on th</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MADOFF + STANFORD + DREIER + SATYAM + FISERV + ALBERT HU + The 1031 Tax Group LLC - Edward H. Okun = PROSKAUER ROSE, FOLEY &amp; LARDNER, IBM, INTEL, SGI and others.
Can all these crimes be related to the theft of Intellectual Property by former IBM patent counsel and employees, could this be the reason Obama is tapping IBM executives and Foley &amp; Lardner attorneys to key commerce positions, in effect to continue the cover up of the crimes against the United States Patent &amp; Trademark Offices and inventors?
At the heart of the matter are technologies that revolutionized the digital imaging and video content creation and distribution channels in almost every product that utilizes such technologies.
The technologies opened the door for things like Internet and Cell Phone full screen, full frame rate video over low bandwidths.
They solved for image pixel distortion on zoom of low resolution images and now are commonly found on all Digital Cameras, the Hubble, Space Simulators, Medical Imaging Devices, Televisions, Graphic Chips, Internet Video Players (i.e.
Microsoft Media Player, Apple Quicktime, Real Player, etc.
), Satellite and Military Imaging Applications.
Coined the âoeHoly Grailâ of digital imaging and video by leading experts and engineers, from Intel, SGI and Lockheed, including Hassan Miah, the technologies were then alleged stolen by the very patent attorneys that were supposed to be patenting them, read on.
I personally have been trying to notify regulators and authorities of a ONE TRILLION DOLLAR patent theft that is putting investors in certain tech companies at huge risk.
Companies involved in the alleged crimes and now in a TRILLION dollar federal lawsuit include Intel, Lockheed, SGI and IBM.
The companies involved in the fraud fail to acknowledge the risk exposing shareholders and citizens to impending liabilities as required by FASB accounting Rule 5, hiding the impending liabilities.
A SEC complaint has been filed against Intel and Lockheed for failure to notify shareholders of liability @ http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20090325\%20FINAL\%20Intel\%20SEC\%20Complaint\%20SIGNED2073.pdf [iviewit.tv]

Investigators, courts and federal agents have been notified of the crimes and evidence, including a car-bombing attempt on my life and the US Patent Office has now suspended the Iviewit Intellectual Properties pending investigations by the USPTO, the attorney disciplinary of the USPTO the Office of Enrollment and Discipline and Federal Authorities.
I know how Harry Markopolos felt trying to expose Madoff in a world without regulation and where government agencies have been infiltrated to subterfuge the crimes by the law firms involved.
Many of todayâ(TM)s biggest crimes like Madoff, Allen Stanford and Marc Drier are alleged tied to the thefts, as money laundering vehicles for the stolen inventor royalties.
Did I hear Proskauer Rose is involved in Madoff (involved many clients too) and acted as Allen Stanford's attorney.
Investors who lost money in these scams should start looking at the law firms, like Proskauer's assets for recovery.
First, Proskauer partner Gregg Mashberg claims Madoff is a financial 9/11 for their clients, if they directed you to Madoff sue them.
Then, Proskauer partner Thomas Sjoblom former enforcement dude for SEC and Allen Stanford attorney, declares PARTY IS OVER to Stanford employees and advises them to PRAY, this two days before SEC hearings.
Then at the SEC hearings, he lies with Holt to SEC saying she only prepared with him but fails to mention Miami meeting at airport hanger which witnesses state was held to mislead SEC investigators.
Then Sjoblom resigns as Stanford counsel and sends an email to the SEC disaffirming all statements made by him and Proskauer, his butt on fire.
If you were burned in Stanford sue Proskauer.
The FBI has arrested Stanford and the indictment clearly points to Sjoblom and Proskauer as the legal counsel involved in committing Fraud on th</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398263
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397161
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28401991
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398171
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396807
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397369
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397161
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397887
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397441
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398607
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397089
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28400867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397161
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28400757
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397161
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397525
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397161
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28408539
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396807
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398591
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397441
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28399025
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28407987
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396807
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398225
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397161
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398373
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397413
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398473
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397161
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398737
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396807
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28399015
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396807
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396959
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396845
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397591
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396953
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396845
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28399073
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396807
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397413
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28399721
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396807
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28407095
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397389
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1941241_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396807
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1941241.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397413
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398373
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397519
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1941241.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397089
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398607
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1941241.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396889
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1941241.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28409985
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1941241.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397325
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1941241.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396843
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1941241.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397389
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28407095
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1941241.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396807
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28399015
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397131
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28399721
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28399073
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28408539
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28407987
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397461
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398171
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28401991
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398017
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398737
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1941241.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396833
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1941241.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397441
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398591
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397887
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1941241.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396845
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396959
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396953
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397591
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1941241.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396847
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28399025
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1941241.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397161
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28400867
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398225
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28400757
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398263
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397369
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28398473
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28397525
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1941241.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1941241.28396835
</commentlist>
</conversation>
