<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_21_167239</id>
	<title>Licensed C64 Emulator Rejected From App Store</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1245603240000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.miasik.net/" rel="nofollow">Miasik.Net</a> writes <i>"A fully licensed Commodore 64 iPhone emulator <a href="http://toucharcade.com/2009/06/20/full-commodore-64-emulator-rejected-from-app-store/">has been rejected from the App Store</a>. The excuse Apple used is a clause in the SDK agreement which doesn't allow for applications that run executable code. It seems Sega is exempt from that clause, because some of its games on the iPhone are emulators running original ROM code."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Miasik.Net writes " A fully licensed Commodore 64 iPhone emulator has been rejected from the App Store .
The excuse Apple used is a clause in the SDK agreement which does n't allow for applications that run executable code .
It seems Sega is exempt from that clause , because some of its games on the iPhone are emulators running original ROM code .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Miasik.Net writes "A fully licensed Commodore 64 iPhone emulator has been rejected from the App Store.
The excuse Apple used is a clause in the SDK agreement which doesn't allow for applications that run executable code.
It seems Sega is exempt from that clause, because some of its games on the iPhone are emulators running original ROM code.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28414463</id>
	<title>Apple holds a grudge</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245586380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They are still upset about the Commodore 64 vs Apple ][ wars in the early 80's.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are still upset about the Commodore 64 vs Apple ] [ wars in the early 80 's .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are still upset about the Commodore 64 vs Apple ][ wars in the early 80's.
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28412495</id>
	<title>This article is extremely misleading</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245613260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This article is extremely misleading, resulting in tons of off-target flaming.</p><p>Apple doesn't prohibit apps using emulation, they prohibit apps that download and run arbitrary code, bypassing the Apple Store. The mistakes that the developers made were (1) putting a C64 Store into the app, and (2) putting a BASIC interpreter in the emulator. If it's tweaked slightly so that the games are downloaded through the Apple Store 3, and the BASIC interpreter is removed (it's useless anyway), I'm sure that it would be approved.</p><p>The developers probably decided to push the boundaries a bit in order to generate some news/press coverage. Pretty clever, actually - now Slashdot and other geek news sites is promoting them, and their app will still get approved in a week or two.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This article is extremely misleading , resulting in tons of off-target flaming.Apple does n't prohibit apps using emulation , they prohibit apps that download and run arbitrary code , bypassing the Apple Store .
The mistakes that the developers made were ( 1 ) putting a C64 Store into the app , and ( 2 ) putting a BASIC interpreter in the emulator .
If it 's tweaked slightly so that the games are downloaded through the Apple Store 3 , and the BASIC interpreter is removed ( it 's useless anyway ) , I 'm sure that it would be approved.The developers probably decided to push the boundaries a bit in order to generate some news/press coverage .
Pretty clever , actually - now Slashdot and other geek news sites is promoting them , and their app will still get approved in a week or two .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This article is extremely misleading, resulting in tons of off-target flaming.Apple doesn't prohibit apps using emulation, they prohibit apps that download and run arbitrary code, bypassing the Apple Store.
The mistakes that the developers made were (1) putting a C64 Store into the app, and (2) putting a BASIC interpreter in the emulator.
If it's tweaked slightly so that the games are downloaded through the Apple Store 3, and the BASIC interpreter is removed (it's useless anyway), I'm sure that it would be approved.The developers probably decided to push the boundaries a bit in order to generate some news/press coverage.
Pretty clever, actually - now Slashdot and other geek news sites is promoting them, and their app will still get approved in a week or two.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411637</id>
	<title>Apple rejecting apps?  Say it ain't so!</title>
	<author>SmackTheIgnorant</author>
	<datestamp>1245607440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So, another article on Apple rejecting an iPhone app without real cause, or via a rule / regulation that contradicts another application.  The solution I see it is one of several:
1 - Apple allowing the new app through, gaining additional income and being named as "the good guy" in this situation.  Except some yackass will start complaining about not getting royalties for their software being in use and someone else profiting from the potential to use it.
2 - Apple will continue block the new app, not really caring about consumer backlash (as per usual)
3 - Apple will block similar apps and go with the "Good spotting!  We didn't realize this OTHER app conflicted with our policies!  We'll remove it too!"

And in all situations, some people will be up in arms, some people will applaud apple, someone will scream about why jailbreaking is required to have (more) control over their phone, many will say "Well, if you had a blackberry/ palm pre / g-phone, you wouldn't have this problem".... and no one will think of the children.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , another article on Apple rejecting an iPhone app without real cause , or via a rule / regulation that contradicts another application .
The solution I see it is one of several : 1 - Apple allowing the new app through , gaining additional income and being named as " the good guy " in this situation .
Except some yackass will start complaining about not getting royalties for their software being in use and someone else profiting from the potential to use it .
2 - Apple will continue block the new app , not really caring about consumer backlash ( as per usual ) 3 - Apple will block similar apps and go with the " Good spotting !
We did n't realize this OTHER app conflicted with our policies !
We 'll remove it too !
" And in all situations , some people will be up in arms , some people will applaud apple , someone will scream about why jailbreaking is required to have ( more ) control over their phone , many will say " Well , if you had a blackberry/ palm pre / g-phone , you would n't have this problem " .... and no one will think of the children .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, another article on Apple rejecting an iPhone app without real cause, or via a rule / regulation that contradicts another application.
The solution I see it is one of several:
1 - Apple allowing the new app through, gaining additional income and being named as "the good guy" in this situation.
Except some yackass will start complaining about not getting royalties for their software being in use and someone else profiting from the potential to use it.
2 - Apple will continue block the new app, not really caring about consumer backlash (as per usual)
3 - Apple will block similar apps and go with the "Good spotting!
We didn't realize this OTHER app conflicted with our policies!
We'll remove it too!
"

And in all situations, some people will be up in arms, some people will applaud apple, someone will scream about why jailbreaking is required to have (more) control over their phone, many will say "Well, if you had a blackberry/ palm pre / g-phone, you wouldn't have this problem".... and no one will think of the children.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28413899</id>
	<title>Re:What is "executable code"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245581520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Than it comes as no surprise that there are <em>no</em> applications with built in scripting in for the iPhone. PDFs may include scripts, and a PDF reader may ignore them.</p><p>And I think it is quite clear if something is a programming language or just a config file parser. If it has read, write, compare and jump operations, it is a programming language. If one of them is missing it is not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Than it comes as no surprise that there are no applications with built in scripting in for the iPhone .
PDFs may include scripts , and a PDF reader may ignore them.And I think it is quite clear if something is a programming language or just a config file parser .
If it has read , write , compare and jump operations , it is a programming language .
If one of them is missing it is not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Than it comes as no surprise that there are no applications with built in scripting in for the iPhone.
PDFs may include scripts, and a PDF reader may ignore them.And I think it is quite clear if something is a programming language or just a config file parser.
If it has read, write, compare and jump operations, it is a programming language.
If one of them is missing it is not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411921</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411567</id>
	<title>Editorialise much ?</title>
	<author>Space cowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1245607020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's not an "excuse", it's clearly against the terms of the *agreement* the developer *agreed* to *before* starting work on it.
<br> <br>
You can argue that Sega ought to be treated the same way (and I'd agree with that), but to call it an "excuse" when the terms specifically and explicitly forbid it smacks of throwing one's toys out of the pram and screaming "waaaaaaaahhhh"! "I want, I want, I want!" is such an ugly character flaw when it's seen in "adults"...
<br> <br>
Simon</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not an " excuse " , it 's clearly against the terms of the * agreement * the developer * agreed * to * before * starting work on it .
You can argue that Sega ought to be treated the same way ( and I 'd agree with that ) , but to call it an " excuse " when the terms specifically and explicitly forbid it smacks of throwing one 's toys out of the pram and screaming " waaaaaaaahhhh " !
" I want , I want , I want !
" is such an ugly character flaw when it 's seen in " adults " .. . Simon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not an "excuse", it's clearly against the terms of the *agreement* the developer *agreed* to *before* starting work on it.
You can argue that Sega ought to be treated the same way (and I'd agree with that), but to call it an "excuse" when the terms specifically and explicitly forbid it smacks of throwing one's toys out of the pram and screaming "waaaaaaaahhhh"!
"I want, I want, I want!
" is such an ugly character flaw when it's seen in "adults"...
 
Simon</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411843</id>
	<title>What would they do with an Apple ][ emulator?</title>
	<author>dmmiller2k</author>
	<datestamp>1245608700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Remember, this is Apple we're talking about.  They get nothing from a C-64 emulation, fully licensed or otherwise.
</p><p>But Apple ][ on the other hand<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Remember , this is Apple we 're talking about .
They get nothing from a C-64 emulation , fully licensed or otherwise .
But Apple ] [ on the other hand .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Remember, this is Apple we're talking about.
They get nothing from a C-64 emulation, fully licensed or otherwise.
But Apple ][ on the other hand ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28419057</id>
	<title>because of this...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245669120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, because of all their arrogance, Apple can keep their crappy iphone.  Im thinking about writing a program that counts the time steve jobs has left to live, and submit it to the appstore for consideration.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , because of all their arrogance , Apple can keep their crappy iphone .
Im thinking about writing a program that counts the time steve jobs has left to live , and submit it to the appstore for consideration .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, because of all their arrogance, Apple can keep their crappy iphone.
Im thinking about writing a program that counts the time steve jobs has left to live, and submit it to the appstore for consideration.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28412597</id>
	<title>Are the ROMs downloaded on the fly?</title>
	<author>strags</author>
	<datestamp>1245614220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Look - here's the relevant part of the agreement:<br>
<br>
"3.3.2 An Application may not itself install or launch other executable code by any means, including without limitation through the use of a plug-in architecture, calling other frameworks, other APIs or otherwise. No interpreted code may be downloaded and used in an Application except for code that is interpreted and run by Apple's Published APIs and built-in interpreter(s)."<br>
<br>
Particularly this part:<br>
<b>"No interpreted code may be downloaded and used in an Application"</b> <br>
<br>
Does the emulator allow users to download ROMs over the internet? If so, then there's a problem. If not - ie. there are a number of licensed ROMs embedded in the application, then there should be no problem. Simple. He just needs to release each game-pack as a self-contained app - that's all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Look - here 's the relevant part of the agreement : " 3.3.2 An Application may not itself install or launch other executable code by any means , including without limitation through the use of a plug-in architecture , calling other frameworks , other APIs or otherwise .
No interpreted code may be downloaded and used in an Application except for code that is interpreted and run by Apple 's Published APIs and built-in interpreter ( s ) .
" Particularly this part : " No interpreted code may be downloaded and used in an Application " Does the emulator allow users to download ROMs over the internet ?
If so , then there 's a problem .
If not - ie .
there are a number of licensed ROMs embedded in the application , then there should be no problem .
Simple. He just needs to release each game-pack as a self-contained app - that 's all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look - here's the relevant part of the agreement:

"3.3.2 An Application may not itself install or launch other executable code by any means, including without limitation through the use of a plug-in architecture, calling other frameworks, other APIs or otherwise.
No interpreted code may be downloaded and used in an Application except for code that is interpreted and run by Apple's Published APIs and built-in interpreter(s).
"

Particularly this part:
"No interpreted code may be downloaded and used in an Application" 

Does the emulator allow users to download ROMs over the internet?
If so, then there's a problem.
If not - ie.
there are a number of licensed ROMs embedded in the application, then there should be no problem.
Simple. He just needs to release each game-pack as a self-contained app - that's all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28413825</id>
	<title>Re:Idiotic Summary</title>
	<author>MWoody</author>
	<datestamp>1245580920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The difference is that they could test those other programs for security holes.  Of course, there's the possibility they'd miss one, but that would be Apple's failure, and they'd pay for it.</p><p>In this case, some obscure ROM could expose a flaw in the emulator well after release, despite the original teams' best efforts at due diligence in testing.  What's more, there's the possibility of ROMs released after the emulator being specifically designed to break out.  So, as I said before, allowing an emulator is akin to allowing any program to run on the device with no testing, virus checking, or indeed ANY sort of quality assurance.  Allowing this program would not merely go against some random, obscure tenet of their EULA; rather, it would invalidate the entire purpose of their app service: that of an experience that trades freedom and quantity for, theoretically at least, control and quality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The difference is that they could test those other programs for security holes .
Of course , there 's the possibility they 'd miss one , but that would be Apple 's failure , and they 'd pay for it.In this case , some obscure ROM could expose a flaw in the emulator well after release , despite the original teams ' best efforts at due diligence in testing .
What 's more , there 's the possibility of ROMs released after the emulator being specifically designed to break out .
So , as I said before , allowing an emulator is akin to allowing any program to run on the device with no testing , virus checking , or indeed ANY sort of quality assurance .
Allowing this program would not merely go against some random , obscure tenet of their EULA ; rather , it would invalidate the entire purpose of their app service : that of an experience that trades freedom and quantity for , theoretically at least , control and quality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The difference is that they could test those other programs for security holes.
Of course, there's the possibility they'd miss one, but that would be Apple's failure, and they'd pay for it.In this case, some obscure ROM could expose a flaw in the emulator well after release, despite the original teams' best efforts at due diligence in testing.
What's more, there's the possibility of ROMs released after the emulator being specifically designed to break out.
So, as I said before, allowing an emulator is akin to allowing any program to run on the device with no testing, virus checking, or indeed ANY sort of quality assurance.
Allowing this program would not merely go against some random, obscure tenet of their EULA; rather, it would invalidate the entire purpose of their app service: that of an experience that trades freedom and quantity for, theoretically at least, control and quality.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411897</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411645</id>
	<title>Sega's case is diferent</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1245607440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The games may run in an emulator but if it only runs that game and nothing else then it is effectively one application and nothing else. The C64 emulator will allow you to run numerous applications even if they are old and outdated.
<br> <br>
Apple's app store policies are weak but I agree with the other commenter and think we've had enough of these sort of stories. Apple isn't going to change their mind because these stories get posted on Slashdot and any regular should be using an Android based phone anyway.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</htmltext>
<tokenext>The games may run in an emulator but if it only runs that game and nothing else then it is effectively one application and nothing else .
The C64 emulator will allow you to run numerous applications even if they are old and outdated .
Apple 's app store policies are weak but I agree with the other commenter and think we 've had enough of these sort of stories .
Apple is n't going to change their mind because these stories get posted on Slashdot and any regular should be using an Android based phone anyway .
: P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The games may run in an emulator but if it only runs that game and nothing else then it is effectively one application and nothing else.
The C64 emulator will allow you to run numerous applications even if they are old and outdated.
Apple's app store policies are weak but I agree with the other commenter and think we've had enough of these sort of stories.
Apple isn't going to change their mind because these stories get posted on Slashdot and any regular should be using an Android based phone anyway.
:P</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411921</id>
	<title>What is "executable code"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245609360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Last time I checked, the iPhone could not run C64 programs natively. So, essentially, the games are interpreted by the emulator (as it is with pretty much all emulators).</p><p>According to that logic, you'd have to ban any application with built in scripting (like, say, any office application that I'm aware of), hell, a PDF reader would be banned as well because PDFs may include scripts. If you want to go bonkers, you could pretty much ban any application that takes any kind of not built-in data because technically, this is interpreted by the application as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Last time I checked , the iPhone could not run C64 programs natively .
So , essentially , the games are interpreted by the emulator ( as it is with pretty much all emulators ) .According to that logic , you 'd have to ban any application with built in scripting ( like , say , any office application that I 'm aware of ) , hell , a PDF reader would be banned as well because PDFs may include scripts .
If you want to go bonkers , you could pretty much ban any application that takes any kind of not built-in data because technically , this is interpreted by the application as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Last time I checked, the iPhone could not run C64 programs natively.
So, essentially, the games are interpreted by the emulator (as it is with pretty much all emulators).According to that logic, you'd have to ban any application with built in scripting (like, say, any office application that I'm aware of), hell, a PDF reader would be banned as well because PDFs may include scripts.
If you want to go bonkers, you could pretty much ban any application that takes any kind of not built-in data because technically, this is interpreted by the application as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411805</id>
	<title>Re:Editorialise much ?</title>
	<author>Space cowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1245608520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>[Turns politeness gauge down a notch to reply in the same fashion as the parent post]
<br> <br>
And I'm sick and tired of this entitlement meme. Here's another quote "Just because you can doesn't mean you ought to".
<br> <br>
Look, you (and (s)he) haven't got a legal leg to stand on, so you want to claim some sort of moral or ethical stance instead - fuck off yourself.
<br> <br>
If the iPhone doesn't do what you want it to do, or restricts you in any way that you don't like, then just don't fucking use it. How hard is that to understand ? What you don't get to do is agree to a contract and subsequently say "oh, but not for this little area here that means I can make a metric butt-load of cash because Apple's worked hard to make the device really popular".
<br> <br>
Still sounds a lot (to me) like toys exiting a pram at high velocity.
<br> <br>
Simon.</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ Turns politeness gauge down a notch to reply in the same fashion as the parent post ] And I 'm sick and tired of this entitlement meme .
Here 's another quote " Just because you can does n't mean you ought to " .
Look , you ( and ( s ) he ) have n't got a legal leg to stand on , so you want to claim some sort of moral or ethical stance instead - fuck off yourself .
If the iPhone does n't do what you want it to do , or restricts you in any way that you do n't like , then just do n't fucking use it .
How hard is that to understand ?
What you do n't get to do is agree to a contract and subsequently say " oh , but not for this little area here that means I can make a metric butt-load of cash because Apple 's worked hard to make the device really popular " .
Still sounds a lot ( to me ) like toys exiting a pram at high velocity .
Simon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[Turns politeness gauge down a notch to reply in the same fashion as the parent post]
 
And I'm sick and tired of this entitlement meme.
Here's another quote "Just because you can doesn't mean you ought to".
Look, you (and (s)he) haven't got a legal leg to stand on, so you want to claim some sort of moral or ethical stance instead - fuck off yourself.
If the iPhone doesn't do what you want it to do, or restricts you in any way that you don't like, then just don't fucking use it.
How hard is that to understand ?
What you don't get to do is agree to a contract and subsequently say "oh, but not for this little area here that means I can make a metric butt-load of cash because Apple's worked hard to make the device really popular".
Still sounds a lot (to me) like toys exiting a pram at high velocity.
Simon.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411607</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28419509</id>
	<title>WHO CARES?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245672900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yet another idiot who didn't read the terms and conditions before spending a few K on writing his software, and now everybody is surprised, and it makes headlines. This will continue for as long as not every aspect of these terms and conditions has been in the news, and for as long as people are stupid enough to either program for these restricted platforms or uninformed enough to "buy" these phones in the first place. Seriously, stop complaining and check out what kinds of handcuffs you are buying with your products, and we'll all be better off!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yet another idiot who did n't read the terms and conditions before spending a few K on writing his software , and now everybody is surprised , and it makes headlines .
This will continue for as long as not every aspect of these terms and conditions has been in the news , and for as long as people are stupid enough to either program for these restricted platforms or uninformed enough to " buy " these phones in the first place .
Seriously , stop complaining and check out what kinds of handcuffs you are buying with your products , and we 'll all be better off !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yet another idiot who didn't read the terms and conditions before spending a few K on writing his software, and now everybody is surprised, and it makes headlines.
This will continue for as long as not every aspect of these terms and conditions has been in the news, and for as long as people are stupid enough to either program for these restricted platforms or uninformed enough to "buy" these phones in the first place.
Seriously, stop complaining and check out what kinds of handcuffs you are buying with your products, and we'll all be better off!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28414129</id>
	<title>This makes sense and its good.</title>
	<author>xMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1245583320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I bet he could get is App approved if he used the now in place DLC mechanisms for additional licensed ROMs.</p><p>The main purpose I see from this is Apple trying to prevent an 'App Store' being created within the App Store.  The App Store is controlled and imposes some quality control with the submission process.  Their is potential for abuse on Apple's part but this isn't a case of that.</p><p>You can distribute your apps freely on a JB phone, or develop for Andriod, Mac OS X, Linux, Windows, or any other system.  What you shouldn't be able to do is distribute your apps within the App Store bypassing the control and payment schemes, while also taking advantage of their distro system and marketing.</p><p>Its nice to have a system with controls, where you don't have to be too worried about malicious content or getting it junked up with fragmented distro systems.</p><p>I am speaking as a professional game developer.  I enjoy developing for Steam, XBOX 360, PS3, Wii, iPhone, or any other system with the bare minimum of quality standards in a submission process.  Everything else is just to big of a mess and for the most part financially impractical, taking into account both piracy and the fact your software is commingled with just a ton of garbage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I bet he could get is App approved if he used the now in place DLC mechanisms for additional licensed ROMs.The main purpose I see from this is Apple trying to prevent an 'App Store ' being created within the App Store .
The App Store is controlled and imposes some quality control with the submission process .
Their is potential for abuse on Apple 's part but this is n't a case of that.You can distribute your apps freely on a JB phone , or develop for Andriod , Mac OS X , Linux , Windows , or any other system .
What you should n't be able to do is distribute your apps within the App Store bypassing the control and payment schemes , while also taking advantage of their distro system and marketing.Its nice to have a system with controls , where you do n't have to be too worried about malicious content or getting it junked up with fragmented distro systems.I am speaking as a professional game developer .
I enjoy developing for Steam , XBOX 360 , PS3 , Wii , iPhone , or any other system with the bare minimum of quality standards in a submission process .
Everything else is just to big of a mess and for the most part financially impractical , taking into account both piracy and the fact your software is commingled with just a ton of garbage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bet he could get is App approved if he used the now in place DLC mechanisms for additional licensed ROMs.The main purpose I see from this is Apple trying to prevent an 'App Store' being created within the App Store.
The App Store is controlled and imposes some quality control with the submission process.
Their is potential for abuse on Apple's part but this isn't a case of that.You can distribute your apps freely on a JB phone, or develop for Andriod, Mac OS X, Linux, Windows, or any other system.
What you shouldn't be able to do is distribute your apps within the App Store bypassing the control and payment schemes, while also taking advantage of their distro system and marketing.Its nice to have a system with controls, where you don't have to be too worried about malicious content or getting it junked up with fragmented distro systems.I am speaking as a professional game developer.
I enjoy developing for Steam, XBOX 360, PS3, Wii, iPhone, or any other system with the bare minimum of quality standards in a submission process.
Everything else is just to big of a mess and for the most part financially impractical, taking into account both piracy and the fact your software is commingled with just a ton of garbage.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28412527</id>
	<title>BASIC</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245613440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Blast it. I was actually going to try and make a BASIC for it.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Blast it .
I was actually going to try and make a BASIC for it .
: (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Blast it.
I was actually going to try and make a BASIC for it.
:(</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28412199</id>
	<title>Re:Editorialise much ?</title>
	<author>QuoteMstr</author>
	<datestamp>1245611460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Does the iPhone becomes yours when you buy it? Yes... but only when that is the full retail price of the device.</p></div></blockquote><p>Actually, I'd argue that it becomes my property either way. If I go to AT&amp;T and purchase a contract, AT&amp;T doesn't <i>lease</i> me the phone. I'm sold the phone. It looks like a sale, it's structured like a sale, and it's <i>called</i> a sale. That the contract is structured so as to recoup the cost of making that <i>sale</i> at a loss is irrelevant to the fact that the phone is now nevertheless my private property.</p><p>If the phone company really wants to retain ownership of the phone until the contract expires, then it needs to use a <i>lease</i> to express the concept. Leases are dependable, well-understood legal instruments that do exactly what the phone companies want.</p><p>Why don't cell phone companies just lease phones instead of selling them at a loss? Because everyone knows what a lease is, and customers would rightly scream bloody murder!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does the iPhone becomes yours when you buy it ?
Yes... but only when that is the full retail price of the device.Actually , I 'd argue that it becomes my property either way .
If I go to AT&amp;T and purchase a contract , AT&amp;T does n't lease me the phone .
I 'm sold the phone .
It looks like a sale , it 's structured like a sale , and it 's called a sale .
That the contract is structured so as to recoup the cost of making that sale at a loss is irrelevant to the fact that the phone is now nevertheless my private property.If the phone company really wants to retain ownership of the phone until the contract expires , then it needs to use a lease to express the concept .
Leases are dependable , well-understood legal instruments that do exactly what the phone companies want.Why do n't cell phone companies just lease phones instead of selling them at a loss ?
Because everyone knows what a lease is , and customers would rightly scream bloody murder !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does the iPhone becomes yours when you buy it?
Yes... but only when that is the full retail price of the device.Actually, I'd argue that it becomes my property either way.
If I go to AT&amp;T and purchase a contract, AT&amp;T doesn't lease me the phone.
I'm sold the phone.
It looks like a sale, it's structured like a sale, and it's called a sale.
That the contract is structured so as to recoup the cost of making that sale at a loss is irrelevant to the fact that the phone is now nevertheless my private property.If the phone company really wants to retain ownership of the phone until the contract expires, then it needs to use a lease to express the concept.
Leases are dependable, well-understood legal instruments that do exactly what the phone companies want.Why don't cell phone companies just lease phones instead of selling them at a loss?
Because everyone knows what a lease is, and customers would rightly scream bloody murder!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28412053</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411607</id>
	<title>Re:Editorialise much ?</title>
	<author>QuoteMstr</author>
	<datestamp>1245607260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am sick and tired of this meme. You confuse authority and defensibility. <b>Yes, Apple has the authority to do this</b>. <b>No, it is NOT ethically right for Apple to do this</b>.<br>It's not a new meme. In 1734, Alexander Pope published "<a href="http://theotherpages.org/poems/pope-e1.html" title="theotherpages.org">An Essay on Man</a> [theotherpages.org]":</p><blockquote><div><p>And spite of Pride, in erring Reason's spite,<br>One truth is clear, Whatever is, is right.</p></div></blockquote><p>The idea was corrosive back then, and it remains corrosive today. Knock it the fuck off.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am sick and tired of this meme .
You confuse authority and defensibility .
Yes , Apple has the authority to do this .
No , it is NOT ethically right for Apple to do this.It 's not a new meme .
In 1734 , Alexander Pope published " An Essay on Man [ theotherpages.org ] " : And spite of Pride , in erring Reason 's spite,One truth is clear , Whatever is , is right.The idea was corrosive back then , and it remains corrosive today .
Knock it the fuck off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am sick and tired of this meme.
You confuse authority and defensibility.
Yes, Apple has the authority to do this.
No, it is NOT ethically right for Apple to do this.It's not a new meme.
In 1734, Alexander Pope published "An Essay on Man [theotherpages.org]":And spite of Pride, in erring Reason's spite,One truth is clear, Whatever is, is right.The idea was corrosive back then, and it remains corrosive today.
Knock it the fuck off.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411643</id>
	<title>Non entirely unreasonable ...</title>
	<author>gstoddart</author>
	<datestamp>1245607440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It seems Sega is exempt from that clause, because some of its games on the iPhone are emulators running original ROM code.</p></div></blockquote><p>From Apples perspective, I don't see this as <em>entirely</em> unreasonable.</p><p>They want to manage customer experience by controlling the environment.  An app which can host arbitrary code could lead to exploits or other badness.</p><p>Code from the original ROMs is pretty well bounded and not going to do anything unexpected or malicious.</p><p>Now, that doesn't mean a bunch of people won't howl about this.  But, for the <em>average</em> person buying a iPhone, I doubt they'll care.</p><p>Cheers</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems Sega is exempt from that clause , because some of its games on the iPhone are emulators running original ROM code.From Apples perspective , I do n't see this as entirely unreasonable.They want to manage customer experience by controlling the environment .
An app which can host arbitrary code could lead to exploits or other badness.Code from the original ROMs is pretty well bounded and not going to do anything unexpected or malicious.Now , that does n't mean a bunch of people wo n't howl about this .
But , for the average person buying a iPhone , I doubt they 'll care.Cheers</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems Sega is exempt from that clause, because some of its games on the iPhone are emulators running original ROM code.From Apples perspective, I don't see this as entirely unreasonable.They want to manage customer experience by controlling the environment.
An app which can host arbitrary code could lead to exploits or other badness.Code from the original ROMs is pretty well bounded and not going to do anything unexpected or malicious.Now, that doesn't mean a bunch of people won't howl about this.
But, for the average person buying a iPhone, I doubt they'll care.Cheers
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28448315</id>
	<title>I fail to see the problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245770160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just put it on Cydia.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just put it on Cydia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just put it on Cydia.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28449347</id>
	<title>look</title>
	<author>smiling\_s</author>
	<datestamp>1245781620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not really sure how to interpret "load executable code". Is there non-executable code? What makes it code, then?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not really sure how to interpret " load executable code " .
Is there non-executable code ?
What makes it code , then ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not really sure how to interpret "load executable code".
Is there non-executable code?
What makes it code, then?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28412427</id>
	<title>Idiots</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245612720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You people are all a bunch of idiots.</p><p>1. It clearly states in the agreement you "sign" when you start submitting apps to the App Store that emulators aren't allowed. This guy was a moron for even working on this.<br>2. Suppose his emulator has a bug - perhaps when it parses a ROM image constructed in a certain way it overflows some buffer he allocates. Ever heard of "security"? Some idiot above alluded to the point that security exploits being written in C64 BASIC is laughable (and it is), but that's not the problem - the problem is writing malformed ROMs with a malicious payload that his app inadvertently loads into the system.</p><p>If Sega's apps are actually one-ROM emulators, they were allowed for a couple of reasons:<br>1. They don't violate that arbitrary code thing someone mentioned above.<br>2. It's less likely that someone could construct a ROM image that could be used to exploit the emulator since it only runs one ROM. Someone might be able to crack the app and inject whatever ROM they want into it, but that would clearly violate some other legal-ese. Apple can't hardly do anything about that, and even if they could I don't think they'd care - they'd tell you to piss off if you got screwed over by an app you cracked so you could play $RANDOM\_EMULATED\_GAME on your iPhone.</p><p>All in all, this is a pretty lame complaint by this guy. He should just suck it up and learn to RTFL (L being 'license') next time. He's only making a stink about this publicly hoping that the bad PR will make Apple roll over and take it up the backside on this one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You people are all a bunch of idiots.1 .
It clearly states in the agreement you " sign " when you start submitting apps to the App Store that emulators are n't allowed .
This guy was a moron for even working on this.2 .
Suppose his emulator has a bug - perhaps when it parses a ROM image constructed in a certain way it overflows some buffer he allocates .
Ever heard of " security " ?
Some idiot above alluded to the point that security exploits being written in C64 BASIC is laughable ( and it is ) , but that 's not the problem - the problem is writing malformed ROMs with a malicious payload that his app inadvertently loads into the system.If Sega 's apps are actually one-ROM emulators , they were allowed for a couple of reasons : 1 .
They do n't violate that arbitrary code thing someone mentioned above.2 .
It 's less likely that someone could construct a ROM image that could be used to exploit the emulator since it only runs one ROM .
Someone might be able to crack the app and inject whatever ROM they want into it , but that would clearly violate some other legal-ese .
Apple ca n't hardly do anything about that , and even if they could I do n't think they 'd care - they 'd tell you to piss off if you got screwed over by an app you cracked so you could play $ RANDOM \ _EMULATED \ _GAME on your iPhone.All in all , this is a pretty lame complaint by this guy .
He should just suck it up and learn to RTFL ( L being 'license ' ) next time .
He 's only making a stink about this publicly hoping that the bad PR will make Apple roll over and take it up the backside on this one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You people are all a bunch of idiots.1.
It clearly states in the agreement you "sign" when you start submitting apps to the App Store that emulators aren't allowed.
This guy was a moron for even working on this.2.
Suppose his emulator has a bug - perhaps when it parses a ROM image constructed in a certain way it overflows some buffer he allocates.
Ever heard of "security"?
Some idiot above alluded to the point that security exploits being written in C64 BASIC is laughable (and it is), but that's not the problem - the problem is writing malformed ROMs with a malicious payload that his app inadvertently loads into the system.If Sega's apps are actually one-ROM emulators, they were allowed for a couple of reasons:1.
They don't violate that arbitrary code thing someone mentioned above.2.
It's less likely that someone could construct a ROM image that could be used to exploit the emulator since it only runs one ROM.
Someone might be able to crack the app and inject whatever ROM they want into it, but that would clearly violate some other legal-ese.
Apple can't hardly do anything about that, and even if they could I don't think they'd care - they'd tell you to piss off if you got screwed over by an app you cracked so you could play $RANDOM\_EMULATED\_GAME on your iPhone.All in all, this is a pretty lame complaint by this guy.
He should just suck it up and learn to RTFL (L being 'license') next time.
He's only making a stink about this publicly hoping that the bad PR will make Apple roll over and take it up the backside on this one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411721</id>
	<title>Way to go, Apple.</title>
	<author>amaupin</author>
	<datestamp>1245607920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Reject the one app that would have guaranteed me purchasing an iPhone.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Reject the one app that would have guaranteed me purchasing an iPhone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reject the one app that would have guaranteed me purchasing an iPhone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28440499</id>
	<title>Jailbreak</title>
	<author>eigenstates</author>
	<datestamp>1245778260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Run anything you want. Get stuff from Apple Store, Cydia/Icy.</p><p>Too scared to actually own your device, ok...</p><p>There is the whole notion of using private distribution of apps.:</p><p><a href="http://bluxte.net/musings/2009/05/17/ad-hoc-distribution-iphone-application" title="bluxte.net" rel="nofollow">http://bluxte.net/musings/2009/05/17/ad-hoc-distribution-iphone-application</a> [bluxte.net]</p><p>And installers of 3rd party apps:</p><p><a href="http://www.mactropolis.com/iphone/how-to-install-apps-on-iphone-without-jailbraking/" title="mactropolis.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.mactropolis.com/iphone/how-to-install-apps-on-iphone-without-jailbraking/</a> [mactropolis.com]</p><p>iTunes and the store is a great heap of crap. Not being allowed to have access in to something you paid for is reprehensible.</p><p>A warranty on a car will be invalidated if you put sand in the gas tank (put bad code in to the iPhone and it fries the board- same thing). However, if you want to pop a bloody home made led light in the cig lighter or add new seats- this should be legally protected and no EULA should be able to thwart that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Run anything you want .
Get stuff from Apple Store , Cydia/Icy.Too scared to actually own your device , ok...There is the whole notion of using private distribution of apps .
: http : //bluxte.net/musings/2009/05/17/ad-hoc-distribution-iphone-application [ bluxte.net ] And installers of 3rd party apps : http : //www.mactropolis.com/iphone/how-to-install-apps-on-iphone-without-jailbraking/ [ mactropolis.com ] iTunes and the store is a great heap of crap .
Not being allowed to have access in to something you paid for is reprehensible.A warranty on a car will be invalidated if you put sand in the gas tank ( put bad code in to the iPhone and it fries the board- same thing ) .
However , if you want to pop a bloody home made led light in the cig lighter or add new seats- this should be legally protected and no EULA should be able to thwart that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Run anything you want.
Get stuff from Apple Store, Cydia/Icy.Too scared to actually own your device, ok...There is the whole notion of using private distribution of apps.
:http://bluxte.net/musings/2009/05/17/ad-hoc-distribution-iphone-application [bluxte.net]And installers of 3rd party apps:http://www.mactropolis.com/iphone/how-to-install-apps-on-iphone-without-jailbraking/ [mactropolis.com]iTunes and the store is a great heap of crap.
Not being allowed to have access in to something you paid for is reprehensible.A warranty on a car will be invalidated if you put sand in the gas tank (put bad code in to the iPhone and it fries the board- same thing).
However, if you want to pop a bloody home made led light in the cig lighter or add new seats- this should be legally protected and no EULA should be able to thwart that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28427947</id>
	<title>3GS</title>
	<author>HTH NE1</author>
	<datestamp>1245661920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So much for getting an Apple IIgs emulator on the iPhone 3G S.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So much for getting an Apple IIgs emulator on the iPhone 3G S .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So much for getting an Apple IIgs emulator on the iPhone 3G S.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28412061</id>
	<title>Re:Idiotic Summary</title>
	<author>eddy</author>
	<datestamp>1245610440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;<em>But let's not start reviling them for merely following their stated policy.</em> </p><p>If they are following their stated policy, explain how "<a href="http://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewSoftware?id=300205592&amp;mt=8" title="apple.com">sid player</a> [apple.com]" was okayed, since it's an emulator that interprets executable code, which is downloaded on-the-fly.</p><p>I think the problem people have with the appstore, is that Apple enforce their policies using dice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; But let 's not start reviling them for merely following their stated policy .
If they are following their stated policy , explain how " sid player [ apple.com ] " was okayed , since it 's an emulator that interprets executable code , which is downloaded on-the-fly.I think the problem people have with the appstore , is that Apple enforce their policies using dice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;But let's not start reviling them for merely following their stated policy.
If they are following their stated policy, explain how "sid player [apple.com]" was okayed, since it's an emulator that interprets executable code, which is downloaded on-the-fly.I think the problem people have with the appstore, is that Apple enforce their policies using dice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28420377</id>
	<title>Re:Editorialise much ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245679020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>wow, just wow. Apple is not stopping anyone from doing this. What they are doing is not letting someone from selling it from Apple's store. HUGE difference there buddy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>wow , just wow .
Apple is not stopping anyone from doing this .
What they are doing is not letting someone from selling it from Apple 's store .
HUGE difference there buddy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wow, just wow.
Apple is not stopping anyone from doing this.
What they are doing is not letting someone from selling it from Apple's store.
HUGE difference there buddy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411607</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411875</id>
	<title>App store process</title>
	<author>gilesjuk</author>
	<datestamp>1245609060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would submit again and provide other instances where submissions have been allowed.</p><p>I have a SID player on the iPhone which was approved. This is emulating C64 hardware.</p><p>The people looking at the app store submissions probably have varied opinions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would submit again and provide other instances where submissions have been allowed.I have a SID player on the iPhone which was approved .
This is emulating C64 hardware.The people looking at the app store submissions probably have varied opinions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would submit again and provide other instances where submissions have been allowed.I have a SID player on the iPhone which was approved.
This is emulating C64 hardware.The people looking at the app store submissions probably have varied opinions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28412593</id>
	<title>Hypocrites</title>
	<author>Nom du Keyboard</author>
	<datestamp>1245614160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Sega is exempt from that clause, because some of its games on the iPhone are emulators running original ROM code.</p></div></blockquote><p>
So Apple is exposed yet again as a bunch of hypocrites who set one set of rules for everyone, until they decide to change them to favor a particular friend.  And this is news why...?
<br> <br>
Maybe someday users will tire of Apple being their un-appointed nanny, but that day is not today.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sega is exempt from that clause , because some of its games on the iPhone are emulators running original ROM code .
So Apple is exposed yet again as a bunch of hypocrites who set one set of rules for everyone , until they decide to change them to favor a particular friend .
And this is news why... ?
Maybe someday users will tire of Apple being their un-appointed nanny , but that day is not today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sega is exempt from that clause, because some of its games on the iPhone are emulators running original ROM code.
So Apple is exposed yet again as a bunch of hypocrites who set one set of rules for everyone, until they decide to change them to favor a particular friend.
And this is news why...?
Maybe someday users will tire of Apple being their un-appointed nanny, but that day is not today.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28413437</id>
	<title>Non store apps?</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1245577800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't have a iPhone so i don't know how that works, but are you stuck with getting stuff from the 'officially blessed' iStore or can you just get any random app from wherever you want?</p><p>If so, sounds like its time for a 3rd party store without such ridiculous rules....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't have a iPhone so i do n't know how that works , but are you stuck with getting stuff from the 'officially blessed ' iStore or can you just get any random app from wherever you want ? If so , sounds like its time for a 3rd party store without such ridiculous rules... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't have a iPhone so i don't know how that works, but are you stuck with getting stuff from the 'officially blessed' iStore or can you just get any random app from wherever you want?If so, sounds like its time for a 3rd party store without such ridiculous rules....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28440591</id>
	<title>Re: The Sega games</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245778560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think it has more to do with the fact this emulator runs machine code files and Sega's games have the emulator is built into an app itself.</p><p>If you were to change a C64 program to the iPhone App with this framework Apple would allow it in the store if it didn't allow other C64 programs to run with your app's emulator.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it has more to do with the fact this emulator runs machine code files and Sega 's games have the emulator is built into an app itself.If you were to change a C64 program to the iPhone App with this framework Apple would allow it in the store if it did n't allow other C64 programs to run with your app 's emulator .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it has more to do with the fact this emulator runs machine code files and Sega's games have the emulator is built into an app itself.If you were to change a C64 program to the iPhone App with this framework Apple would allow it in the store if it didn't allow other C64 programs to run with your app's emulator.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28418399</id>
	<title>Re:What is "executable code"?</title>
	<author>Phroggy</author>
	<datestamp>1245663240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm thinking, <a href="http://www.chiptune.com/" title="chiptune.com">port it to JavaScript</a> [chiptune.com]...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm thinking , port it to JavaScript [ chiptune.com ] .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm thinking, port it to JavaScript [chiptune.com]...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411921</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411839</id>
	<title>Bad Memories</title>
	<author>amiga3D</author>
	<datestamp>1245608700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think the C64 brings back bad memories from the home computer wars.  Apple ultimately survived thanks to the Macintosh and DTP but CBM gave them fits in the low end market.  In fact they were a high end company ever since.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the C64 brings back bad memories from the home computer wars .
Apple ultimately survived thanks to the Macintosh and DTP but CBM gave them fits in the low end market .
In fact they were a high end company ever since .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the C64 brings back bad memories from the home computer wars.
Apple ultimately survived thanks to the Macintosh and DTP but CBM gave them fits in the low end market.
In fact they were a high end company ever since.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28418969</id>
	<title>Re:Non entirely unreasonable ...</title>
	<author>dzfoo</author>
	<datestamp>1245668520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Also, as others have pointed out (and the article seems to ignore), the Sega emulator is not open-ended, allowing the download and installation of <i>any</i> ROM image; it only runs the ROM images included with it.</p><p>The C=64 emulator, in contrast, not only allows you to run any old game made for the platform, but it contains a fully functional BASIC interpreter, allowing the emulator to execute any arbitrary code.  It also provides a way for users to purchase other games directly from the emulator developer, bypassing Apple's App Store.  This is clearly a violation of Apple's SDK, not to mention its interests.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; -dZ.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , as others have pointed out ( and the article seems to ignore ) , the Sega emulator is not open-ended , allowing the download and installation of any ROM image ; it only runs the ROM images included with it.The C = 64 emulator , in contrast , not only allows you to run any old game made for the platform , but it contains a fully functional BASIC interpreter , allowing the emulator to execute any arbitrary code .
It also provides a way for users to purchase other games directly from the emulator developer , bypassing Apple 's App Store .
This is clearly a violation of Apple 's SDK , not to mention its interests .
        -dZ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, as others have pointed out (and the article seems to ignore), the Sega emulator is not open-ended, allowing the download and installation of any ROM image; it only runs the ROM images included with it.The C=64 emulator, in contrast, not only allows you to run any old game made for the platform, but it contains a fully functional BASIC interpreter, allowing the emulator to execute any arbitrary code.
It also provides a way for users to purchase other games directly from the emulator developer, bypassing Apple's App Store.
This is clearly a violation of Apple's SDK, not to mention its interests.
        -dZ.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411643</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28413051</id>
	<title>Re:Non entirely unreasonable ...</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1245617820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's also reasonable not to let any random app execute arbitrary downloaded code on a mobile phone.  I'd be rather cranky if one of the downloadable C64 games used the opportunity to send a few GB worth of spam while I was playing it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's also reasonable not to let any random app execute arbitrary downloaded code on a mobile phone .
I 'd be rather cranky if one of the downloadable C64 games used the opportunity to send a few GB worth of spam while I was playing it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's also reasonable not to let any random app execute arbitrary downloaded code on a mobile phone.
I'd be rather cranky if one of the downloadable C64 games used the opportunity to send a few GB worth of spam while I was playing it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411643</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411897</id>
	<title>Re:Idiotic Summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245609180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only way a C64 program could "break out" is if the emulator has a security hole - and how is this different from any other app? sendmail and BIND aren't emulators, yet they've had tons of security holes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only way a C64 program could " break out " is if the emulator has a security hole - and how is this different from any other app ?
sendmail and BIND are n't emulators , yet they 've had tons of security holes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only way a C64 program could "break out" is if the emulator has a security hole - and how is this different from any other app?
sendmail and BIND aren't emulators, yet they've had tons of security holes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411739</id>
	<title>What if...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245608100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... Microsoft added a line to their Windows SDK agreement that says: you must not use this SDK to develop any application that has the same or similar functionallity as Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player or Microsoft Office. That would surely save a lot of cash for them in the EU.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... Microsoft added a line to their Windows SDK agreement that says : you must not use this SDK to develop any application that has the same or similar functionallity as Internet Explorer , Windows Media Player or Microsoft Office .
That would surely save a lot of cash for them in the EU .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... Microsoft added a line to their Windows SDK agreement that says: you must not use this SDK to develop any application that has the same or similar functionallity as Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player or Microsoft Office.
That would surely save a lot of cash for them in the EU.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28413669</id>
	<title>Re:Non entirely unreasonable ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245579480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, I do consider it as entirely unreasonable. The customer bought the iPhone, if he wants to buy and run an app, that's none of Apple's business. The amazing thing here is that this shit continues to this day. If any other platform vendor tried to pull such a stunt, they'd be laughed and sued out of business! Imagine Intel only allowing you to boot an approved OS! Or Microsoft only allowing you to run apps from a set of approved vendors! Or Google only allowing you to run pre-approved searches! And when Apple pulls this stunt, everyone just bends over and lines up to kiss Jobs' ass.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , I do consider it as entirely unreasonable .
The customer bought the iPhone , if he wants to buy and run an app , that 's none of Apple 's business .
The amazing thing here is that this shit continues to this day .
If any other platform vendor tried to pull such a stunt , they 'd be laughed and sued out of business !
Imagine Intel only allowing you to boot an approved OS !
Or Microsoft only allowing you to run apps from a set of approved vendors !
Or Google only allowing you to run pre-approved searches !
And when Apple pulls this stunt , everyone just bends over and lines up to kiss Jobs ' ass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, I do consider it as entirely unreasonable.
The customer bought the iPhone, if he wants to buy and run an app, that's none of Apple's business.
The amazing thing here is that this shit continues to this day.
If any other platform vendor tried to pull such a stunt, they'd be laughed and sued out of business!
Imagine Intel only allowing you to boot an approved OS!
Or Microsoft only allowing you to run apps from a set of approved vendors!
Or Google only allowing you to run pre-approved searches!
And when Apple pulls this stunt, everyone just bends over and lines up to kiss Jobs' ass.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411643</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28412565</id>
	<title>Re:What is "executable code"?</title>
	<author>DevStar</author>
	<datestamp>1245613920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Mod parent up.  All the emulator is doing is using data to dictate the control flow of the program (emulator).  This is exactly what virtually every program on the iPhone (or any computer does).  If Apple's fear is security then their restriction is braindead (which is consistent with Apple's naive stance on security in general).  I suspect their bigger concern is loss of the AppStore (a Flash or Silverlight appstore, sitting in an iPhone app could make their store irrelevant).

It's unfortunate Apple never gets taken to task for their behavior.  I get that they're not a "monopoly", but ethically (monopoly or not) they seem to have some of the worst practices in software.  I shudder to think what would happen if they became as big as Google or MS.  Well I think we're getting glimpses of it.  BillG and Sergey will probably end up looking like saints.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mod parent up .
All the emulator is doing is using data to dictate the control flow of the program ( emulator ) .
This is exactly what virtually every program on the iPhone ( or any computer does ) .
If Apple 's fear is security then their restriction is braindead ( which is consistent with Apple 's naive stance on security in general ) .
I suspect their bigger concern is loss of the AppStore ( a Flash or Silverlight appstore , sitting in an iPhone app could make their store irrelevant ) .
It 's unfortunate Apple never gets taken to task for their behavior .
I get that they 're not a " monopoly " , but ethically ( monopoly or not ) they seem to have some of the worst practices in software .
I shudder to think what would happen if they became as big as Google or MS. Well I think we 're getting glimpses of it .
BillG and Sergey will probably end up looking like saints .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mod parent up.
All the emulator is doing is using data to dictate the control flow of the program (emulator).
This is exactly what virtually every program on the iPhone (or any computer does).
If Apple's fear is security then their restriction is braindead (which is consistent with Apple's naive stance on security in general).
I suspect their bigger concern is loss of the AppStore (a Flash or Silverlight appstore, sitting in an iPhone app could make their store irrelevant).
It's unfortunate Apple never gets taken to task for their behavior.
I get that they're not a "monopoly", but ethically (monopoly or not) they seem to have some of the worst practices in software.
I shudder to think what would happen if they became as big as Google or MS.  Well I think we're getting glimpses of it.
BillG and Sergey will probably end up looking like saints.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411921</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411895</id>
	<title>Re:Editorialise much ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245609120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; And I'm sick and tired of this entitlement meme.</p><p>It's not "entitlement" to desire control of one's own property.</p><p>Yes: an iPhone becomes my property when I buy it.</p><p>So does a copy of "The Martian Chronicles" (on book, ebook or DVD).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; And I 'm sick and tired of this entitlement meme.It 's not " entitlement " to desire control of one 's own property.Yes : an iPhone becomes my property when I buy it.So does a copy of " The Martian Chronicles " ( on book , ebook or DVD ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; And I'm sick and tired of this entitlement meme.It's not "entitlement" to desire control of one's own property.Yes: an iPhone becomes my property when I buy it.So does a copy of "The Martian Chronicles" (on book, ebook or DVD).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411805</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411649</id>
	<title>Clarification</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245607500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think what Apple wants is to make sure you can't "add" more games without going to the appstore.</p><p>Individual games (eg the Sega ones referred to) are each a seperate app that you get from the App store. You arent getting a single "Sega" emulator which you can then get more roms (legit or otherwise) seperately from the app store.</p><p>Presumably the C64 emulator had no such limitation.</p><p>(I have an iPhone, its jailbroken and unlocked, and even though I can explain Apple's motivation for their restrictive policy, they can kiss my ass)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think what Apple wants is to make sure you ca n't " add " more games without going to the appstore.Individual games ( eg the Sega ones referred to ) are each a seperate app that you get from the App store .
You arent getting a single " Sega " emulator which you can then get more roms ( legit or otherwise ) seperately from the app store.Presumably the C64 emulator had no such limitation .
( I have an iPhone , its jailbroken and unlocked , and even though I can explain Apple 's motivation for their restrictive policy , they can kiss my ass )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think what Apple wants is to make sure you can't "add" more games without going to the appstore.Individual games (eg the Sega ones referred to) are each a seperate app that you get from the App store.
You arent getting a single "Sega" emulator which you can then get more roms (legit or otherwise) seperately from the app store.Presumably the C64 emulator had no such limitation.
(I have an iPhone, its jailbroken and unlocked, and even though I can explain Apple's motivation for their restrictive policy, they can kiss my ass)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411677</id>
	<title>Simple solution...</title>
	<author>argent</author>
	<datestamp>1245607620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bundle the individual games with the emulator, but don't provide a mechanism to install additional games.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bundle the individual games with the emulator , but do n't provide a mechanism to install additional games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bundle the individual games with the emulator, but don't provide a mechanism to install additional games.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411671</id>
	<title>Typical Apple</title>
	<author>spiffydudex</author>
	<datestamp>1245607620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You gotta do it the Apple way or go home. We have seen this time and time again with the app store.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You got ta do it the Apple way or go home .
We have seen this time and time again with the app store .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You gotta do it the Apple way or go home.
We have seen this time and time again with the app store.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28443277</id>
	<title>Re:Idiotic Summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245787800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>uh, because it doesn't execute arbitrary code downloaded from a third party source? You're comparing Apples to Cadillacs. Sid player does *not* "interpret executable code" "downloaded on-the-fly." Instead it plays music. Funny, you linked to sid player but didn't read any of the description? Or are you one of the morons who kept posting comments in the ssh clients about using them as ssh servers?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>uh , because it does n't execute arbitrary code downloaded from a third party source ?
You 're comparing Apples to Cadillacs .
Sid player does * not * " interpret executable code " " downloaded on-the-fly .
" Instead it plays music .
Funny , you linked to sid player but did n't read any of the description ?
Or are you one of the morons who kept posting comments in the ssh clients about using them as ssh servers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>uh, because it doesn't execute arbitrary code downloaded from a third party source?
You're comparing Apples to Cadillacs.
Sid player does *not* "interpret executable code" "downloaded on-the-fly.
" Instead it plays music.
Funny, you linked to sid player but didn't read any of the description?
Or are you one of the morons who kept posting comments in the ssh clients about using them as ssh servers?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28412061</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28415297</id>
	<title>Call me when it's an Amiga emulator</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245594240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't care about C64.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't care about C64 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't care about C64.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28423079</id>
	<title>More to the point...</title>
	<author>Bones3D\_mac</author>
	<datestamp>1245688680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... where exactly is the line for "launch and execution"? Under a very broad interpretation of policy, this could apply to any situation in which an app must parse any kind of 3rd party data in order to work with or display it.</p><p>Simply seeking out identifiable markers in any data source and reacting to it accordingly could be defined as an execution of externally issued instruction.</p><p>In a sense, any time you open a file in an app that didn't create it, that app is operating on the data in emulation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... where exactly is the line for " launch and execution " ?
Under a very broad interpretation of policy , this could apply to any situation in which an app must parse any kind of 3rd party data in order to work with or display it.Simply seeking out identifiable markers in any data source and reacting to it accordingly could be defined as an execution of externally issued instruction.In a sense , any time you open a file in an app that did n't create it , that app is operating on the data in emulation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... where exactly is the line for "launch and execution"?
Under a very broad interpretation of policy, this could apply to any situation in which an app must parse any kind of 3rd party data in order to work with or display it.Simply seeking out identifiable markers in any data source and reacting to it accordingly could be defined as an execution of externally issued instruction.In a sense, any time you open a file in an app that didn't create it, that app is operating on the data in emulation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411773</id>
	<title>Re:Editorialise much ?</title>
	<author>onefriedrice</author>
	<datestamp>1245608280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not seeing this as an ethical issue.  I may wish that Apple's terms of use for the iPhone were more accepting of a particular type of application, but all developers know the terms before they even start coding.  This case is different from Sega because this one interprets <i>arbitrary</i> code while Sega's apps run hard-coded ROMs.  The term <i>arbitrary</i> is important, and it clearly means that this app is indeed against Apple's terms of inclusion into <i>their</i> store.<br> <br>

Does it suck?  Yeah.  Unethical?  That's a stretch...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not seeing this as an ethical issue .
I may wish that Apple 's terms of use for the iPhone were more accepting of a particular type of application , but all developers know the terms before they even start coding .
This case is different from Sega because this one interprets arbitrary code while Sega 's apps run hard-coded ROMs .
The term arbitrary is important , and it clearly means that this app is indeed against Apple 's terms of inclusion into their store .
Does it suck ?
Yeah. Unethical ?
That 's a stretch.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not seeing this as an ethical issue.
I may wish that Apple's terms of use for the iPhone were more accepting of a particular type of application, but all developers know the terms before they even start coding.
This case is different from Sega because this one interprets arbitrary code while Sega's apps run hard-coded ROMs.
The term arbitrary is important, and it clearly means that this app is indeed against Apple's terms of inclusion into their store.
Does it suck?
Yeah.  Unethical?
That's a stretch...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411607</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28447523</id>
	<title>Re:Editorialise much ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245762480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jesus, go refill your Xanax, already.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jesus , go refill your Xanax , already .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jesus, go refill your Xanax, already.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411607</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28415601</id>
	<title>Re:Editorialise much ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245597420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Authority???  For the moment.  But wait until the antitrust suit comes to bare.  They are a mass platform that operates on public air-waves.  This isn't a game system that runs in your home.  This is a device that operated through licenses from the US government.  And if you do a bit of searching you will notice that they are being challenged for their exclusive license to AT&amp;T.  You'll also notice that net neutrality is a hot button with the government...and Apple is controlling net neutrality by rejecting certain applications.  This means that apples right to their approval of applications is short lived.  They better start accepting all applications that don't cross major legal boundaries, or be prepared to give up their authority because their authority is granted by the citizens of the united states.  They have no right to make phones that operate on public airwaves otherwise....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Authority ? ? ?
For the moment .
But wait until the antitrust suit comes to bare .
They are a mass platform that operates on public air-waves .
This is n't a game system that runs in your home .
This is a device that operated through licenses from the US government .
And if you do a bit of searching you will notice that they are being challenged for their exclusive license to AT&amp;T .
You 'll also notice that net neutrality is a hot button with the government...and Apple is controlling net neutrality by rejecting certain applications .
This means that apples right to their approval of applications is short lived .
They better start accepting all applications that do n't cross major legal boundaries , or be prepared to give up their authority because their authority is granted by the citizens of the united states .
They have no right to make phones that operate on public airwaves otherwise... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Authority???
For the moment.
But wait until the antitrust suit comes to bare.
They are a mass platform that operates on public air-waves.
This isn't a game system that runs in your home.
This is a device that operated through licenses from the US government.
And if you do a bit of searching you will notice that they are being challenged for their exclusive license to AT&amp;T.
You'll also notice that net neutrality is a hot button with the government...and Apple is controlling net neutrality by rejecting certain applications.
This means that apples right to their approval of applications is short lived.
They better start accepting all applications that don't cross major legal boundaries, or be prepared to give up their authority because their authority is granted by the citizens of the united states.
They have no right to make phones that operate on public airwaves otherwise....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411607</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411681</id>
	<title>Consistently Inconsistent</title>
	<author>mlingojones</author>
	<datestamp>1245607680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It seems Sega is exempt from that clause, because some of its games on the iPhone are emulators running original ROM code."</p></div> </blockquote><p>It's not as if this is new behavior for Apple.  There's been <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579\_3-10108348-37.html?part=rss&amp;tag=feed&amp;subj=News-Apple" title="cnet.com" rel="nofollow">at least one other case</a> [cnet.com] of an app by a big developer breaking the SDK agreement and getting approved, even though they fully and publicly admitted to it.</p><blockquote><div><p>Google acknowledged breaking the official rules of Apple's iPhone software development kit when it created the latest version of the Google Mobile application for the iPhone, but denied a more serious charge.</p></div> </blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems Sega is exempt from that clause , because some of its games on the iPhone are emulators running original ROM code .
" It 's not as if this is new behavior for Apple .
There 's been at least one other case [ cnet.com ] of an app by a big developer breaking the SDK agreement and getting approved , even though they fully and publicly admitted to it.Google acknowledged breaking the official rules of Apple 's iPhone software development kit when it created the latest version of the Google Mobile application for the iPhone , but denied a more serious charge .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems Sega is exempt from that clause, because some of its games on the iPhone are emulators running original ROM code.
" It's not as if this is new behavior for Apple.
There's been at least one other case [cnet.com] of an app by a big developer breaking the SDK agreement and getting approved, even though they fully and publicly admitted to it.Google acknowledged breaking the official rules of Apple's iPhone software development kit when it created the latest version of the Google Mobile application for the iPhone, but denied a more serious charge. 
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28412053</id>
	<title>Re:Editorialise much ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245610380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>&gt; And I'm sick and tired of this entitlement meme.</p><p>It's not "entitlement" to desire control of one's own property.</p><p>Yes: an iPhone becomes my property when I buy it.</p><p>So does a copy of "The Martian Chronicles" (on book, ebook or DVD).</p></div><p>Does the iPhone becomes yours when you buy it?  Yes... but only when <b>that is the full retail price of the device.</b>  Purchasing it from AT&amp;T with a 2 year guaranteed service contract for 200 bucks... is not full retail price.

Further, just because you bought the device, does not mean you bought the software it runs.  That, my friend, is <b>licensed</b> to you.

The app store is a <b>service</b> owned by Apple, and licensed for your use, on their software, on their terms.

Apple can decide to have whatever the hell they want in their store... without worrying about your hurt feelings, because the App Store is their property.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; And I 'm sick and tired of this entitlement meme.It 's not " entitlement " to desire control of one 's own property.Yes : an iPhone becomes my property when I buy it.So does a copy of " The Martian Chronicles " ( on book , ebook or DVD ) .Does the iPhone becomes yours when you buy it ?
Yes... but only when that is the full retail price of the device .
Purchasing it from AT&amp;T with a 2 year guaranteed service contract for 200 bucks... is not full retail price .
Further , just because you bought the device , does not mean you bought the software it runs .
That , my friend , is licensed to you .
The app store is a service owned by Apple , and licensed for your use , on their software , on their terms .
Apple can decide to have whatever the hell they want in their store... without worrying about your hurt feelings , because the App Store is their property .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; And I'm sick and tired of this entitlement meme.It's not "entitlement" to desire control of one's own property.Yes: an iPhone becomes my property when I buy it.So does a copy of "The Martian Chronicles" (on book, ebook or DVD).Does the iPhone becomes yours when you buy it?
Yes... but only when that is the full retail price of the device.
Purchasing it from AT&amp;T with a 2 year guaranteed service contract for 200 bucks... is not full retail price.
Further, just because you bought the device, does not mean you bought the software it runs.
That, my friend, is licensed to you.
The app store is a service owned by Apple, and licensed for your use, on their software, on their terms.
Apple can decide to have whatever the hell they want in their store... without worrying about your hurt feelings, because the App Store is their property.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28451363</id>
	<title>Pocket Gamer has the REAL info on this story</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245852120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>PocketGamer.co.uk broke this story and had a preview live before any of the other sites (including TouchArcade) had even heard about it. If you want to find out what REALLY happened with the C64 emulator on the iPhone, read the original Pocket Gamer articles where all this info actually came from: http://www.pocketgamer.co.uk/r/iPhone/product.asp?p=C64&amp;i=11381</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>PocketGamer.co.uk broke this story and had a preview live before any of the other sites ( including TouchArcade ) had even heard about it .
If you want to find out what REALLY happened with the C64 emulator on the iPhone , read the original Pocket Gamer articles where all this info actually came from : http : //www.pocketgamer.co.uk/r/iPhone/product.asp ? p = C64&amp;i = 11381</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PocketGamer.co.uk broke this story and had a preview live before any of the other sites (including TouchArcade) had even heard about it.
If you want to find out what REALLY happened with the C64 emulator on the iPhone, read the original Pocket Gamer articles where all this info actually came from: http://www.pocketgamer.co.uk/r/iPhone/product.asp?p=C64&amp;i=11381</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411685</id>
	<title>Idiotic Summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245607680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course Sega is exempt; their programs are a single ROM, run via emulation.  You don't buy a Sega hardware emulator and then download ROMs for it, so they can test it fully before allowing it to be released.  An open emulator, able to run any ROM you give it, is essentially a way to run un-tested, 3rd party code on the platform.  There's no way for Apple to be sure the programs stay within their virtual environment.  In essence, it would be a way to circumvent the security and execution protection on the phone entirely; it's a jailbreaker.</p><p>I'm about as far from an Apple apologist as you can get, and can't wait for this app store bullshit to quiet down.  But let's not start reviling them for merely following their stated policy.  If these people want to release their emulator, they'll need to do what their competitors have: bundle it with specific games and sell THOSE instead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course Sega is exempt ; their programs are a single ROM , run via emulation .
You do n't buy a Sega hardware emulator and then download ROMs for it , so they can test it fully before allowing it to be released .
An open emulator , able to run any ROM you give it , is essentially a way to run un-tested , 3rd party code on the platform .
There 's no way for Apple to be sure the programs stay within their virtual environment .
In essence , it would be a way to circumvent the security and execution protection on the phone entirely ; it 's a jailbreaker.I 'm about as far from an Apple apologist as you can get , and ca n't wait for this app store bullshit to quiet down .
But let 's not start reviling them for merely following their stated policy .
If these people want to release their emulator , they 'll need to do what their competitors have : bundle it with specific games and sell THOSE instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course Sega is exempt; their programs are a single ROM, run via emulation.
You don't buy a Sega hardware emulator and then download ROMs for it, so they can test it fully before allowing it to be released.
An open emulator, able to run any ROM you give it, is essentially a way to run un-tested, 3rd party code on the platform.
There's no way for Apple to be sure the programs stay within their virtual environment.
In essence, it would be a way to circumvent the security and execution protection on the phone entirely; it's a jailbreaker.I'm about as far from an Apple apologist as you can get, and can't wait for this app store bullshit to quiet down.
But let's not start reviling them for merely following their stated policy.
If these people want to release their emulator, they'll need to do what their competitors have: bundle it with specific games and sell THOSE instead.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28442659</id>
	<title>What about C64 Emulators in Javascript?</title>
	<author>Domini</author>
	<datestamp>1245785700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps they think this is safe because it runs in a 'safe' Javascript sandbox in a browser 'sandbox' despite iPhone unlocking hacks out there proving otherwise.</p><p><a href="http://www.jac64.com/jac64-how-to-use.html" title="jac64.com">http://www.jac64.com/jac64-how-to-use.html</a> [jac64.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps they think this is safe because it runs in a 'safe ' Javascript sandbox in a browser 'sandbox ' despite iPhone unlocking hacks out there proving otherwise.http : //www.jac64.com/jac64-how-to-use.html [ jac64.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps they think this is safe because it runs in a 'safe' Javascript sandbox in a browser 'sandbox' despite iPhone unlocking hacks out there proving otherwise.http://www.jac64.com/jac64-how-to-use.html [jac64.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_167239_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28413825
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411897
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_167239_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411773
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411607
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_167239_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28413669
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411643
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_167239_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28415601
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411607
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_167239_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28412565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411921
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_167239_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28413899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411921
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_167239_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28418969
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411643
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_167239_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28443277
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28412061
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_167239_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28418399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411921
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_167239_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28447523
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411607
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_167239_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28420377
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411607
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_167239_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28413051
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411643
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_167239_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28412199
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28412053
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411607
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_167239.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411875
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_167239.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411637
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_167239.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411567
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411607
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28447523
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28415601
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411805
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411895
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28412053
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28412199
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28420377
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411773
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_167239.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411843
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_167239.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411645
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_167239.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28412597
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_167239.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411677
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_167239.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28412427
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_167239.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411721
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_167239.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411921
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28418399
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28412565
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28413899
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_167239.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28442659
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_167239.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411685
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28412061
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28443277
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411897
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28413825
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_167239.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411643
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28413051
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28413669
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28418969
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_167239.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28411671
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_167239.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_167239.28412495
</commentlist>
</conversation>
