<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_13_215242</id>
	<title>EU Publishers Want a Law To Control Online News</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1247481480000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>suraj.sun writes with news that European publishers are also <a href="http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2009/07/european-publishers-want-news-access-controls-legislated.ars">seeking ways to "protect" their content</a> from the big bad intertubes.  Their rant, termed the "<a href="http://www.epceurope.org/presscentre/archive/International\_publishers\_demand\_new\_intellectual\_property\_rights.shtml">Hamburg Declaration</a>," asks the government to step in with a legislative fix.  <i>"Most of the statements in the relatively short declaration, which will surely take its place among thousands of other European declarations on intellectual property and other matters that have come out over the past few years, hinge on the idea that 'universal access to news' does not equal 'free.' In this respect, the publishers want to maintain the democratic ideal of a 'fourth estate' that provides news to an informed citizenry, while simultaneously restricting access to that news to those who can pay for it directly.  What sets this declaration apart from the other Hamburg declarations out there, or from the various Geneva declarations or Berlin declarations, is that this one is intended to give the publishers' favorite solution to the news-stealing problem, the Automated Content Access Protocol, the force of law."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>suraj.sun writes with news that European publishers are also seeking ways to " protect " their content from the big bad intertubes .
Their rant , termed the " Hamburg Declaration , " asks the government to step in with a legislative fix .
" Most of the statements in the relatively short declaration , which will surely take its place among thousands of other European declarations on intellectual property and other matters that have come out over the past few years , hinge on the idea that 'universal access to news ' does not equal 'free .
' In this respect , the publishers want to maintain the democratic ideal of a 'fourth estate ' that provides news to an informed citizenry , while simultaneously restricting access to that news to those who can pay for it directly .
What sets this declaration apart from the other Hamburg declarations out there , or from the various Geneva declarations or Berlin declarations , is that this one is intended to give the publishers ' favorite solution to the news-stealing problem , the Automated Content Access Protocol , the force of law .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>suraj.sun writes with news that European publishers are also seeking ways to "protect" their content from the big bad intertubes.
Their rant, termed the "Hamburg Declaration," asks the government to step in with a legislative fix.
"Most of the statements in the relatively short declaration, which will surely take its place among thousands of other European declarations on intellectual property and other matters that have come out over the past few years, hinge on the idea that 'universal access to news' does not equal 'free.
' In this respect, the publishers want to maintain the democratic ideal of a 'fourth estate' that provides news to an informed citizenry, while simultaneously restricting access to that news to those who can pay for it directly.
What sets this declaration apart from the other Hamburg declarations out there, or from the various Geneva declarations or Berlin declarations, is that this one is intended to give the publishers' favorite solution to the news-stealing problem, the Automated Content Access Protocol, the force of law.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684173</id>
	<title>Re:Why is it always draconian?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247487360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd suggest "Fucking"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... as in</p><p>Fucking DRM</p><p>Fucking Internet Filters</p><p>and</p><p>Fucking Automated Content Access Protocol</p><p>----</p><p>Rumors of this substitution originating with high-level executives within Microsoft can be neither confirmed nor denied.</p><p>----</p><p>PS&gt; We expressly disclaim any and ALL actions you take in regards to this new suggestion. !!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd suggest " Fucking " ... as inFucking DRMFucking Internet FiltersandFucking Automated Content Access Protocol----Rumors of this substitution originating with high-level executives within Microsoft can be neither confirmed nor denied.----PS &gt; We expressly disclaim any and ALL actions you take in regards to this new suggestion .
! ! !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd suggest "Fucking" ... as inFucking DRMFucking Internet FiltersandFucking Automated Content Access Protocol----Rumors of this substitution originating with high-level executives within Microsoft can be neither confirmed nor denied.----PS&gt; We expressly disclaim any and ALL actions you take in regards to this new suggestion.
!!!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683923</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28687115</id>
	<title>Google could kill this proposal</title>
	<author>gdshaw</author>
	<datestamp>1247512380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What they should do is implement ACAP as a front-end to their existing robots.txt filtering capability
</p><p>Of course, the correspondence would not be exact.  To stay within the rules they would have to translate each ACAP restriction into one for robots.txt that was at least as restrictive (technically very easy since robots.txt allows little discrimination).</p><p>Any publisher who tried to use the new features would then risk not being listed at all.</p><p>(This only works while ACAP-enabled sites are a small minority, otherwise Google would be hurting themselves, but I think it would have a very good chance of preventing the system from achieving critical mass.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What they should do is implement ACAP as a front-end to their existing robots.txt filtering capability Of course , the correspondence would not be exact .
To stay within the rules they would have to translate each ACAP restriction into one for robots.txt that was at least as restrictive ( technically very easy since robots.txt allows little discrimination ) .Any publisher who tried to use the new features would then risk not being listed at all .
( This only works while ACAP-enabled sites are a small minority , otherwise Google would be hurting themselves , but I think it would have a very good chance of preventing the system from achieving critical mass .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What they should do is implement ACAP as a front-end to their existing robots.txt filtering capability
Of course, the correspondence would not be exact.
To stay within the rules they would have to translate each ACAP restriction into one for robots.txt that was at least as restrictive (technically very easy since robots.txt allows little discrimination).Any publisher who tried to use the new features would then risk not being listed at all.
(This only works while ACAP-enabled sites are a small minority, otherwise Google would be hurting themselves, but I think it would have a very good chance of preventing the system from achieving critical mass.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684467</id>
	<title>Re:This won't Work</title>
	<author>RDW</author>
	<datestamp>1247489280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>'people will gravitate towards free. If they go pay... people will just go elsewhere its simple as that, law or no law.'</p><p>Well, I think we should at least consider the terms of their proposal carefully. Check out the full text below:</p><p>"Hamburg Declaration regarding intellectual property rights</p><p>The Internet offers immense opportunities to professional journalism - but only if the basis for profitability remains secure throughout the digital channels of distribution. This is currently [ERROR! ACAP VIOLATION IN PROGRESS! YOU HAVE EXCEEDED THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF CHARACTERS ALLOCATED TO THIS NEWS AGGREGATOR! PLEASE DEPOSIT EUR 50 TO READ THE NEXT 100 WORDS OF THIS ARTICLE!]"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>'people will gravitate towards free .
If they go pay... people will just go elsewhere its simple as that , law or no law .
'Well , I think we should at least consider the terms of their proposal carefully .
Check out the full text below : " Hamburg Declaration regarding intellectual property rightsThe Internet offers immense opportunities to professional journalism - but only if the basis for profitability remains secure throughout the digital channels of distribution .
This is currently [ ERROR !
ACAP VIOLATION IN PROGRESS !
YOU HAVE EXCEEDED THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF CHARACTERS ALLOCATED TO THIS NEWS AGGREGATOR !
PLEASE DEPOSIT EUR 50 TO READ THE NEXT 100 WORDS OF THIS ARTICLE !
] "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'people will gravitate towards free.
If they go pay... people will just go elsewhere its simple as that, law or no law.
'Well, I think we should at least consider the terms of their proposal carefully.
Check out the full text below:"Hamburg Declaration regarding intellectual property rightsThe Internet offers immense opportunities to professional journalism - but only if the basis for profitability remains secure throughout the digital channels of distribution.
This is currently [ERROR!
ACAP VIOLATION IN PROGRESS!
YOU HAVE EXCEEDED THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF CHARACTERS ALLOCATED TO THIS NEWS AGGREGATOR!
PLEASE DEPOSIT EUR 50 TO READ THE NEXT 100 WORDS OF THIS ARTICLE!
]"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683769</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684187</id>
	<title>Re:People are mis-understanding this issue:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247487600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've got an easy solution if they try and pull this.</p><p>Don't give those people information.  It's not like they pay the people they interview anyway.</p><p>I'm sure someone will invent a way for us to share original news.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've got an easy solution if they try and pull this.Do n't give those people information .
It 's not like they pay the people they interview anyway.I 'm sure someone will invent a way for us to share original news .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've got an easy solution if they try and pull this.Don't give those people information.
It's not like they pay the people they interview anyway.I'm sure someone will invent a way for us to share original news.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683911</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28690001</id>
	<title>Re:If you don't want it indexed, then either</title>
	<author>Phoghat</author>
	<datestamp>1247581680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_amendments\_to\_the\_United\_States\_Constitution" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">
Bill of Rights</a> [wikipedia.org]
</p><p> Number one, with a bullet. Number 2? also with a bullet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bill of Rights [ wikipedia.org ] Number one , with a bullet .
Number 2 ?
also with a bullet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>

Bill of Rights [wikipedia.org]
 Number one, with a bullet.
Number 2?
also with a bullet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683795</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28687321</id>
	<title>Real news with no bias</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247514960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is exactly what I won't pay for. If I want "just" news, they are littered throughout the internet, TV, Radio,... Stripping the bias from them isn't a lot of work, if you choose your sources carefully.</p><p>I would pay people who are professionals on a topic to interpret the news for me, if I'm not a professional on this topic. Being a parrot that just repeats what it hears from news agencies is a job for Google, not for journalists.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is exactly what I wo n't pay for .
If I want " just " news , they are littered throughout the internet , TV , Radio,... Stripping the bias from them is n't a lot of work , if you choose your sources carefully.I would pay people who are professionals on a topic to interpret the news for me , if I 'm not a professional on this topic .
Being a parrot that just repeats what it hears from news agencies is a job for Google , not for journalists .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is exactly what I won't pay for.
If I want "just" news, they are littered throughout the internet, TV, Radio,... Stripping the bias from them isn't a lot of work, if you choose your sources carefully.I would pay people who are professionals on a topic to interpret the news for me, if I'm not a professional on this topic.
Being a parrot that just repeats what it hears from news agencies is a job for Google, not for journalists.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683883</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28688103</id>
	<title>Publicly accessible = publicly accessible</title>
	<author>dugeen</author>
	<datestamp>1247566800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The news content is on open HTTP servers whose URLs news organisations actively promote. That constitutes an invitation to use their server to download and read a copy of the content. If that's not what they want, then they're free to wall off their sites behind a subscription mechanism.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The news content is on open HTTP servers whose URLs news organisations actively promote .
That constitutes an invitation to use their server to download and read a copy of the content .
If that 's not what they want , then they 're free to wall off their sites behind a subscription mechanism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The news content is on open HTTP servers whose URLs news organisations actively promote.
That constitutes an invitation to use their server to download and read a copy of the content.
If that's not what they want, then they're free to wall off their sites behind a subscription mechanism.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28686511</id>
	<title>Re:People are mis-understanding this issue:</title>
	<author>PPNSteve</author>
	<datestamp>1247505780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have 'news' for you;<br>
News is NOT IP it is facts of something real or that has happened. No company or agency "owns' the news. (only their telling of said news is 'owned' by them, not the news itself.)
<br> <br>
You can't copyright facts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have 'news ' for you ; News is NOT IP it is facts of something real or that has happened .
No company or agency " owns ' the news .
( only their telling of said news is 'owned ' by them , not the news itself .
) You ca n't copyright facts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have 'news' for you;
News is NOT IP it is facts of something real or that has happened.
No company or agency "owns' the news.
(only their telling of said news is 'owned' by them, not the news itself.
)
 
You can't copyright facts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683911</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684381</id>
	<title>BBC has my favorite example of slant</title>
	<author>a2wflc</author>
	<datestamp>1247488800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I love this BBC world news title: "2007 data confirms warming trend". <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7142694.stm" title="bbc.co.uk" rel="nofollow">http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7142694.stm</a> [bbc.co.uk]  Nowhere in the article does it mention that 2007 was cooler than 2002-2006 or 2007 was cooler than 2006 which was cooler than 2005. <br>
&nbsp; <br>Fortunately they included a table so anyone who bothered to re-sort the table by year would know that their definition of trend is a little odd.  <br>
&nbsp; <br>Unfortunately most people read the title,  a few less read the first paragraph, and relatively few analyze the data tables.  <br>
&nbsp; <br>I'd call this bias unless they admit the negative short-term trend up front and explain how climate scientists determine trends.  At the time, they could have used nasa temps instead of Hadley's and it wouldn't have looked so bad short-term.  So I don't think it was intentional bias, but writers/editors not knowing enough of the subject to write an article and just copying press releases (which are always biased towards whoever releases them)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love this BBC world news title : " 2007 data confirms warming trend " .
http : //news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7142694.stm [ bbc.co.uk ] Nowhere in the article does it mention that 2007 was cooler than 2002-2006 or 2007 was cooler than 2006 which was cooler than 2005 .
  Fortunately they included a table so anyone who bothered to re-sort the table by year would know that their definition of trend is a little odd .
  Unfortunately most people read the title , a few less read the first paragraph , and relatively few analyze the data tables .
  I 'd call this bias unless they admit the negative short-term trend up front and explain how climate scientists determine trends .
At the time , they could have used nasa temps instead of Hadley 's and it would n't have looked so bad short-term .
So I do n't think it was intentional bias , but writers/editors not knowing enough of the subject to write an article and just copying press releases ( which are always biased towards whoever releases them )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love this BBC world news title: "2007 data confirms warming trend".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7142694.stm [bbc.co.uk]  Nowhere in the article does it mention that 2007 was cooler than 2002-2006 or 2007 was cooler than 2006 which was cooler than 2005.
  Fortunately they included a table so anyone who bothered to re-sort the table by year would know that their definition of trend is a little odd.
  Unfortunately most people read the title,  a few less read the first paragraph, and relatively few analyze the data tables.
  I'd call this bias unless they admit the negative short-term trend up front and explain how climate scientists determine trends.
At the time, they could have used nasa temps instead of Hadley's and it wouldn't have looked so bad short-term.
So I don't think it was intentional bias, but writers/editors not knowing enough of the subject to write an article and just copying press releases (which are always biased towards whoever releases them)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684113</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684113</id>
	<title>Re:I wish they'd focus on the news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247487000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I find the BBC's world news to be pretty unbiased as for the part of opinions. Though I do think they publish stories with only a few "facts" to sway one side or another.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I find the BBC 's world news to be pretty unbiased as for the part of opinions .
Though I do think they publish stories with only a few " facts " to sway one side or another .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find the BBC's world news to be pretty unbiased as for the part of opinions.
Though I do think they publish stories with only a few "facts" to sway one side or another.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683883</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683855</id>
	<title>Hamburg Declaration</title>
	<author>camperdave</author>
	<datestamp>1247485680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hamburg Declaration:<br> <br>"I'll have mine with cheese and bacon."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hamburg Declaration : " I 'll have mine with cheese and bacon .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hamburg Declaration: "I'll have mine with cheese and bacon.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684283</id>
	<title>Remember Salon and Slate tried to charge too..</title>
	<author>Dr\_Ken</author>
	<datestamp>1247488140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>and how well did that work out for them? They both had to back off immediately or go extinct. I've heard the NY Times is looking into charging for content. I dont' expect that'll work out well either. People will just migrate to free every time. Pooh on you EU!</htmltext>
<tokenext>and how well did that work out for them ?
They both had to back off immediately or go extinct .
I 've heard the NY Times is looking into charging for content .
I dont ' expect that 'll work out well either .
People will just migrate to free every time .
Pooh on you EU !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and how well did that work out for them?
They both had to back off immediately or go extinct.
I've heard the NY Times is looking into charging for content.
I dont' expect that'll work out well either.
People will just migrate to free every time.
Pooh on you EU!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684137</id>
	<title>Journalism.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247487180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wanna know why people have stopped reading papers? Because online they can skip to the next article without that feeling of "but I paid for the paper" and thus can escape the childish, state-obedient garbage that passes for journalism these days.<br>Wanna know why people will not pay for access? </p><p>see above </p><p>I presume, perhaps incorrectly, that people here on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. read a number of sites, see what each is saying and draw an average from all the reports. No one site/source/newsroom has sufficient credibility anymore to be the sole source of news. They've all shown themselves to be moronic repeaters of "the official line".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wan na know why people have stopped reading papers ?
Because online they can skip to the next article without that feeling of " but I paid for the paper " and thus can escape the childish , state-obedient garbage that passes for journalism these days.Wan na know why people will not pay for access ?
see above I presume , perhaps incorrectly , that people here on / .
read a number of sites , see what each is saying and draw an average from all the reports .
No one site/source/newsroom has sufficient credibility anymore to be the sole source of news .
They 've all shown themselves to be moronic repeaters of " the official line " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wanna know why people have stopped reading papers?
Because online they can skip to the next article without that feeling of "but I paid for the paper" and thus can escape the childish, state-obedient garbage that passes for journalism these days.Wanna know why people will not pay for access?
see above I presume, perhaps incorrectly, that people here on /.
read a number of sites, see what each is saying and draw an average from all the reports.
No one site/source/newsroom has sufficient credibility anymore to be the sole source of news.
They've all shown themselves to be moronic repeaters of "the official line".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28691893</id>
	<title>HUmmmmmm   oh well</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247590020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>we got rules and shit (it's just unfortunate it's more shit than rules) screw em all  , If they try to hard to regulate it will only bite their asses hard in the long run</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>we got rules and shit ( it 's just unfortunate it 's more shit than rules ) screw em all , If they try to hard to regulate it will only bite their asses hard in the long run</tokentext>
<sentencetext>we got rules and shit (it's just unfortunate it's more shit than rules) screw em all  , If they try to hard to regulate it will only bite their asses hard in the long run</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683845</id>
	<title>freedom will not be found in "free" countries</title>
	<author>Blue Shifted</author>
	<datestamp>1247485620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>how ironic that true information freedom will end up being centered in countries such as russia, or countries with less governmental control, such as on the african continent, or south america.  hell, so called "unfree" countries such as china, even with it's great internet wall, will become safe havens for data that is heavily regulated by the west.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>how ironic that true information freedom will end up being centered in countries such as russia , or countries with less governmental control , such as on the african continent , or south america .
hell , so called " unfree " countries such as china , even with it 's great internet wall , will become safe havens for data that is heavily regulated by the west .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>how ironic that true information freedom will end up being centered in countries such as russia, or countries with less governmental control, such as on the african continent, or south america.
hell, so called "unfree" countries such as china, even with it's great internet wall, will become safe havens for data that is heavily regulated by the west.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683835</id>
	<title>I suppose I will start getting my news...</title>
	<author>SUB7IME</author>
	<datestamp>1247485560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>... 2.5 hours later ( <a href="http://news.slashdot.org/story/09/07/13/0531215/Traditional-News-Media-Lead-Blogs-By-25-Hours?from=rss" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://news.slashdot.org/story/09/07/13/0531215/Traditional-News-Media-Lead-Blogs-By-25-Hours?from=rss</a> [slashdot.org] )</htmltext>
<tokenext>... 2.5 hours later ( http : //news.slashdot.org/story/09/07/13/0531215/Traditional-News-Media-Lead-Blogs-By-25-Hours ? from = rss [ slashdot.org ] )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... 2.5 hours later ( http://news.slashdot.org/story/09/07/13/0531215/Traditional-News-Media-Lead-Blogs-By-25-Hours?from=rss [slashdot.org] )</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683923</id>
	<title>Why is it always draconian?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247486040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>TFA refers to it as "Draconian Automated Content Access Protocol", we also have Draconian DRM and Draconian Internet Filters.

See Draconian always makes me think of Dracula, which makes me think of the cereal Count Chacula which forces me to go up and eat some. Imagine doing this every time you read an article on DRM. Needless to say I'm putting on weight and the womens are no longer responding. So I would appreciate it if someone could come up with a new word.</htmltext>
<tokenext>TFA refers to it as " Draconian Automated Content Access Protocol " , we also have Draconian DRM and Draconian Internet Filters .
See Draconian always makes me think of Dracula , which makes me think of the cereal Count Chacula which forces me to go up and eat some .
Imagine doing this every time you read an article on DRM .
Needless to say I 'm putting on weight and the womens are no longer responding .
So I would appreciate it if someone could come up with a new word .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TFA refers to it as "Draconian Automated Content Access Protocol", we also have Draconian DRM and Draconian Internet Filters.
See Draconian always makes me think of Dracula, which makes me think of the cereal Count Chacula which forces me to go up and eat some.
Imagine doing this every time you read an article on DRM.
Needless to say I'm putting on weight and the womens are no longer responding.
So I would appreciate it if someone could come up with a new word.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684111</id>
	<title>Re:If you don't want it indexed, then either</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1247487000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FYI, robots.txt can be ignored by anything that chooses to ignore it. In fact, many web crawlers have caused problems because of this. If directory "huge\_downloads\_in\_here" is marked to disallow, it's annoying when a web crawler starts downloading everything in there 10 times per day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FYI , robots.txt can be ignored by anything that chooses to ignore it .
In fact , many web crawlers have caused problems because of this .
If directory " huge \ _downloads \ _in \ _here " is marked to disallow , it 's annoying when a web crawler starts downloading everything in there 10 times per day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FYI, robots.txt can be ignored by anything that chooses to ignore it.
In fact, many web crawlers have caused problems because of this.
If directory "huge\_downloads\_in\_here" is marked to disallow, it's annoying when a web crawler starts downloading everything in there 10 times per day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683795</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683883</id>
	<title>I wish they'd focus on the news</title>
	<author>reboot246</author>
	<datestamp>1247485860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd settle for news organizations doing a better job of reporting the news, and stop the spinning and opinions. I'd pay for real news with no bias.<br><br>Just the facts as best you can report them please. Leave your opinions at home.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd settle for news organizations doing a better job of reporting the news , and stop the spinning and opinions .
I 'd pay for real news with no bias.Just the facts as best you can report them please .
Leave your opinions at home .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd settle for news organizations doing a better job of reporting the news, and stop the spinning and opinions.
I'd pay for real news with no bias.Just the facts as best you can report them please.
Leave your opinions at home.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28690139</id>
	<title>Boycott. Abolish. these will teach them.</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1247582280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>moves detrimental against people by interest groups that are no different than french nobility, can be countered by moves like french revolution. totally boycott their profit making instruments, refuse to have to do anything with them, ignore their existence, and name your reason. this teaches them not to limit people's freedoms for their own profit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>moves detrimental against people by interest groups that are no different than french nobility , can be countered by moves like french revolution .
totally boycott their profit making instruments , refuse to have to do anything with them , ignore their existence , and name your reason .
this teaches them not to limit people 's freedoms for their own profit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>moves detrimental against people by interest groups that are no different than french nobility, can be countered by moves like french revolution.
totally boycott their profit making instruments, refuse to have to do anything with them, ignore their existence, and name your reason.
this teaches them not to limit people's freedoms for their own profit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28689681</id>
	<title>Here's the rub:</title>
	<author>Biswalt</author>
	<datestamp>1247580360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem is (from the perspective of the media companies) that there are too many free readers.  And in the past because it was so easy to control the distribution of information (printing presses being expensive to operate) the media companies could monopolize the news distribution frame work.  But now they can't, and that means more and more people are refusing to pay for the news.  I for one don't ever buy news.  I feel like it's wasteful to purchase news because I don't feel someone should have the right to monopolize the description of current events.  Secondly, most of the news is provided for news media organizations for free.  The AP for example doesn't pay anything to be able to quote political speeches, and they shouldn't have to.  I mean, pick up a paper and read it cover to cover (other than the sports section, and the business section) how much news is investigative journalism that significantly costs the media companies anything, versus how much of that same newspaper is just a retelling of some event without any real extra costs to the news papers.   Then look at how many outlets for info your typical media company like say the Hearst newspaper group has, and lastly look at how much money the heads of the newspapers are getting.  It's not like the people who own the media companies aren't getting paid because ad revenue is down.  My argument would be that newspapers are losing money not because websites are linking to their articles, but because while they are experiencing diminished ad  revenues the owners of these media companies are making record personal windfalls!</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is ( from the perspective of the media companies ) that there are too many free readers .
And in the past because it was so easy to control the distribution of information ( printing presses being expensive to operate ) the media companies could monopolize the news distribution frame work .
But now they ca n't , and that means more and more people are refusing to pay for the news .
I for one do n't ever buy news .
I feel like it 's wasteful to purchase news because I do n't feel someone should have the right to monopolize the description of current events .
Secondly , most of the news is provided for news media organizations for free .
The AP for example does n't pay anything to be able to quote political speeches , and they should n't have to .
I mean , pick up a paper and read it cover to cover ( other than the sports section , and the business section ) how much news is investigative journalism that significantly costs the media companies anything , versus how much of that same newspaper is just a retelling of some event without any real extra costs to the news papers .
Then look at how many outlets for info your typical media company like say the Hearst newspaper group has , and lastly look at how much money the heads of the newspapers are getting .
It 's not like the people who own the media companies are n't getting paid because ad revenue is down .
My argument would be that newspapers are losing money not because websites are linking to their articles , but because while they are experiencing diminished ad revenues the owners of these media companies are making record personal windfalls !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is (from the perspective of the media companies) that there are too many free readers.
And in the past because it was so easy to control the distribution of information (printing presses being expensive to operate) the media companies could monopolize the news distribution frame work.
But now they can't, and that means more and more people are refusing to pay for the news.
I for one don't ever buy news.
I feel like it's wasteful to purchase news because I don't feel someone should have the right to monopolize the description of current events.
Secondly, most of the news is provided for news media organizations for free.
The AP for example doesn't pay anything to be able to quote political speeches, and they shouldn't have to.
I mean, pick up a paper and read it cover to cover (other than the sports section, and the business section) how much news is investigative journalism that significantly costs the media companies anything, versus how much of that same newspaper is just a retelling of some event without any real extra costs to the news papers.
Then look at how many outlets for info your typical media company like say the Hearst newspaper group has, and lastly look at how much money the heads of the newspapers are getting.
It's not like the people who own the media companies aren't getting paid because ad revenue is down.
My argument would be that newspapers are losing money not because websites are linking to their articles, but because while they are experiencing diminished ad  revenues the owners of these media companies are making record personal windfalls!
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28685247</id>
	<title>Re:People are mis-understanding this issue:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247495640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Two thoughts:</p><p>1. Personally, if I like going to the source if possible. Even for things like syndication, I'd rather go to reuters.com than a imahackblogger.com website.</p><p>2. You'd think people who deal in information would be more cautious about preventing the flow of information.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Two thoughts : 1 .
Personally , if I like going to the source if possible .
Even for things like syndication , I 'd rather go to reuters.com than a imahackblogger.com website.2 .
You 'd think people who deal in information would be more cautious about preventing the flow of information .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Two thoughts:1.
Personally, if I like going to the source if possible.
Even for things like syndication, I'd rather go to reuters.com than a imahackblogger.com website.2.
You'd think people who deal in information would be more cautious about preventing the flow of information.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683911</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684271</id>
	<title>Sue them back using the same law.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247488080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're on a crashing airplane, twitter about it.  Then use your twitter as justification that the reported information is YOURS and demand all the news outlets to pay you for use of that information.  Sorry, I should use the correct form.</p><p>1) See event<br>2) Twitter about it<br>3) Sue other news agencies<br>4) Profit!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're on a crashing airplane , twitter about it .
Then use your twitter as justification that the reported information is YOURS and demand all the news outlets to pay you for use of that information .
Sorry , I should use the correct form.1 ) See event2 ) Twitter about it3 ) Sue other news agencies4 ) Profit !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're on a crashing airplane, twitter about it.
Then use your twitter as justification that the reported information is YOURS and demand all the news outlets to pay you for use of that information.
Sorry, I should use the correct form.1) See event2) Twitter about it3) Sue other news agencies4) Profit!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683769</id>
	<title>This won't Work</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247485260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>people will gravitate towards free. If they go pay... people will just go elsewhere its simple as that, law or no law.</htmltext>
<tokenext>people will gravitate towards free .
If they go pay... people will just go elsewhere its simple as that , law or no law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>people will gravitate towards free.
If they go pay... people will just go elsewhere its simple as that, law or no law.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28685223</id>
	<title>Re:I wish they'd focus on the news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247495400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Reality has a well-known Liberal bias.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Reality has a well-known Liberal bias .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reality has a well-known Liberal bias.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683883</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28685597</id>
	<title>Re:Hamburg Declaration</title>
	<author>Dragonslicer</author>
	<datestamp>1247499060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Hamburg Declaration:

"I'll have mine with cheese and bacon."</p></div><p>But are you going to pay for it today or on Tuesday?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hamburg Declaration : " I 'll have mine with cheese and bacon .
" But are you going to pay for it today or on Tuesday ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hamburg Declaration:

"I'll have mine with cheese and bacon.
"But are you going to pay for it today or on Tuesday?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683855</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683823</id>
	<title>i don't see it happening</title>
	<author>Tom Smith</author>
	<datestamp>1247485500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>totally unworkable</p><p>who is to say that one report is ripping off another?</p><p>or that another report is not ripping off the first?</p><p>impossible to police, even harder to prosecute.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>totally unworkablewho is to say that one report is ripping off another ? or that another report is not ripping off the first ? impossible to police , even harder to prosecute .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>totally unworkablewho is to say that one report is ripping off another?or that another report is not ripping off the first?impossible to police, even harder to prosecute.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684191</id>
	<title>Re:Why is it always draconian?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247487600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draco\_(lawgiver)" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Draconian</a> [wikipedia.org] is the correct adjective for laws which demand disproportionate punishments for minor offences.<p>
Vampires, sadly, have nothing to do with it. Although, most articles on DRM make me want to impale someone, so I suppose there's a connection.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because Draconian [ wikipedia.org ] is the correct adjective for laws which demand disproportionate punishments for minor offences .
Vampires , sadly , have nothing to do with it .
Although , most articles on DRM make me want to impale someone , so I suppose there 's a connection .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because Draconian [wikipedia.org] is the correct adjective for laws which demand disproportionate punishments for minor offences.
Vampires, sadly, have nothing to do with it.
Although, most articles on DRM make me want to impale someone, so I suppose there's a connection.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683923</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683911</id>
	<title>People are mis-understanding this issue:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247485980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This isn't about free web content, or copyright.</p><p>The newspapers are trying to establish ownership of the underlying INFORMATION, not just the words they use to convey that information.</p><p>Newspapers who actually go out and "get" news are trying to establish control over that information so that those who re-report do not compete directly with the original report.</p><p>This isn't about copyright, it is about establishing a new 'estate' of IP which establishes ownership over directly sourced/reported information.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is n't about free web content , or copyright.The newspapers are trying to establish ownership of the underlying INFORMATION , not just the words they use to convey that information.Newspapers who actually go out and " get " news are trying to establish control over that information so that those who re-report do not compete directly with the original report.This is n't about copyright , it is about establishing a new 'estate ' of IP which establishes ownership over directly sourced/reported information .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This isn't about free web content, or copyright.The newspapers are trying to establish ownership of the underlying INFORMATION, not just the words they use to convey that information.Newspapers who actually go out and "get" news are trying to establish control over that information so that those who re-report do not compete directly with the original report.This isn't about copyright, it is about establishing a new 'estate' of IP which establishes ownership over directly sourced/reported information.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683875</id>
	<title>The Internet Says "No"</title>
	<author>flydude18</author>
	<datestamp>1247485800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683889</id>
	<title>Steamengines</title>
	<author>santax</author>
	<datestamp>1247485920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I make steamengines and I did not believe in the combustionengine. Please make it a crime to own a combustion-engine.

That is what these people want. Nothing more, nothing less.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I make steamengines and I did not believe in the combustionengine .
Please make it a crime to own a combustion-engine .
That is what these people want .
Nothing more , nothing less .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I make steamengines and I did not believe in the combustionengine.
Please make it a crime to own a combustion-engine.
That is what these people want.
Nothing more, nothing less.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684811</id>
	<title>Re:I wish they'd focus on the news</title>
	<author>somenickname</author>
	<datestamp>1247491860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Many governments publish gigabytes of CSV files, PDF files, and database files.  I assume that's what you're referring to when you say you just want facts published.  Should the New York Times just be filled with tables of data?</p></div><p>No, they should describe the contents of those documents in English and in an unbiased manner.  That's what "the news" is.  It's not sensationalist crap with a slant on the writers/editors/publishers view.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>If you want that information translated into written English, the author of that text is going to have a point of view and a context within which they write.  It's the way language works.  And everyone wants other people to share their understanding of events.</p></div><p>Then they shouldn't be writing it.  It has nothing to do with the language.  What you are describing is a blog.  The news is not a blog.  If I read a news article that says, "this reporter thinks", "our analyst thinks", "our correspondent thinks", and I gave a fuck about what any of those people think, I would subscribe to their *blog*.</p><p>Tell me the facts and go away.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Many governments publish gigabytes of CSV files , PDF files , and database files .
I assume that 's what you 're referring to when you say you just want facts published .
Should the New York Times just be filled with tables of data ? No , they should describe the contents of those documents in English and in an unbiased manner .
That 's what " the news " is .
It 's not sensationalist crap with a slant on the writers/editors/publishers view.If you want that information translated into written English , the author of that text is going to have a point of view and a context within which they write .
It 's the way language works .
And everyone wants other people to share their understanding of events.Then they should n't be writing it .
It has nothing to do with the language .
What you are describing is a blog .
The news is not a blog .
If I read a news article that says , " this reporter thinks " , " our analyst thinks " , " our correspondent thinks " , and I gave a fuck about what any of those people think , I would subscribe to their * blog * .Tell me the facts and go away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many governments publish gigabytes of CSV files, PDF files, and database files.
I assume that's what you're referring to when you say you just want facts published.
Should the New York Times just be filled with tables of data?No, they should describe the contents of those documents in English and in an unbiased manner.
That's what "the news" is.
It's not sensationalist crap with a slant on the writers/editors/publishers view.If you want that information translated into written English, the author of that text is going to have a point of view and a context within which they write.
It's the way language works.
And everyone wants other people to share their understanding of events.Then they shouldn't be writing it.
It has nothing to do with the language.
What you are describing is a blog.
The news is not a blog.
If I read a news article that says, "this reporter thinks", "our analyst thinks", "our correspondent thinks", and I gave a fuck about what any of those people think, I would subscribe to their *blog*.Tell me the facts and go away.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684109</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683821</id>
	<title>RSS, robots.txt  and paywall</title>
	<author>guyfawkes-11-5</author>
	<datestamp>1247485500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Simple.

Disable RSS feeds,disallow all robots and then put it behind a paywall and see what happens....

either it thrives as the Wall Street journal seems to be doing, or it doesn't, as the 99\% of other sites who have tried similar ideas.

Where do I send my invoice?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Simple .
Disable RSS feeds,disallow all robots and then put it behind a paywall and see what happens... . either it thrives as the Wall Street journal seems to be doing , or it does n't , as the 99 \ % of other sites who have tried similar ideas .
Where do I send my invoice ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Simple.
Disable RSS feeds,disallow all robots and then put it behind a paywall and see what happens....

either it thrives as the Wall Street journal seems to be doing, or it doesn't, as the 99\% of other sites who have tried similar ideas.
Where do I send my invoice?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28685661</id>
	<title>Re:People are mis-understanding this issue:</title>
	<author>mckinnsb</author>
	<datestamp>1247499600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would refine your observation with the following: European Newspapers aren't just trying to establish ownership of the underlying information, they are trying to:</p><ol>
<li>fundamentally change the way it is packaged to their proposal, after a free market decided against said proposal</li><li>fundamentally change the medium of delivery, and then force everyone else to use it a la 1)</li><li>foist all the costs onto either a) the search engine companies b) the taxpayer or c) the government (which ultimately leads to a or b anyway)</li></ol><p>.
</p><p>The main problem with the ACAP system is that you cannot accurately index the content (or index the content as well) because bizarre restrictions may in be place given the media in question, causing incorrect evaluation. I'm not sure if the execs understand that their system will decrease their content's visibility, or if they expect search companies to foot the bill for the erection of a third meta-index to interface with proprietary content - both of which are equally asinine.</p><p> (apologies to any newspaper execs in the audience)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/cheeky</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would refine your observation with the following : European Newspapers are n't just trying to establish ownership of the underlying information , they are trying to : fundamentally change the way it is packaged to their proposal , after a free market decided against said proposalfundamentally change the medium of delivery , and then force everyone else to use it a la 1 ) foist all the costs onto either a ) the search engine companies b ) the taxpayer or c ) the government ( which ultimately leads to a or b anyway ) .
The main problem with the ACAP system is that you can not accurately index the content ( or index the content as well ) because bizarre restrictions may in be place given the media in question , causing incorrect evaluation .
I 'm not sure if the execs understand that their system will decrease their content 's visibility , or if they expect search companies to foot the bill for the erection of a third meta-index to interface with proprietary content - both of which are equally asinine .
( apologies to any newspaper execs in the audience ) /cheeky</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would refine your observation with the following: European Newspapers aren't just trying to establish ownership of the underlying information, they are trying to:
fundamentally change the way it is packaged to their proposal, after a free market decided against said proposalfundamentally change the medium of delivery, and then force everyone else to use it a la 1)foist all the costs onto either a) the search engine companies b) the taxpayer or c) the government (which ultimately leads to a or b anyway).
The main problem with the ACAP system is that you cannot accurately index the content (or index the content as well) because bizarre restrictions may in be place given the media in question, causing incorrect evaluation.
I'm not sure if the execs understand that their system will decrease their content's visibility, or if they expect search companies to foot the bill for the erection of a third meta-index to interface with proprietary content - both of which are equally asinine.
(apologies to any newspaper execs in the audience) /cheeky</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683911</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684865</id>
	<title>Re:If you don't want it indexed, then either</title>
	<author>Runaway1956</author>
	<datestamp>1247492280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Robots text?  Strange, I would have thought they use radio.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Robots text ?
Strange , I would have thought they use radio .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Robots text?
Strange, I would have thought they use radio.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683795</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684485</id>
	<title>Re:I wish they'd focus on the news</title>
	<author>FourthAge</author>
	<datestamp>1247489340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The BBC definitely are biased. The thing about bias is that you only tend to notice it when it jars with your own personal world view. That's when it really stands out, and you think "OMG WTF, how can you say that?"</p><p>I often find this on the BBC, but then, I disapprove of their predominant ideology, and that of the government they serve (see my sig). I live in Britain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The BBC definitely are biased .
The thing about bias is that you only tend to notice it when it jars with your own personal world view .
That 's when it really stands out , and you think " OMG WTF , how can you say that ?
" I often find this on the BBC , but then , I disapprove of their predominant ideology , and that of the government they serve ( see my sig ) .
I live in Britain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The BBC definitely are biased.
The thing about bias is that you only tend to notice it when it jars with your own personal world view.
That's when it really stands out, and you think "OMG WTF, how can you say that?
"I often find this on the BBC, but then, I disapprove of their predominant ideology, and that of the government they serve (see my sig).
I live in Britain.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684113</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28688549</id>
	<title>So let me get this straight:</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1247571960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You want to ban all your propaganda, misinformation, FUD, press-releases in disguise, and advertisements in disguise from the net, unless someone pays a way too expensive price for it?</p><p>Well... go ahead!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</p><p>I will go read some RSS news from blogs in the meantime.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You want to ban all your propaganda , misinformation , FUD , press-releases in disguise , and advertisements in disguise from the net , unless someone pays a way too expensive price for it ? Well... go ahead !
: DI will go read some RSS news from blogs in the meantime .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You want to ban all your propaganda, misinformation, FUD, press-releases in disguise, and advertisements in disguise from the net, unless someone pays a way too expensive price for it?Well... go ahead!
:DI will go read some RSS news from blogs in the meantime.
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683795</id>
	<title>If you don't want it indexed, then either</title>
	<author>Amazing Quantum Man</author>
	<datestamp>1247485380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1. Don't put it on the web<br>2. Learn how to use robots.txt</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
Do n't put it on the web2 .
Learn how to use robots.txt</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
Don't put it on the web2.
Learn how to use robots.txt</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684109</id>
	<title>Re:I wish they'd focus on the news</title>
	<author>samkass</author>
	<datestamp>1247487000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Many governments publish gigabytes of CSV files, PDF files, and database files.  I assume that's what you're referring to when you say you just want facts published.  Should the New York Times just be filled with tables of data?</p><p>If you want that information translated into written English, the author of that text is going to have a point of view and a context within which they write.  It's the way language works.  And everyone wants other people to share their understanding of events.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Many governments publish gigabytes of CSV files , PDF files , and database files .
I assume that 's what you 're referring to when you say you just want facts published .
Should the New York Times just be filled with tables of data ? If you want that information translated into written English , the author of that text is going to have a point of view and a context within which they write .
It 's the way language works .
And everyone wants other people to share their understanding of events .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many governments publish gigabytes of CSV files, PDF files, and database files.
I assume that's what you're referring to when you say you just want facts published.
Should the New York Times just be filled with tables of data?If you want that information translated into written English, the author of that text is going to have a point of view and a context within which they write.
It's the way language works.
And everyone wants other people to share their understanding of events.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683883</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683971</id>
	<title>Re:People are mis-understanding this issue:</title>
	<author>Zerth</author>
	<datestamp>1247486280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Which is hilarious, since most newspapers have been axing their writers left and right.  Something like 3/4 of your major local rag is probably AP stories.</p><p>Like the AP needs help sucking money out of newspapers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Which is hilarious , since most newspapers have been axing their writers left and right .
Something like 3/4 of your major local rag is probably AP stories.Like the AP needs help sucking money out of newspapers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which is hilarious, since most newspapers have been axing their writers left and right.
Something like 3/4 of your major local rag is probably AP stories.Like the AP needs help sucking money out of newspapers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683911</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28685285</id>
	<title>Ahh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247496180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>still full of dickless wankers who are trying to defend a Fundamentalist Fascist with a Messiah Complex as being accountable to that of President Obama. Either this click is full of disgruntled derivatives traders, fraudulent preachers mad about losing their religious funding or a bunch of punks who were born after Reagan finished his second term and haven't a clue about what a clusterf'ck the US has been for the past 40 years. I know I'm missing other collective sheep but it's not hard to see how greed, blind faith and ignorance all tie in together.</p><p>P.S. To the original purpose of this thread it never ceases to amaze me the amount of energy wasted on such garbage as attempting to impose a law as this idea while proclaiming to be a free and reasoned set of nations.</p><p>It's bad enough the US allowed little messiah to run the nation into the ditch for 8 years while we put up with all the bitching from the EU about it, but you equally have mini-murdochs attempting economic coups of their own in your back yard. Clean up your own s*** and we'll do the same.</p><p>Perhaps these folks feel they are tired of having books, journals, magazines and more printed in hopes we all buy those lame ass Kindles.</p><p>The day that attempt arrives is the day a new industry of publishing will start making this consortium powerless and holding nothing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>still full of dickless wankers who are trying to defend a Fundamentalist Fascist with a Messiah Complex as being accountable to that of President Obama .
Either this click is full of disgruntled derivatives traders , fraudulent preachers mad about losing their religious funding or a bunch of punks who were born after Reagan finished his second term and have n't a clue about what a clusterf'ck the US has been for the past 40 years .
I know I 'm missing other collective sheep but it 's not hard to see how greed , blind faith and ignorance all tie in together.P.S .
To the original purpose of this thread it never ceases to amaze me the amount of energy wasted on such garbage as attempting to impose a law as this idea while proclaiming to be a free and reasoned set of nations.It 's bad enough the US allowed little messiah to run the nation into the ditch for 8 years while we put up with all the bitching from the EU about it , but you equally have mini-murdochs attempting economic coups of their own in your back yard .
Clean up your own s * * * and we 'll do the same.Perhaps these folks feel they are tired of having books , journals , magazines and more printed in hopes we all buy those lame ass Kindles.The day that attempt arrives is the day a new industry of publishing will start making this consortium powerless and holding nothing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>still full of dickless wankers who are trying to defend a Fundamentalist Fascist with a Messiah Complex as being accountable to that of President Obama.
Either this click is full of disgruntled derivatives traders, fraudulent preachers mad about losing their religious funding or a bunch of punks who were born after Reagan finished his second term and haven't a clue about what a clusterf'ck the US has been for the past 40 years.
I know I'm missing other collective sheep but it's not hard to see how greed, blind faith and ignorance all tie in together.P.S.
To the original purpose of this thread it never ceases to amaze me the amount of energy wasted on such garbage as attempting to impose a law as this idea while proclaiming to be a free and reasoned set of nations.It's bad enough the US allowed little messiah to run the nation into the ditch for 8 years while we put up with all the bitching from the EU about it, but you equally have mini-murdochs attempting economic coups of their own in your back yard.
Clean up your own s*** and we'll do the same.Perhaps these folks feel they are tired of having books, journals, magazines and more printed in hopes we all buy those lame ass Kindles.The day that attempt arrives is the day a new industry of publishing will start making this consortium powerless and holding nothing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683797</id>
	<title>What garbage</title>
	<author>Dr\_Ken</author>
	<datestamp>1247485440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hope Obama doesn't buy into this stuff. The "fourth estate" has enough clout already.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope Obama does n't buy into this stuff .
The " fourth estate " has enough clout already .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope Obama doesn't buy into this stuff.
The "fourth estate" has enough clout already.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684383</id>
	<title>Not news</title>
	<author>marco.antonio.costa</author>
	<datestamp>1247488860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just another special privilege which the government will grant to special interests and the less-free-with-each-passing-moment market will be blamed for.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just another special privilege which the government will grant to special interests and the less-free-with-each-passing-moment market will be blamed for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just another special privilege which the government will grant to special interests and the less-free-with-each-passing-moment market will be blamed for.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_215242_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684485
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684113
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683883
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_215242_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683795
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_215242_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684811
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684109
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683883
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_215242_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684187
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683911
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_215242_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28687321
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683883
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_215242_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684381
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684113
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683883
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_215242_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28686511
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683911
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_215242_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28685247
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683911
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_215242_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684173
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683923
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_215242_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28685223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683883
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_215242_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684467
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683769
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_215242_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684191
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683923
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_215242_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28685597
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683855
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_215242_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683971
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683911
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_215242_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684865
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683795
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_215242_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28685661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683911
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_215242_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28690001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683795
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_215242.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683855
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28685597
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_215242.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683795
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684865
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28690001
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684111
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_215242.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683769
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684467
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_215242.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683875
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_215242.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683911
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684187
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28685661
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28686511
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683971
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28685247
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_215242.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683797
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_215242.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684271
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_215242.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683883
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684109
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684811
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28687321
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684113
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684485
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684381
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28685223
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_215242.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28685285
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_215242.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683923
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684173
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684191
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_215242.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28683845
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_215242.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_215242.28684383
</commentlist>
</conversation>
