<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_21_1225219</id>
	<title>CSIRO Reinvests Patent Earnings</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1256129820000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:aussie\_bob@@@hotmail...com" rel="nofollow">ozmanjusri</a> writes with an update to a story we discussed a few days ago about a <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/10/15/0222213/Wi-Fi-Patent-Victory-Earns-CSIRO-200-Million">$200 million patent victory</a> by CSIRO, Australia's governmental science research body. The organization has now turned around and <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/technology/technology-news/csiro-reinvests-windfall-into-wireless-research-20091021-h7jw.html">reinvested $150 million of the proceeds</a> into the science and industry endowment fund, which has already established three grants: "$12 million for two wireless research projects and $7.5 million for up to 120 fellowships and scholarships." CSIRO boss Megan Clark said, "It's very important that when you have a success like this, you reinvest it back into the wellspring. It's really about supporting areas that might need a helping hand in some of the frontier areas and research that actually tackles the national challenges."</htmltext>
<tokenext>ozmanjusri writes with an update to a story we discussed a few days ago about a $ 200 million patent victory by CSIRO , Australia 's governmental science research body .
The organization has now turned around and reinvested $ 150 million of the proceeds into the science and industry endowment fund , which has already established three grants : " $ 12 million for two wireless research projects and $ 7.5 million for up to 120 fellowships and scholarships .
" CSIRO boss Megan Clark said , " It 's very important that when you have a success like this , you reinvest it back into the wellspring .
It 's really about supporting areas that might need a helping hand in some of the frontier areas and research that actually tackles the national challenges .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ozmanjusri writes with an update to a story we discussed a few days ago about a $200 million patent victory by CSIRO, Australia's governmental science research body.
The organization has now turned around and reinvested $150 million of the proceeds into the science and industry endowment fund, which has already established three grants: "$12 million for two wireless research projects and $7.5 million for up to 120 fellowships and scholarships.
" CSIRO boss Megan Clark said, "It's very important that when you have a success like this, you reinvest it back into the wellspring.
It's really about supporting areas that might need a helping hand in some of the frontier areas and research that actually tackles the national challenges.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29823681</id>
	<title>Good for them</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256141160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All I can say is good for them. They developed a core piece of technology and have re-invested for the future. As another poster already mentioned, this is the way the patent system should work. Now, if only the damn patent trolls would wake up, stop their frivolous lawsuits and coercion tactics and actually invent something instead of profiteering off of other companies investments by buying up patents, we would be getting somewhere. Unfortunately, the current patent environment in the US won't let this happen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All I can say is good for them .
They developed a core piece of technology and have re-invested for the future .
As another poster already mentioned , this is the way the patent system should work .
Now , if only the damn patent trolls would wake up , stop their frivolous lawsuits and coercion tactics and actually invent something instead of profiteering off of other companies investments by buying up patents , we would be getting somewhere .
Unfortunately , the current patent environment in the US wo n't let this happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All I can say is good for them.
They developed a core piece of technology and have re-invested for the future.
As another poster already mentioned, this is the way the patent system should work.
Now, if only the damn patent trolls would wake up, stop their frivolous lawsuits and coercion tactics and actually invent something instead of profiteering off of other companies investments by buying up patents, we would be getting somewhere.
Unfortunately, the current patent environment in the US won't let this happen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29824057</id>
	<title>Re:too bad the proceeds came from stifling progres</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256143140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Absolutely correct. Interesting that you had to go AC to post a positive comment about patents.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Absolutely correct .
Interesting that you had to go AC to post a positive comment about patents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Absolutely correct.
Interesting that you had to go AC to post a positive comment about patents.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822699</id>
	<title>Re:What were the alternatives?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256136360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>True, but the money cold have been put back into any number of fields of research outside of IT that the CSIRO works in. It is significant that they are doing this because the likely beneficiaries of any new technologies that come out of that $150 million worth of research are the very companies that paid them the money to settle the dispute.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>True , but the money cold have been put back into any number of fields of research outside of IT that the CSIRO works in .
It is significant that they are doing this because the likely beneficiaries of any new technologies that come out of that $ 150 million worth of research are the very companies that paid them the money to settle the dispute .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True, but the money cold have been put back into any number of fields of research outside of IT that the CSIRO works in.
It is significant that they are doing this because the likely beneficiaries of any new technologies that come out of that $150 million worth of research are the very companies that paid them the money to settle the dispute.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822485</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822485</id>
	<title>What were the alternatives?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256135220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What else were they supposed to do with the money? It's not like they have shareholders to support.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What else were they supposed to do with the money ?
It 's not like they have shareholders to support .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What else were they supposed to do with the money?
It's not like they have shareholders to support.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822453</id>
	<title>Re:too bad the proceeds came from stifling progres</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256135100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe the companies shouldn't have tried to weasel out of paying royalties then.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe the companies should n't have tried to weasel out of paying royalties then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe the companies shouldn't have tried to weasel out of paying royalties then.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822533</id>
	<title>Re:too bad the proceeds came from stifling progres</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256135580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is just ridiculous - you clearly have no idea about this particular case.</p><p>The research for which this patent was granted was THE thing that made modern wireless networking possible.  It took radio data transfer from kilobits per second (where it had languished for some time) to a hundred megabits per second.  At a time when you were using a 14k modem if you were lucky.</p><p>And secondly, while software patents in the USA may be commonly used to stifle innovation, this technology was the thing that enabled the wifi industry to get started and IN NO WAY stifled anything.  They haven't limited what it is used for.  Or who uses it.  Multiple standards have emerged based on it, all in the full foreknowledge that this was the basis technology.  This is no submarine patent - the devices and the standards were based on this - and $200M total is pocket change spread among the multibillion giants of the world technology industry.</p><p>Third, it is a patent granted for a short time for technology that will be in use for an extremely long time to come.</p><p>This is exactly the kind of technological progress that the patent system was designed to encourage - this is the patent system WORKING the way it was intended.</p><p>It is amazing that you can be so grossly wrong in so many ways in such a short comment.  I have no idea how that got modded 'insightful'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is just ridiculous - you clearly have no idea about this particular case.The research for which this patent was granted was THE thing that made modern wireless networking possible .
It took radio data transfer from kilobits per second ( where it had languished for some time ) to a hundred megabits per second .
At a time when you were using a 14k modem if you were lucky.And secondly , while software patents in the USA may be commonly used to stifle innovation , this technology was the thing that enabled the wifi industry to get started and IN NO WAY stifled anything .
They have n't limited what it is used for .
Or who uses it .
Multiple standards have emerged based on it , all in the full foreknowledge that this was the basis technology .
This is no submarine patent - the devices and the standards were based on this - and $ 200M total is pocket change spread among the multibillion giants of the world technology industry.Third , it is a patent granted for a short time for technology that will be in use for an extremely long time to come.This is exactly the kind of technological progress that the patent system was designed to encourage - this is the patent system WORKING the way it was intended.It is amazing that you can be so grossly wrong in so many ways in such a short comment .
I have no idea how that got modded 'insightful' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is just ridiculous - you clearly have no idea about this particular case.The research for which this patent was granted was THE thing that made modern wireless networking possible.
It took radio data transfer from kilobits per second (where it had languished for some time) to a hundred megabits per second.
At a time when you were using a 14k modem if you were lucky.And secondly, while software patents in the USA may be commonly used to stifle innovation, this technology was the thing that enabled the wifi industry to get started and IN NO WAY stifled anything.
They haven't limited what it is used for.
Or who uses it.
Multiple standards have emerged based on it, all in the full foreknowledge that this was the basis technology.
This is no submarine patent - the devices and the standards were based on this - and $200M total is pocket change spread among the multibillion giants of the world technology industry.Third, it is a patent granted for a short time for technology that will be in use for an extremely long time to come.This is exactly the kind of technological progress that the patent system was designed to encourage - this is the patent system WORKING the way it was intended.It is amazing that you can be so grossly wrong in so many ways in such a short comment.
I have no idea how that got modded 'insightful'.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822219</id>
	<title>Just another tax</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256133780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like the government has found a new way to tax industry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like the government has found a new way to tax industry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like the government has found a new way to tax industry.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822523</id>
	<title>Re:too bad the proceeds came from stifling progres</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256135520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The issuing of patent with a lifetime of 20 years to technology that has a lifetime of much less is stifling progress.</p></div><p>You're absolutely right, the fact that years of research went into the creation of this outdated technology does not count for anything.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The issuing of patent with a lifetime of 20 years to technology that has a lifetime of much less is stifling progress.You 're absolutely right , the fact that years of research went into the creation of this outdated technology does not count for anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The issuing of patent with a lifetime of 20 years to technology that has a lifetime of much less is stifling progress.You're absolutely right, the fact that years of research went into the creation of this outdated technology does not count for anything.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822303</id>
	<title>Fat pipe to the intertubes</title>
	<author>cerberusss</author>
	<datestamp>1256134260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"$12 million for two wireless research projects" CSIRO boss Megan Clark said</p></div><p>She declined to comment on the fact that the first project took place at the roof of her apartment building and the second was located near a datacenter.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" $ 12 million for two wireless research projects " CSIRO boss Megan Clark saidShe declined to comment on the fact that the first project took place at the roof of her apartment building and the second was located near a datacenter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"$12 million for two wireless research projects" CSIRO boss Megan Clark saidShe declined to comment on the fact that the first project took place at the roof of her apartment building and the second was located near a datacenter.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29825227</id>
	<title>Re:too bad the proceeds came from stifling progres</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256148360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The patent describes the implementation of a WLAN using OFDM as the transmission mechanism.  Given that WLANs and OFDM existed well before 1993, the patent appears to be rather obvious.  What exactly is the innovation covered by this patent?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The patent describes the implementation of a WLAN using OFDM as the transmission mechanism .
Given that WLANs and OFDM existed well before 1993 , the patent appears to be rather obvious .
What exactly is the innovation covered by this patent ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The patent describes the implementation of a WLAN using OFDM as the transmission mechanism.
Given that WLANs and OFDM existed well before 1993, the patent appears to be rather obvious.
What exactly is the innovation covered by this patent?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29823033</id>
	<title>Re:Typical</title>
	<author>tick-tock-atona</author>
	<datestamp>1256137920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, look at what comes out of socialised science!<br> <br>

US citizens are right to be afraid of Obama's socialist^w public health option.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , look at what comes out of socialised science !
US citizens are right to be afraid of Obama 's socialist ^ w public health option .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, look at what comes out of socialised science!
US citizens are right to be afraid of Obama's socialist^w public health option.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29830743</id>
	<title>Re:What were the alternatives?</title>
	<author>adamkennedy</author>
	<datestamp>1256132580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The other place the money could have gone was that the government could have just sucked it all back into "General Revenue".</p><p>It's great to see that they left the money inside of the CSIRO.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The other place the money could have gone was that the government could have just sucked it all back into " General Revenue " .It 's great to see that they left the money inside of the CSIRO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The other place the money could have gone was that the government could have just sucked it all back into "General Revenue".It's great to see that they left the money inside of the CSIRO.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822485</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822287</id>
	<title>PR</title>
	<author>Thanshin</author>
	<datestamp>1256134200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"After seeing the media impact of the previous results we decided to treat it with elementary PR care".</p><p>Well, in an environment with so many PR failures, I guess it's something.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" After seeing the media impact of the previous results we decided to treat it with elementary PR care " .Well , in an environment with so many PR failures , I guess it 's something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"After seeing the media impact of the previous results we decided to treat it with elementary PR care".Well, in an environment with so many PR failures, I guess it's something.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822705</id>
	<title>Re:too bad the proceeds came from stifling progres</title>
	<author>Zumbs</author>
	<datestamp>1256136420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm unsure as to what you mean. Are you bashing patents all together? Or do you think that a private company holding the patents and winning the case in question would stiffle progress less? Or that it is wrong for public organizations to do research?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm unsure as to what you mean .
Are you bashing patents all together ?
Or do you think that a private company holding the patents and winning the case in question would stiffle progress less ?
Or that it is wrong for public organizations to do research ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm unsure as to what you mean.
Are you bashing patents all together?
Or do you think that a private company holding the patents and winning the case in question would stiffle progress less?
Or that it is wrong for public organizations to do research?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822957</id>
	<title>Re:Research, patent, troll; repeat as desired</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256137560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>You're an idiot.<br> <br>

CSIRO's patent which netted it 200 million is <em>not</em> a software patent. It's a <em>hardware</em> patent. Read <a href="http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&amp;Sect2=HITOFF&amp;d=PALL&amp;p=1&amp;u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.htm&amp;r=1&amp;f=G&amp;l=50&amp;s1=5,487,069.PN.&amp;OS=PN/5,487,069&amp;RS=PN/5,487,069" title="uspto.gov">the patent itself</a> [uspto.gov] (from way back in 1993) if you don't believe me. The word "software" doesn't even appear in it.<br> <br>

This is exactly the way the patent system is supposed to work. It's <em>supposed</em> to encourage innovation and protect investment. What CSIRO is doing is improving the world. Can you imagine the world today if they hadn't done the research and developed the WIFI technology that everyone takes for granted?<br> <br>

It <a href="http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=155373&amp;sectioncode=26" title="timeshighe...tion.co.uk">on the public record</a> [timeshighe...tion.co.uk] that they licensed the technology and expected to receive payments. As the court cases showed, the big tech companies just tried to weasel their way out of actually coughing up the cash after taking the technology and incorporating it into their products.<br> <br>

How can you be mad that this cash is going into cutting edge research projects rather than hookers and coke for some executive's next mediterranean cruise?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're an idiot .
CSIRO 's patent which netted it 200 million is not a software patent .
It 's a hardware patent .
Read the patent itself [ uspto.gov ] ( from way back in 1993 ) if you do n't believe me .
The word " software " does n't even appear in it .
This is exactly the way the patent system is supposed to work .
It 's supposed to encourage innovation and protect investment .
What CSIRO is doing is improving the world .
Can you imagine the world today if they had n't done the research and developed the WIFI technology that everyone takes for granted ?
It on the public record [ timeshighe...tion.co.uk ] that they licensed the technology and expected to receive payments .
As the court cases showed , the big tech companies just tried to weasel their way out of actually coughing up the cash after taking the technology and incorporating it into their products .
How can you be mad that this cash is going into cutting edge research projects rather than hookers and coke for some executive 's next mediterranean cruise ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're an idiot.
CSIRO's patent which netted it 200 million is not a software patent.
It's a hardware patent.
Read the patent itself [uspto.gov] (from way back in 1993) if you don't believe me.
The word "software" doesn't even appear in it.
This is exactly the way the patent system is supposed to work.
It's supposed to encourage innovation and protect investment.
What CSIRO is doing is improving the world.
Can you imagine the world today if they hadn't done the research and developed the WIFI technology that everyone takes for granted?
It on the public record [timeshighe...tion.co.uk] that they licensed the technology and expected to receive payments.
As the court cases showed, the big tech companies just tried to weasel their way out of actually coughing up the cash after taking the technology and incorporating it into their products.
How can you be mad that this cash is going into cutting edge research projects rather than hookers and coke for some executive's next mediterranean cruise?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822621</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29823153</id>
	<title>Re:Research, patent, troll; repeat as desired</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256138580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And how many lucrative patents will this research yield?</p></div><p>From an organization that invents real technology and licenses it very cheaply to everybody? Hopefully a lot.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>When can we expect the next shakedown?</p></div><p>The next time the megalomaniacs of intellectual property like Microsoft and Apple think they can pilfer legitimate IP from others at will, hopefully!</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Help in documenting CSIRO and other troll activities is welcome:</p></div><p>Why yes, I'd like to document some troll activity!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And how many lucrative patents will this research yield ? From an organization that invents real technology and licenses it very cheaply to everybody ?
Hopefully a lot.When can we expect the next shakedown ? The next time the megalomaniacs of intellectual property like Microsoft and Apple think they can pilfer legitimate IP from others at will , hopefully ! Help in documenting CSIRO and other troll activities is welcome : Why yes , I 'd like to document some troll activity !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And how many lucrative patents will this research yield?From an organization that invents real technology and licenses it very cheaply to everybody?
Hopefully a lot.When can we expect the next shakedown?The next time the megalomaniacs of intellectual property like Microsoft and Apple think they can pilfer legitimate IP from others at will, hopefully!Help in documenting CSIRO and other troll activities is welcome:Why yes, I'd like to document some troll activity!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822621</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822253</id>
	<title>Blacklist the CSIRO employees</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256133960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>CSIRO appearing on a resume should result in an automatic blacklisting from employment or consulting (it will with me). This is sociopathic theft.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>CSIRO appearing on a resume should result in an automatic blacklisting from employment or consulting ( it will with me ) .
This is sociopathic theft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CSIRO appearing on a resume should result in an automatic blacklisting from employment or consulting (it will with me).
This is sociopathic theft.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822189</id>
	<title>and here in USA...</title>
	<author>ub3r n3u7r4l1st</author>
	<datestamp>1256133540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When a patent victory comes, it goes straight out as executive pay bonus.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When a patent victory comes , it goes straight out as executive pay bonus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When a patent victory comes, it goes straight out as executive pay bonus.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29823287</id>
	<title>Re:too bad the proceeds came from stifling progres</title>
	<author>ozbird</author>
	<datestamp>1256139180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Overheard at one of the settlement meetings: "That's not a patent!  <i>That's</i> a patent."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Overheard at one of the settlement meetings : " That 's not a patent !
That 's a patent .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Overheard at one of the settlement meetings: "That's not a patent!
That's a patent.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29825987</id>
	<title>Re:Blacklist the CSIRO employees</title>
	<author>Catharsis</author>
	<datestamp>1256151240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>CSIRO appearing on a resume should result in an automatic blacklisting from employment or consulting (it will with me). This is sociopathic theft.</p></div><p>Steve Jobs? Is that you?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>CSIRO appearing on a resume should result in an automatic blacklisting from employment or consulting ( it will with me ) .
This is sociopathic theft.Steve Jobs ?
Is that you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CSIRO appearing on a resume should result in an automatic blacklisting from employment or consulting (it will with me).
This is sociopathic theft.Steve Jobs?
Is that you?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822253</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29831459</id>
	<title>Re:Typical</title>
	<author>quink</author>
	<datestamp>1256140680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Socialised science came up with an amazing collection of things that probably keep you alive and fed today... so if you don't like it, go back to eating pesticide-ridden food and having planes crash all over your suburb....  two things the rest of the world can avoid because of the CSIRO.</p><p>That's your right, just as it's your right to delude yourself and keep paying insurance companies through the nose for your so-called existing health "scheme" that costs about twice as much out of your GDP as the "socialist" public health schemes elsewhere, and leaves about 40\% of your population copping the Bessy Smith treatment regime in your hospitals. So much for "efficiency" and "competition".</p><p>Stay pure.  Buy more Enron shares, soon as you can.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Socialised science came up with an amazing collection of things that probably keep you alive and fed today... so if you do n't like it , go back to eating pesticide-ridden food and having planes crash all over your suburb.... two things the rest of the world can avoid because of the CSIRO.That 's your right , just as it 's your right to delude yourself and keep paying insurance companies through the nose for your so-called existing health " scheme " that costs about twice as much out of your GDP as the " socialist " public health schemes elsewhere , and leaves about 40 \ % of your population copping the Bessy Smith treatment regime in your hospitals .
So much for " efficiency " and " competition " .Stay pure .
Buy more Enron shares , soon as you can .
       </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Socialised science came up with an amazing collection of things that probably keep you alive and fed today... so if you don't like it, go back to eating pesticide-ridden food and having planes crash all over your suburb....  two things the rest of the world can avoid because of the CSIRO.That's your right, just as it's your right to delude yourself and keep paying insurance companies through the nose for your so-called existing health "scheme" that costs about twice as much out of your GDP as the "socialist" public health schemes elsewhere, and leaves about 40\% of your population copping the Bessy Smith treatment regime in your hospitals.
So much for "efficiency" and "competition".Stay pure.
Buy more Enron shares, soon as you can.
       </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29823033</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29823331</id>
	<title>Re:too bad the proceeds came from stifling progres</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256139540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hope CSIRO enjoys not being invited to any more IEEE standards meetings, because that's what the verdict means. The patent wasn't granted until well after the 802.11 standards were set up, so this perfectly matches the "submarine patent" idea - it's Rambus all over again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope CSIRO enjoys not being invited to any more IEEE standards meetings , because that 's what the verdict means .
The patent was n't granted until well after the 802.11 standards were set up , so this perfectly matches the " submarine patent " idea - it 's Rambus all over again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope CSIRO enjoys not being invited to any more IEEE standards meetings, because that's what the verdict means.
The patent wasn't granted until well after the 802.11 standards were set up, so this perfectly matches the "submarine patent" idea - it's Rambus all over again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822969</id>
	<title>Re:Research, patent, troll; repeat as desired</title>
	<author>Sockatume</author>
	<datestamp>1256137560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A software patents wiki, and you're rambling on about a patent on radio signalling schemes on it. Bravo, sir.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A software patents wiki , and you 're rambling on about a patent on radio signalling schemes on it .
Bravo , sir .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A software patents wiki, and you're rambling on about a patent on radio signalling schemes on it.
Bravo, sir.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822621</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822323</id>
	<title>paying big $$ in order to promote disblief</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256134380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/10/21/new.york.subway.ads/index.html</p><p>could be that they're afraid of something? did you chip in for that robbIE? reminds a bit of the flat earth society, forcing their irrelevant/concocted om ayn rand(oidian) position on everybody. i think they do that in the vatican &amp; d.c. as well</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.cnn.com/2009/US/10/21/new.york.subway.ads/index.htmlcould be that they 're afraid of something ?
did you chip in for that robbIE ?
reminds a bit of the flat earth society , forcing their irrelevant/concocted om ayn rand ( oidian ) position on everybody .
i think they do that in the vatican &amp; d.c. as well</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/10/21/new.york.subway.ads/index.htmlcould be that they're afraid of something?
did you chip in for that robbIE?
reminds a bit of the flat earth society, forcing their irrelevant/concocted om ayn rand(oidian) position on everybody.
i think they do that in the vatican &amp; d.c. as well</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822735</id>
	<title>Only 0.31\% state-funded</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1256136540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>a state-funded organisation</p></div><p>An organization funded by the government of Australia doesn't take any tax dollars from US citizens or any tax euros from EU-member citizens. So CSIRO is "a state-funded organization" to only 0.31 percent of the world population.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>a state-funded organisationAn organization funded by the government of Australia does n't take any tax dollars from US citizens or any tax euros from EU-member citizens .
So CSIRO is " a state-funded organization " to only 0.31 percent of the world population .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a state-funded organisationAn organization funded by the government of Australia doesn't take any tax dollars from US citizens or any tax euros from EU-member citizens.
So CSIRO is "a state-funded organization" to only 0.31 percent of the world population.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822621</id>
	<title>Research, patent, troll; repeat as desired</title>
	<author>H4x0r Jim Duggan</author>
	<datestamp>1256136000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And how many lucrative patents will this research yield?</p><p>When can we expect the next shakedown?</p><p>Help in documenting CSIRO and other troll activities is welcome:</p><p><a href="http://en.swpat.org/wiki/CSIRO\_wifi\_patent" title="swpat.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.swpat.org/wiki/CSIRO\_wifi\_patent</a> [swpat.org]<br><a href="http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Patent\_trolls" title="swpat.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Patent\_trolls</a> [swpat.org]<br><a href="http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Litigation\_and\_specific\_patents" title="swpat.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Litigation\_and\_specific\_patents</a> [swpat.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And how many lucrative patents will this research yield ? When can we expect the next shakedown ? Help in documenting CSIRO and other troll activities is welcome : http : //en.swpat.org/wiki/CSIRO \ _wifi \ _patent [ swpat.org ] http : //en.swpat.org/wiki/Patent \ _trolls [ swpat.org ] http : //en.swpat.org/wiki/Litigation \ _and \ _specific \ _patents [ swpat.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And how many lucrative patents will this research yield?When can we expect the next shakedown?Help in documenting CSIRO and other troll activities is welcome:http://en.swpat.org/wiki/CSIRO\_wifi\_patent [swpat.org]http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Patent\_trolls [swpat.org]http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Litigation\_and\_specific\_patents [swpat.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822701</id>
	<title>Re:What were the alternatives?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256136360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What else were they supposed to do with the money? It's not like they have shareholders to support.</p></div><p>Hookers and blow?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What else were they supposed to do with the money ?
It 's not like they have shareholders to support.Hookers and blow ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What else were they supposed to do with the money?
It's not like they have shareholders to support.Hookers and blow?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822485</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29823303</id>
	<title>Re:too bad the proceeds came from stifling progres</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256139300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>First, standards should never be based on patents. This creates an opportunity for this to happen. There are a lot of people who get misled in thinking that since it is a standard they are free to use it.
Second, their approach was an obvious solution. I have witnessed on several occasions individuals solving the same problem in much the same manner independently of each other and each having a different level of intelligence. A lot of people have this misconception that they have a gift, whereas each individual is born with the same capabilities as the other. The only thing that changes is the rate in which their physical brain can modify itself in which to further gain intelligence and their desire to persevere. If someone tells you differently then they are that percentage of the world that beats others down so they can retain power since they have either the inability to better themselves, or just too damn lazy to do so. I find it best to describe my point in the following way. A person will claim that since they aren't as good as Michael Jordan then they can never play professional ball, but yet while they know there are other people better at driving a vehicle they will continue to do so. As the population increases it is ever present that the percentage of the population that will have the exact same thought pattern also increases. It is is because of this that they should really think about the possible obviousness of some patent being processed. I miss the days of having to have a physical device that demonstrates your solution. Too many people nowadays can't quite get theirs from paper into something tangible.
Third, I would argue the fact that this technology will be around for a long time. I would even bet money that it might be replaced in as little as 2 years. Don't worry it won't be patented so feel free to use it however you will want to.
Anyways, I have work to do so piss off mates. =)</htmltext>
<tokenext>First , standards should never be based on patents .
This creates an opportunity for this to happen .
There are a lot of people who get misled in thinking that since it is a standard they are free to use it .
Second , their approach was an obvious solution .
I have witnessed on several occasions individuals solving the same problem in much the same manner independently of each other and each having a different level of intelligence .
A lot of people have this misconception that they have a gift , whereas each individual is born with the same capabilities as the other .
The only thing that changes is the rate in which their physical brain can modify itself in which to further gain intelligence and their desire to persevere .
If someone tells you differently then they are that percentage of the world that beats others down so they can retain power since they have either the inability to better themselves , or just too damn lazy to do so .
I find it best to describe my point in the following way .
A person will claim that since they are n't as good as Michael Jordan then they can never play professional ball , but yet while they know there are other people better at driving a vehicle they will continue to do so .
As the population increases it is ever present that the percentage of the population that will have the exact same thought pattern also increases .
It is is because of this that they should really think about the possible obviousness of some patent being processed .
I miss the days of having to have a physical device that demonstrates your solution .
Too many people nowadays ca n't quite get theirs from paper into something tangible .
Third , I would argue the fact that this technology will be around for a long time .
I would even bet money that it might be replaced in as little as 2 years .
Do n't worry it wo n't be patented so feel free to use it however you will want to .
Anyways , I have work to do so piss off mates .
= )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First, standards should never be based on patents.
This creates an opportunity for this to happen.
There are a lot of people who get misled in thinking that since it is a standard they are free to use it.
Second, their approach was an obvious solution.
I have witnessed on several occasions individuals solving the same problem in much the same manner independently of each other and each having a different level of intelligence.
A lot of people have this misconception that they have a gift, whereas each individual is born with the same capabilities as the other.
The only thing that changes is the rate in which their physical brain can modify itself in which to further gain intelligence and their desire to persevere.
If someone tells you differently then they are that percentage of the world that beats others down so they can retain power since they have either the inability to better themselves, or just too damn lazy to do so.
I find it best to describe my point in the following way.
A person will claim that since they aren't as good as Michael Jordan then they can never play professional ball, but yet while they know there are other people better at driving a vehicle they will continue to do so.
As the population increases it is ever present that the percentage of the population that will have the exact same thought pattern also increases.
It is is because of this that they should really think about the possible obviousness of some patent being processed.
I miss the days of having to have a physical device that demonstrates your solution.
Too many people nowadays can't quite get theirs from paper into something tangible.
Third, I would argue the fact that this technology will be around for a long time.
I would even bet money that it might be replaced in as little as 2 years.
Don't worry it won't be patented so feel free to use it however you will want to.
Anyways, I have work to do so piss off mates.
=)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822753</id>
	<title>Re:too bad the proceeds came from stifling progres</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256136600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The research for which this patent was granted was THE thing that made modern wireless networking possible. It took radio data transfer from kilobits per second (where it had languished for some time) to a hundred megabits per second. At a time when you were using a 14k modem if you were lucky.</p></div></blockquote><p>Too bad it was invented in the 1960's.  CSIRO's patent amounts to "using COFDM indoors".</p><p>From one of the court papers on the subject:<br>'The trial court found that Rault disclosed several of the limitations of independent claims 42, 56, 68 -- the modulation means, the data reliability enhancement means, and the interleaving means.  The district court did not find that Rault anticipated any of the claims, however, because the court found that Rault had failed to disclose the limitation, found in the preamble of each of the independent claims, that referred to the use of the invention "in a confined multipath transmission enviroment."  The trial court construed the words "in a confined multipath transmission environment" to mean "in an indoor environment."'</p><p>Note that Rault (the author of a paper attempted to be used as prior art) DID address multipath.  He just addressed it in the context of a moving vehicle in an urban environment, not an indoor environment".</p><p>So CSIROs $200M award was for... moving a radio indoors.  (where, BTW,  the problem is easier than a moving vehicle in an 'urban canyon'; indoors you have mostly static multipath (some dynamic due to things and people in the environment moving) and no Doppler, outdoors you have dynamic multipath and Doppler.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The research for which this patent was granted was THE thing that made modern wireless networking possible .
It took radio data transfer from kilobits per second ( where it had languished for some time ) to a hundred megabits per second .
At a time when you were using a 14k modem if you were lucky.Too bad it was invented in the 1960 's .
CSIRO 's patent amounts to " using COFDM indoors " .From one of the court papers on the subject : 'The trial court found that Rault disclosed several of the limitations of independent claims 42 , 56 , 68 -- the modulation means , the data reliability enhancement means , and the interleaving means .
The district court did not find that Rault anticipated any of the claims , however , because the court found that Rault had failed to disclose the limitation , found in the preamble of each of the independent claims , that referred to the use of the invention " in a confined multipath transmission enviroment .
" The trial court construed the words " in a confined multipath transmission environment " to mean " in an indoor environment .
" 'Note that Rault ( the author of a paper attempted to be used as prior art ) DID address multipath .
He just addressed it in the context of a moving vehicle in an urban environment , not an indoor environment " .So CSIROs $ 200M award was for... moving a radio indoors .
( where , BTW , the problem is easier than a moving vehicle in an 'urban canyon ' ; indoors you have mostly static multipath ( some dynamic due to things and people in the environment moving ) and no Doppler , outdoors you have dynamic multipath and Doppler .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The research for which this patent was granted was THE thing that made modern wireless networking possible.
It took radio data transfer from kilobits per second (where it had languished for some time) to a hundred megabits per second.
At a time when you were using a 14k modem if you were lucky.Too bad it was invented in the 1960's.
CSIRO's patent amounts to "using COFDM indoors".From one of the court papers on the subject:'The trial court found that Rault disclosed several of the limitations of independent claims 42, 56, 68 -- the modulation means, the data reliability enhancement means, and the interleaving means.
The district court did not find that Rault anticipated any of the claims, however, because the court found that Rault had failed to disclose the limitation, found in the preamble of each of the independent claims, that referred to the use of the invention "in a confined multipath transmission enviroment.
"  The trial court construed the words "in a confined multipath transmission environment" to mean "in an indoor environment.
"'Note that Rault (the author of a paper attempted to be used as prior art) DID address multipath.
He just addressed it in the context of a moving vehicle in an urban environment, not an indoor environment".So CSIROs $200M award was for... moving a radio indoors.
(where, BTW,  the problem is easier than a moving vehicle in an 'urban canyon'; indoors you have mostly static multipath (some dynamic due to things and people in the environment moving) and no Doppler, outdoors you have dynamic multipath and Doppler.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822331</id>
	<title>too bad the proceeds came from stifling progress</title>
	<author>nietsch</author>
	<datestamp>1256134440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>allocating 3/4 of your winnings to science does not diminish the fact that a state-funded organisation has probably spent the remainder on litigation and harassing hi-tech companies. The issuing of patent with a lifetime of 20 years to technology that has a lifetime of much less is stifling progress.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>allocating 3/4 of your winnings to science does not diminish the fact that a state-funded organisation has probably spent the remainder on litigation and harassing hi-tech companies .
The issuing of patent with a lifetime of 20 years to technology that has a lifetime of much less is stifling progress .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>allocating 3/4 of your winnings to science does not diminish the fact that a state-funded organisation has probably spent the remainder on litigation and harassing hi-tech companies.
The issuing of patent with a lifetime of 20 years to technology that has a lifetime of much less is stifling progress.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29829571</id>
	<title>Re:and here in USA...</title>
	<author>KwKSilver</author>
	<datestamp>1256123880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>+ cocaine + politicians + hookers.  It's really shameful to support drug dealers and politicians.</htmltext>
<tokenext>+ cocaine + politicians + hookers .
It 's really shameful to support drug dealers and politicians .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>+ cocaine + politicians + hookers.
It's really shameful to support drug dealers and politicians.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29827893</id>
	<title>Re:What were the alternatives?</title>
	<author>GumphMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1256116080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They do have shareholders and they are distributing the wealth to them; there just isn't an explicit shareholder's register.   CSIRO is only <i>partly</i> government funded, making the federal government of Australia and by extension the Australian people a shareholder.   Other shareholders are companies that fund research cooperatively and take a cut of returns or take on the commercialisation themselves.  Like any company the directors are electing to reinvest the income rather than issue a dividend to the Government.  It's likely that the previous Government would have demanded a dividend paid into general revenue (a decreed amount and not one tied to actual income) but the current Govt is (I assume) allowing this much more sane use of funds.</p><p>What would be interesting to know is how much of the remaining $50M or so went into the pockets of the US legal profession as dead money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They do have shareholders and they are distributing the wealth to them ; there just is n't an explicit shareholder 's register .
CSIRO is only partly government funded , making the federal government of Australia and by extension the Australian people a shareholder .
Other shareholders are companies that fund research cooperatively and take a cut of returns or take on the commercialisation themselves .
Like any company the directors are electing to reinvest the income rather than issue a dividend to the Government .
It 's likely that the previous Government would have demanded a dividend paid into general revenue ( a decreed amount and not one tied to actual income ) but the current Govt is ( I assume ) allowing this much more sane use of funds.What would be interesting to know is how much of the remaining $ 50M or so went into the pockets of the US legal profession as dead money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They do have shareholders and they are distributing the wealth to them; there just isn't an explicit shareholder's register.
CSIRO is only partly government funded, making the federal government of Australia and by extension the Australian people a shareholder.
Other shareholders are companies that fund research cooperatively and take a cut of returns or take on the commercialisation themselves.
Like any company the directors are electing to reinvest the income rather than issue a dividend to the Government.
It's likely that the previous Government would have demanded a dividend paid into general revenue (a decreed amount and not one tied to actual income) but the current Govt is (I assume) allowing this much more sane use of funds.What would be interesting to know is how much of the remaining $50M or so went into the pockets of the US legal profession as dead money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822485</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822723</id>
	<title>Typical</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256136480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The greed! First they get lots of money, then they go and put it to good so as to deprive me of being able to indignantly call them out for their immoral ways. The government can never do anything right!</htmltext>
<tokenext>The greed !
First they get lots of money , then they go and put it to good so as to deprive me of being able to indignantly call them out for their immoral ways .
The government can never do anything right !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The greed!
First they get lots of money, then they go and put it to good so as to deprive me of being able to indignantly call them out for their immoral ways.
The government can never do anything right!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29824997</id>
	<title>Re:and here in USA...</title>
	<author>khallow</author>
	<datestamp>1256147400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, yes. We have a single example of a government program that might be doing something right. Hence, it is time for a knee-jerk bash on business. You'll get extra points for working in Micro$oft somehow.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , yes .
We have a single example of a government program that might be doing something right .
Hence , it is time for a knee-jerk bash on business .
You 'll get extra points for working in Micro $ oft somehow .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, yes.
We have a single example of a government program that might be doing something right.
Hence, it is time for a knee-jerk bash on business.
You'll get extra points for working in Micro$oft somehow.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29828129</id>
	<title>Re:and here in USA...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256116920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It happens when the Jews take over America after WWII.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It happens when the Jews take over America after WWII .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It happens when the Jews take over America after WWII.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822709</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822709</id>
	<title>Re:and here in USA...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256136420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anyone else ever wonder about how that situation came to be in America?  Weren't we the people who cheered for the underdog?  The people who would have cheered for David instead of Goliath?  Why are we so interested in protecting the pay of top executives and already wealthy, if some of the political debates over the last decade is any indication?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone else ever wonder about how that situation came to be in America ?
Were n't we the people who cheered for the underdog ?
The people who would have cheered for David instead of Goliath ?
Why are we so interested in protecting the pay of top executives and already wealthy , if some of the political debates over the last decade is any indication ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone else ever wonder about how that situation came to be in America?
Weren't we the people who cheered for the underdog?
The people who would have cheered for David instead of Goliath?
Why are we so interested in protecting the pay of top executives and already wealthy, if some of the political debates over the last decade is any indication?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29831505</id>
	<title>Re:too bad the proceeds came from stifling progres</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256141400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, sort of. The intention at the time was a 60GHz WLAN (which a lot or people are working on now), not at 5GHz, or 2.4GHz. Partly that was because a lot of the people involved (the five guys on te patent were just the tip of the iceberg) came from a mm-wave background (especially with respect to antennas), and also for internal politcal reasons since the particular CSIRO division was also trying to get a GaAs pHEMT process off the ground.</p><p>But also, the patent should never have been granted. Very similar patents had been granted in 1966 and 1986 (could eb alittle out with those numbers, but not by more than a year or two), plus, other researchers had already beaten CSIRO to OFDM radios by 6  years or more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , sort of .
The intention at the time was a 60GHz WLAN ( which a lot or people are working on now ) , not at 5GHz , or 2.4GHz .
Partly that was because a lot of the people involved ( the five guys on te patent were just the tip of the iceberg ) came from a mm-wave background ( especially with respect to antennas ) , and also for internal politcal reasons since the particular CSIRO division was also trying to get a GaAs pHEMT process off the ground.But also , the patent should never have been granted .
Very similar patents had been granted in 1966 and 1986 ( could eb alittle out with those numbers , but not by more than a year or two ) , plus , other researchers had already beaten CSIRO to OFDM radios by 6 years or more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, sort of.
The intention at the time was a 60GHz WLAN (which a lot or people are working on now), not at 5GHz, or 2.4GHz.
Partly that was because a lot of the people involved (the five guys on te patent were just the tip of the iceberg) came from a mm-wave background (especially with respect to antennas), and also for internal politcal reasons since the particular CSIRO division was also trying to get a GaAs pHEMT process off the ground.But also, the patent should never have been granted.
Very similar patents had been granted in 1966 and 1986 (could eb alittle out with those numbers, but not by more than a year or two), plus, other researchers had already beaten CSIRO to OFDM radios by 6  years or more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29831417</id>
	<title>Re:Typical</title>
	<author>sincewhen</author>
	<datestamp>1256140140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think this re-investment is just a ploy to develop more technology and patent it.<p>
Then, they'll expect to get paid when others use that new technology.</p><p>
These guys have got to be the worst patent trolls ever!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think this re-investment is just a ploy to develop more technology and patent it .
Then , they 'll expect to get paid when others use that new technology .
These guys have got to be the worst patent trolls ever !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think this re-investment is just a ploy to develop more technology and patent it.
Then, they'll expect to get paid when others use that new technology.
These guys have got to be the worst patent trolls ever!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29833119</id>
	<title>You deserver more money, CSIRO</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256208060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the CSIRO deserve every penny. Though I wouldn't want them to go Microsoft on us all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the CSIRO deserve every penny .
Though I would n't want them to go Microsoft on us all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the CSIRO deserve every penny.
Though I wouldn't want them to go Microsoft on us all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822705
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29823153
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822621
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822523
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29830743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822485
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29831505
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29825987
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822253
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29823287
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29827893
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822485
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822485
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29823331
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29829571
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29824997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29831417
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822735
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822753
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822969
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822621
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29828129
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822709
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29824057
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29831459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29823033
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29823303
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822957
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822621
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29825227
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1225219_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822701
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822485
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1225219.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822723
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29831417
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29823033
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29831459
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1225219.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822621
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29823153
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822957
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822969
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1225219.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29823681
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1225219.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822485
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822699
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29827893
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29830743
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822701
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1225219.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822219
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1225219.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822253
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29825987
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1225219.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822189
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29824997
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822709
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29828129
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29829571
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1225219.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822331
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822533
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29823331
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29824057
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29825227
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29823303
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822753
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29831505
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822705
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29823287
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822735
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822523
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1225219.29822453
</commentlist>
</conversation>
