<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_27_2013250</id>
	<title>EFF Launches "Takedown Hall of Shame"</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1256637780000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>netbuzz writes <i>"Recognizing that public shame is a potent weapon, the Electronic Frontier Foundation today launched a new Web site &mdash; its <a href="http://www.eff.org/takedowns">Takedown Hall of Shame</a> &mdash; that will <a href="http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/46783">shine an unflattering spotlight</a> on those corporations and individuals who abuse copyright claims to stifle free speech. Among the early inductees are NPR, NBC, CBS, and Diebold."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>netbuzz writes " Recognizing that public shame is a potent weapon , the Electronic Frontier Foundation today launched a new Web site    its Takedown Hall of Shame    that will shine an unflattering spotlight on those corporations and individuals who abuse copyright claims to stifle free speech .
Among the early inductees are NPR , NBC , CBS , and Diebold .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>netbuzz writes "Recognizing that public shame is a potent weapon, the Electronic Frontier Foundation today launched a new Web site — its Takedown Hall of Shame — that will shine an unflattering spotlight on those corporations and individuals who abuse copyright claims to stifle free speech.
Among the early inductees are NPR, NBC, CBS, and Diebold.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890867</id>
	<title>Re:NPR?</title>
	<author>Locke2005</author>
	<datestamp>1256644980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The one thing I hate the most is hypocrites. I'm a staunch advocate of same-sex couples having the same legal rights as mixed-sex couples, but fair use is fair use. Your principles should apply equally to those whom you esteem and those whose viewpoints you find repugnant. Opponents of same sex marriage have a first amendment right to use any legal, non-threatening method to communicate their viewpoint to others. I'd prefer they stick to facts, but apparently they have no legal obligation to do so, and except for being taken out of context, use of this clip was entirely factual. As Voltaire is credited with saying, "I may not agree with what you are saying, but I will fight to the death to defend your right to say it."</htmltext>
<tokenext>The one thing I hate the most is hypocrites .
I 'm a staunch advocate of same-sex couples having the same legal rights as mixed-sex couples , but fair use is fair use .
Your principles should apply equally to those whom you esteem and those whose viewpoints you find repugnant .
Opponents of same sex marriage have a first amendment right to use any legal , non-threatening method to communicate their viewpoint to others .
I 'd prefer they stick to facts , but apparently they have no legal obligation to do so , and except for being taken out of context , use of this clip was entirely factual .
As Voltaire is credited with saying , " I may not agree with what you are saying , but I will fight to the death to defend your right to say it .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The one thing I hate the most is hypocrites.
I'm a staunch advocate of same-sex couples having the same legal rights as mixed-sex couples, but fair use is fair use.
Your principles should apply equally to those whom you esteem and those whose viewpoints you find repugnant.
Opponents of same sex marriage have a first amendment right to use any legal, non-threatening method to communicate their viewpoint to others.
I'd prefer they stick to facts, but apparently they have no legal obligation to do so, and except for being taken out of context, use of this clip was entirely factual.
As Voltaire is credited with saying, "I may not agree with what you are saying, but I will fight to the death to defend your right to say it.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890319</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891161</id>
	<title>Youtube and Warner</title>
	<author>Ceiynt</author>
	<datestamp>1256646480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Warner Music, being the big pile of hate and control freaks they are, issued DMCA take down notices for videos on there own channel. The Slipknot video of PsychoSocial as the prime example. The local rock station would provide a link to the video, go to the link, and video removed by order of DMCA copyright infringement. As hosted under the Warner Music group channel, almost all the videos they had had the takedown notice. Why not just um, remove the video from the channel? I guess they needed to feed the lawyers</htmltext>
<tokenext>Warner Music , being the big pile of hate and control freaks they are , issued DMCA take down notices for videos on there own channel .
The Slipknot video of PsychoSocial as the prime example .
The local rock station would provide a link to the video , go to the link , and video removed by order of DMCA copyright infringement .
As hosted under the Warner Music group channel , almost all the videos they had had the takedown notice .
Why not just um , remove the video from the channel ?
I guess they needed to feed the lawyers</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Warner Music, being the big pile of hate and control freaks they are, issued DMCA take down notices for videos on there own channel.
The Slipknot video of PsychoSocial as the prime example.
The local rock station would provide a link to the video, go to the link, and video removed by order of DMCA copyright infringement.
As hosted under the Warner Music group channel, almost all the videos they had had the takedown notice.
Why not just um, remove the video from the channel?
I guess they needed to feed the lawyers</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29914123</id>
	<title>Re:Video professor</title>
	<author>capologist</author>
	<datestamp>1256845260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Or FOX News? I see NBC/MSNBC listed.</p></div></blockquote><p>
No, you do not see MSNBC listed, unless you have a very vivid imagination.

MSNBC's parent NBC Universal is a hardass about SNL footage (except for Andy Samberg's digital shorts, which they don't own) showing up on YouTube and consistently issues takedowns over such clips.  This has nothing to do with MSNBC or your personal political differences with that channel.</p><blockquote><div><p>Hmmm; guess the anti-fox bias has no basis.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Let me see if I'm following your "logic" correctly.
</p><p>
This EFF web page, which lists a small number (13) of examples of censorship by copyright assertion, includes a single example from NBC (not MSNBC) and no example from Fox News.  From that it follows that Fox News does not engage in these tactics, and thence that their reporting is honest, ethical, and responsible.
</p><p>
That kind of argument is worthy of Fox News itself.  Keep it up and you might get a job there.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or FOX News ?
I see NBC/MSNBC listed .
No , you do not see MSNBC listed , unless you have a very vivid imagination .
MSNBC 's parent NBC Universal is a hardass about SNL footage ( except for Andy Samberg 's digital shorts , which they do n't own ) showing up on YouTube and consistently issues takedowns over such clips .
This has nothing to do with MSNBC or your personal political differences with that channel.Hmmm ; guess the anti-fox bias has no basis .
Let me see if I 'm following your " logic " correctly .
This EFF web page , which lists a small number ( 13 ) of examples of censorship by copyright assertion , includes a single example from NBC ( not MSNBC ) and no example from Fox News .
From that it follows that Fox News does not engage in these tactics , and thence that their reporting is honest , ethical , and responsible .
That kind of argument is worthy of Fox News itself .
Keep it up and you might get a job there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or FOX News?
I see NBC/MSNBC listed.
No, you do not see MSNBC listed, unless you have a very vivid imagination.
MSNBC's parent NBC Universal is a hardass about SNL footage (except for Andy Samberg's digital shorts, which they don't own) showing up on YouTube and consistently issues takedowns over such clips.
This has nothing to do with MSNBC or your personal political differences with that channel.Hmmm; guess the anti-fox bias has no basis.
Let me see if I'm following your "logic" correctly.
This EFF web page, which lists a small number (13) of examples of censorship by copyright assertion, includes a single example from NBC (not MSNBC) and no example from Fox News.
From that it follows that Fox News does not engage in these tactics, and thence that their reporting is honest, ethical, and responsible.
That kind of argument is worthy of Fox News itself.
Keep it up and you might get a job there.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29896031</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29895995</id>
	<title>Re:They forgot one</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1256739360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just browsed the site a little, there's an important thing missing -- the names of the law firms the people abusing the DMCA are using. They should be shamed as well; they're even worse, as they should have told their clients that they didn't have a snowball's chance in hell.</p><p>Yay EFF! Not sure what I'd do if one of those sociopaths sent me a takedown.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just browsed the site a little , there 's an important thing missing -- the names of the law firms the people abusing the DMCA are using .
They should be shamed as well ; they 're even worse , as they should have told their clients that they did n't have a snowball 's chance in hell.Yay EFF !
Not sure what I 'd do if one of those sociopaths sent me a takedown .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just browsed the site a little, there's an important thing missing -- the names of the law firms the people abusing the DMCA are using.
They should be shamed as well; they're even worse, as they should have told their clients that they didn't have a snowball's chance in hell.Yay EFF!
Not sure what I'd do if one of those sociopaths sent me a takedown.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890225</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890379</id>
	<title>Obligatory Darl comment</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256642640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How many billions have been tied up with his threatened takedowns of everyone and their dog who ever looked at Linux?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How many billions have been tied up with his threatened takedowns of everyone and their dog who ever looked at Linux ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many billions have been tied up with his threatened takedowns of everyone and their dog who ever looked at Linux?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890215</id>
	<title>Video professor</title>
	<author>Brian Gordon</author>
	<datestamp>1256642040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What happened to <a href="http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=2522" title="citizen.org">Video Professor</a> [citizen.org]? Should have made the list IMO:</p><blockquote><div><p>In mid-August, in federal court in Denver, the Video Professor, a self-proclaimed consumer advocate, sued his own customers for posting comments on two consumer comment Web sites. The sites, infomercialratings.com and infomercialscams.com, are run by a Nevada company, Leonard Fitness, Inc.</p><p>The Professor alleged that his detractors had violated federal trademark laws by saying negative things about the name of his product, as well as committing defamation and several violations of state law</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What happened to Video Professor [ citizen.org ] ?
Should have made the list IMO : In mid-August , in federal court in Denver , the Video Professor , a self-proclaimed consumer advocate , sued his own customers for posting comments on two consumer comment Web sites .
The sites , infomercialratings.com and infomercialscams.com , are run by a Nevada company , Leonard Fitness , Inc.The Professor alleged that his detractors had violated federal trademark laws by saying negative things about the name of his product , as well as committing defamation and several violations of state law</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What happened to Video Professor [citizen.org]?
Should have made the list IMO:In mid-August, in federal court in Denver, the Video Professor, a self-proclaimed consumer advocate, sued his own customers for posting comments on two consumer comment Web sites.
The sites, infomercialratings.com and infomercialscams.com, are run by a Nevada company, Leonard Fitness, Inc.The Professor alleged that his detractors had violated federal trademark laws by saying negative things about the name of his product, as well as committing defamation and several violations of state law
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890611</id>
	<title>Re:NBC - MSNBC ?</title>
	<author>hrimhari</author>
	<datestamp>1256643660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't feed the trolls ; )</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't feed the trolls ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't feed the trolls ; )</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890335</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890807</id>
	<title>Re:NPR?</title>
	<author>BJ\_Covert\_Action</author>
	<datestamp>1256644740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's like trying to get bees with vinegar.</p></div><p>
So...you're saying it will <a href="http://xkcd.com/357/" title="xkcd.com">work better than using honey?</a> [xkcd.com] =P</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's like trying to get bees with vinegar .
So...you 're saying it will work better than using honey ?
[ xkcd.com ] = P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's like trying to get bees with vinegar.
So...you're saying it will work better than using honey?
[xkcd.com] =P
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890319</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891479</id>
	<title>Re:NPR?</title>
	<author>IntricateEnigma</author>
	<datestamp>1256648220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What?  Picking and choosing your examples = having an opinion.  Resources aren't infinite, therefore examples must be picked and that will occur according to the decision making authority's perspective and opinion.  Using political, legal, or other resources as a tool to oppress the expression of opinions=censorship.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What ?
Picking and choosing your examples = having an opinion .
Resources are n't infinite , therefore examples must be picked and that will occur according to the decision making authority 's perspective and opinion .
Using political , legal , or other resources as a tool to oppress the expression of opinions = censorship .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What?
Picking and choosing your examples = having an opinion.
Resources aren't infinite, therefore examples must be picked and that will occur according to the decision making authority's perspective and opinion.
Using political, legal, or other resources as a tool to oppress the expression of opinions=censorship.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890359</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29894355</id>
	<title>WTF?</title>
	<author>namespan</author>
	<datestamp>1256723340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>They get for free multi-billion dollar valued airwaves all over the country. </i></p><p>Neither NPR nor CPB actually have any spectrum, let alone get it for free. They produce programming which is licensed by other broadcasters. The radio stations themselves are generally operated by public education institutions (with the occasional private university or ad hoc community organization thrown in).</p><p><i>That '2\%' you cite is more if you consider the taxes not collected from the 98 percent donated.</i></p><p>Are we going to claim ownership of anything produced by any 501c3 or any other tax exempt organization, too?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They get for free multi-billion dollar valued airwaves all over the country .
Neither NPR nor CPB actually have any spectrum , let alone get it for free .
They produce programming which is licensed by other broadcasters .
The radio stations themselves are generally operated by public education institutions ( with the occasional private university or ad hoc community organization thrown in ) .That '2 \ % ' you cite is more if you consider the taxes not collected from the 98 percent donated.Are we going to claim ownership of anything produced by any 501c3 or any other tax exempt organization , too ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They get for free multi-billion dollar valued airwaves all over the country.
Neither NPR nor CPB actually have any spectrum, let alone get it for free.
They produce programming which is licensed by other broadcasters.
The radio stations themselves are generally operated by public education institutions (with the occasional private university or ad hoc community organization thrown in).That '2\%' you cite is more if you consider the taxes not collected from the 98 percent donated.Are we going to claim ownership of anything produced by any 501c3 or any other tax exempt organization, too?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891123</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890239</id>
	<title>NBC - MSNBC ?</title>
	<author>commodore64\_love</author>
	<datestamp>1256642100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Forget NBC.  What about FOX News?  With all the hate I see directed at them from Usenet posters and even our own White House, surely they must be enemy #1 when it comes to censorship.</p><p>What?</p><p>They don't censor free speech?  Well su'prise su'prise su'prise.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Forget NBC .
What about FOX News ?
With all the hate I see directed at them from Usenet posters and even our own White House , surely they must be enemy # 1 when it comes to censorship.What ? They do n't censor free speech ?
Well su'prise su'prise su'prise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Forget NBC.
What about FOX News?
With all the hate I see directed at them from Usenet posters and even our own White House, surely they must be enemy #1 when it comes to censorship.What?They don't censor free speech?
Well su'prise su'prise su'prise.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891123</id>
	<title>Re:NPR is on here?</title>
	<author>mrmeval</author>
	<datestamp>1256646240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They get for free multi-billion dollar valued airwaves all over the country. That '2\%' you cite is  more if you consider the taxes not collected from the 98 percent donated. So I own their output until I'm paid back my share of that plus interest plus whatever fees they do not pay on the FCC license going back when they got their bucket of largess.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They get for free multi-billion dollar valued airwaves all over the country .
That '2 \ % ' you cite is more if you consider the taxes not collected from the 98 percent donated .
So I own their output until I 'm paid back my share of that plus interest plus whatever fees they do not pay on the FCC license going back when they got their bucket of largess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They get for free multi-billion dollar valued airwaves all over the country.
That '2\%' you cite is  more if you consider the taxes not collected from the 98 percent donated.
So I own their output until I'm paid back my share of that plus interest plus whatever fees they do not pay on the FCC license going back when they got their bucket of largess.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890605</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890531</id>
	<title>Re:NPR is on here?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256643300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NPR is mostly funded by direct contributions by listeners.  ~2\% comes from grants and other government sources.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NPR is mostly funded by direct contributions by listeners .
~ 2 \ % comes from grants and other government sources .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NPR is mostly funded by direct contributions by listeners.
~2\% comes from grants and other government sources.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890339</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891323</id>
	<title>Re:NPR is on here?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256647500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>By that logic, all government funded research and drug discovery should be considered public domain as well....</p></div><p>Well, if money is stolen from citizens in the form of taxation to fund something we should at least get royalties from it.  Public domain would be preferred, however.  Really though, rather than giving the pharmaceutical companies more corporate welfare we should focus on nutritional medicine.  Let's start curing and preventing disease rather than milking people for every last cent as they die.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>By that logic , all government funded research and drug discovery should be considered public domain as well....Well , if money is stolen from citizens in the form of taxation to fund something we should at least get royalties from it .
Public domain would be preferred , however .
Really though , rather than giving the pharmaceutical companies more corporate welfare we should focus on nutritional medicine .
Let 's start curing and preventing disease rather than milking people for every last cent as they die .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By that logic, all government funded research and drug discovery should be considered public domain as well....Well, if money is stolen from citizens in the form of taxation to fund something we should at least get royalties from it.
Public domain would be preferred, however.
Really though, rather than giving the pharmaceutical companies more corporate welfare we should focus on nutritional medicine.
Let's start curing and preventing disease rather than milking people for every last cent as they die.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890795</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29892937</id>
	<title>Inifinite Loops</title>
	<author>blyloveranger</author>
	<datestamp>1256660400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anyone else worried about this turning into an infinite takedown notice loop the brings the whole internet to it's knees, as the corporations send takedown notices to take down the takedown notices which are then put up only to be followed up by more takedown notices for the takedown notices of the takedown notices, which of course will then have to be put...

Can anyone stop this madness?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone else worried about this turning into an infinite takedown notice loop the brings the whole internet to it 's knees , as the corporations send takedown notices to take down the takedown notices which are then put up only to be followed up by more takedown notices for the takedown notices of the takedown notices , which of course will then have to be put.. . Can anyone stop this madness ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone else worried about this turning into an infinite takedown notice loop the brings the whole internet to it's knees, as the corporations send takedown notices to take down the takedown notices which are then put up only to be followed up by more takedown notices for the takedown notices of the takedown notices, which of course will then have to be put...

Can anyone stop this madness?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890335</id>
	<title>Re:NBC - MSNBC ?</title>
	<author>NiceGeek</author>
	<datestamp>1256642520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Having fun with the strawman?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Having fun with the strawman ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having fun with the strawman?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890239</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890485</id>
	<title>I'm not sure who this will help?</title>
	<author>mirix</author>
	<datestamp>1256643060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>*if* normal folk come across this, I'm sure big outfits will just spin the EFF as some anti-corporate evil pinko deal...<br>And the sheep will go for it, too.<br> <br>kind of a choir preach type deal, no?</htmltext>
<tokenext>* if * normal folk come across this , I 'm sure big outfits will just spin the EFF as some anti-corporate evil pinko deal...And the sheep will go for it , too .
kind of a choir preach type deal , no ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*if* normal folk come across this, I'm sure big outfits will just spin the EFF as some anti-corporate evil pinko deal...And the sheep will go for it, too.
kind of a choir preach type deal, no?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890797</id>
	<title>Re:NPR is on here?</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1256644620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Since we the taxpayers are paying for National Public Radio</p></div></blockquote><p>National Public Radio is a private nonprofit that receives most of its funding through membership dues from its member stations, subscription charges from stations to use NPR programming, and corporate sponsorship (corporate sponsorship alone provides around 1/4 of NPR's funding), with somewhere around 2\% from various government grants.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since we the taxpayers are paying for National Public RadioNational Public Radio is a private nonprofit that receives most of its funding through membership dues from its member stations , subscription charges from stations to use NPR programming , and corporate sponsorship ( corporate sponsorship alone provides around 1/4 of NPR 's funding ) , with somewhere around 2 \ % from various government grants .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since we the taxpayers are paying for National Public RadioNational Public Radio is a private nonprofit that receives most of its funding through membership dues from its member stations, subscription charges from stations to use NPR programming, and corporate sponsorship (corporate sponsorship alone provides around 1/4 of NPR's funding), with somewhere around 2\% from various government grants.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890339</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890147</id>
	<title>They forgot one</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256641680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about the Church of Scientology?<br>Their censorship is the entire reason the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/b/tards started harassing them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about the Church of Scientology ? Their censorship is the entire reason the /b/tards started harassing them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about the Church of Scientology?Their censorship is the entire reason the /b/tards started harassing them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891313</id>
	<title>These people have no shame</title>
	<author>syousef</author>
	<datestamp>1256647440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>....and this is a waste of time. If these people had any shame we wouldn't be in the position we're in, legitimate customers wouldn't end up out of pocket and with an unusable product etc. etc. This is like trying to shame that obnoxious house mate your friend has that doesn't shower or shave and walks around their apartment naked in mixed company.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>....and this is a waste of time .
If these people had any shame we would n't be in the position we 're in , legitimate customers would n't end up out of pocket and with an unusable product etc .
etc. This is like trying to shame that obnoxious house mate your friend has that does n't shower or shave and walks around their apartment naked in mixed company .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>....and this is a waste of time.
If these people had any shame we wouldn't be in the position we're in, legitimate customers wouldn't end up out of pocket and with an unusable product etc.
etc. This is like trying to shame that obnoxious house mate your friend has that doesn't shower or shave and walks around their apartment naked in mixed company.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890475</id>
	<title>Clear number 1</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256643060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shouldn't the number one "shame" spot go to the congress that passed the DMCA?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Should n't the number one " shame " spot go to the congress that passed the DMCA ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shouldn't the number one "shame" spot go to the congress that passed the DMCA?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29898293</id>
	<title>Re:They forgot one</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256748720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>       Microsoft might head that list. Bankrupting or buying out competition in order to stifle program releases is one heck of a form of censorship. The ultra expensive law suit was the usual tool to force cooperation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft might head that list .
Bankrupting or buying out competition in order to stifle program releases is one heck of a form of censorship .
The ultra expensive law suit was the usual tool to force cooperation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>       Microsoft might head that list.
Bankrupting or buying out competition in order to stifle program releases is one heck of a form of censorship.
The ultra expensive law suit was the usual tool to force cooperation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890147</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890287</id>
	<title>"They" also wanted this one taken down..</title>
	<author>BigBadBus</author>
	<datestamp>1256642340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>......<a href="http://www.paullee.com/computers/autonomy.php" title="paullee.com">and even hassled a benefactor in Australia to take down his mirror</a> [paullee.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>......and even hassled a benefactor in Australia to take down his mirror [ paullee.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>......and even hassled a benefactor in Australia to take down his mirror [paullee.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29899605</id>
	<title>Re:Youtube and Warner</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1256754360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't know how Content ID works, but it could be that a copyright owner has to have the video in its channel, even if set to private, for the Content ID system to work.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know how Content ID works , but it could be that a copyright owner has to have the video in its channel , even if set to private , for the Content ID system to work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know how Content ID works, but it could be that a copyright owner has to have the video in its channel, even if set to private, for the Content ID system to work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890587</id>
	<title>Chilling Effects?</title>
	<author>Misch</author>
	<datestamp>1256643600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought this is what <a href="http://chillingeffects.org/" title="chillingeffects.org">Chilling Effects</a> [chillingeffects.org] was for?</p><p>Or was the EFF unable to push the spotlight idea through the other partners they have for Chilling Effects (Harvard, Stanford, Berkeley, University of San Francisco, University of Maine, George Washington School of Law, and Santa Clara University School of Law clinics.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought this is what Chilling Effects [ chillingeffects.org ] was for ? Or was the EFF unable to push the spotlight idea through the other partners they have for Chilling Effects ( Harvard , Stanford , Berkeley , University of San Francisco , University of Maine , George Washington School of Law , and Santa Clara University School of Law clinics .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought this is what Chilling Effects [chillingeffects.org] was for?Or was the EFF unable to push the spotlight idea through the other partners they have for Chilling Effects (Harvard, Stanford, Berkeley, University of San Francisco, University of Maine, George Washington School of Law, and Santa Clara University School of Law clinics.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890319</id>
	<title>NPR?</title>
	<author>virtualXTC</author>
	<datestamp>1256642400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I understand that they are trying to make a point about applying fair-use across the board. But you'd think they'd choose something other than NPR trying to mute gay bashes as an example.   It's like trying to get bees with vinegar.</p><p>PS. here's the censored youtube clip incase you were wondering what was actually said.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I understand that they are trying to make a point about applying fair-use across the board .
But you 'd think they 'd choose something other than NPR trying to mute gay bashes as an example .
It 's like trying to get bees with vinegar.PS .
here 's the censored youtube clip incase you were wondering what was actually said .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I understand that they are trying to make a point about applying fair-use across the board.
But you'd think they'd choose something other than NPR trying to mute gay bashes as an example.
It's like trying to get bees with vinegar.PS.
here's the censored youtube clip incase you were wondering what was actually said.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890117</id>
	<title>I for one</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256641620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I for one welcome our shameful overlords</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I for one welcome our shameful overlords</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I for one welcome our shameful overlords</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29896031</id>
	<title>Re:Video professor</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256739480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or FOX News?  I see NBC/MSNBC listed.  What about fox? With all the hate I see directed at them from Usenet posters and even our own White House, surely they must be enemy #1 when it comes to censorship.</p><p>What?</p><p>They don't censor free speech?  Hmmm; guess the anti-fox bias has no basis.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or FOX News ?
I see NBC/MSNBC listed .
What about fox ?
With all the hate I see directed at them from Usenet posters and even our own White House , surely they must be enemy # 1 when it comes to censorship.What ? They do n't censor free speech ?
Hmmm ; guess the anti-fox bias has no basis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or FOX News?
I see NBC/MSNBC listed.
What about fox?
With all the hate I see directed at them from Usenet posters and even our own White House, surely they must be enemy #1 when it comes to censorship.What?They don't censor free speech?
Hmmm; guess the anti-fox bias has no basis.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890215</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890935</id>
	<title>They aren't the BBC</title>
	<author>RudeIota</author>
	<datestamp>1256645280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Consider NPR a private organization with a (very small) government subsidy. Does everything with a subsidy automatically become public domain?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Consider NPR a private organization with a ( very small ) government subsidy .
Does everything with a subsidy automatically become public domain ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Consider NPR a private organization with a (very small) government subsidy.
Does everything with a subsidy automatically become public domain?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890339</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890795</id>
	<title>Re:NPR is on here?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256644620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Since we the taxpayers are paying for National Public Radio, shouldn't all their productions be considered public domain, or at least open-licensed, under U.S. Congressional law?   </p></div><p>By that logic, all government funded research and drug discovery should be considered public domain as well....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since we the taxpayers are paying for National Public Radio , should n't all their productions be considered public domain , or at least open-licensed , under U.S. Congressional law ?
By that logic , all government funded research and drug discovery should be considered public domain as well... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since we the taxpayers are paying for National Public Radio, shouldn't all their productions be considered public domain, or at least open-licensed, under U.S. Congressional law?
By that logic, all government funded research and drug discovery should be considered public domain as well....
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890339</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29892893</id>
	<title>Re:NPR is on here?</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1256659860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>About 2\% of NPR's funding comes from the government</p></div><p>And a little stimulus money for a bank gives the government the ability to set payment levels.  Why does NPR get a pass?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>About 2 \ % of NPR 's funding comes from the governmentAnd a little stimulus money for a bank gives the government the ability to set payment levels .
Why does NPR get a pass ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>About 2\% of NPR's funding comes from the governmentAnd a little stimulus money for a bank gives the government the ability to set payment levels.
Why does NPR get a pass?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890605</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29898461</id>
	<title>Re:NPR is on here?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256749380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>            The gay marriage debate is being caused by a consequence of invasive government. Marriage is a sacrament of the church. The notion that legislation could somehow convert a sacrament into a non religious event that could be performed by civil authorities is absurd. Marriage should be left entirely within the authority of churches. People who do not believe in churches could still live together, reproduce and sign contracts for relating to each other. They could even form churches that allow for unusual forms of marriage,<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; In the end the issue of gay marriages rests in the effect upon society. For example we may never allow polygamy which is no more unusual than gay marriage. And it is not all to do with whether such marriages are "right" or 'wrong". It simply rests upon the suspected, future effects of the purposed forms of marriage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The gay marriage debate is being caused by a consequence of invasive government .
Marriage is a sacrament of the church .
The notion that legislation could somehow convert a sacrament into a non religious event that could be performed by civil authorities is absurd .
Marriage should be left entirely within the authority of churches .
People who do not believe in churches could still live together , reproduce and sign contracts for relating to each other .
They could even form churches that allow for unusual forms of marriage ,                         In the end the issue of gay marriages rests in the effect upon society .
For example we may never allow polygamy which is no more unusual than gay marriage .
And it is not all to do with whether such marriages are " right " or 'wrong " .
It simply rests upon the suspected , future effects of the purposed forms of marriage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>            The gay marriage debate is being caused by a consequence of invasive government.
Marriage is a sacrament of the church.
The notion that legislation could somehow convert a sacrament into a non religious event that could be performed by civil authorities is absurd.
Marriage should be left entirely within the authority of churches.
People who do not believe in churches could still live together, reproduce and sign contracts for relating to each other.
They could even form churches that allow for unusual forms of marriage,
                        In the end the issue of gay marriages rests in the effect upon society.
For example we may never allow polygamy which is no more unusual than gay marriage.
And it is not all to do with whether such marriages are "right" or 'wrong".
It simply rests upon the suspected, future effects of the purposed forms of marriage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890339</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29892559</id>
	<title>Re:NBC - MSNBC ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256657160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>oozing a yellowish goo made up of cum, rectal fluids and fecal matter, a smelly, sweaty, fat and hairy man positions his anus directly over your open, waiting mouth. as the goo slides down your throat, a wave of nausea comes over you and you start to vomit. At the same moment the fat man fills your mouth with his distended anus and unloads a hot, steamy load of liquid excrement, shooting its way down your throat.</htmltext>
<tokenext>oozing a yellowish goo made up of cum , rectal fluids and fecal matter , a smelly , sweaty , fat and hairy man positions his anus directly over your open , waiting mouth .
as the goo slides down your throat , a wave of nausea comes over you and you start to vomit .
At the same moment the fat man fills your mouth with his distended anus and unloads a hot , steamy load of liquid excrement , shooting its way down your throat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>oozing a yellowish goo made up of cum, rectal fluids and fecal matter, a smelly, sweaty, fat and hairy man positions his anus directly over your open, waiting mouth.
as the goo slides down your throat, a wave of nausea comes over you and you start to vomit.
At the same moment the fat man fills your mouth with his distended anus and unloads a hot, steamy load of liquid excrement, shooting its way down your throat.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890239</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890397</id>
	<title>Re:They forgot one</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256642700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The EFF even <a href="http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/09/massive-takedown-anti-scientology-videos-youtube" title="eff.org" rel="nofollow">covered</a> [eff.org] scientology takedowns!</p><p>Also, project chanology is a steaming mess of faggotry. The EFG masks and microsoft voice synthesized youtube videos reek of internet tuff guy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The EFF even covered [ eff.org ] scientology takedowns ! Also , project chanology is a steaming mess of faggotry .
The EFG masks and microsoft voice synthesized youtube videos reek of internet tuff guy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The EFF even covered [eff.org] scientology takedowns!Also, project chanology is a steaming mess of faggotry.
The EFG masks and microsoft voice synthesized youtube videos reek of internet tuff guy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890147</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890605</id>
	<title>Re:NPR is on here?</title>
	<author>ral</author>
	<datestamp>1256643660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>About 2\% of NPR's funding <a href="http://www.npr.org/about/privatesupport.html" title="npr.org">comes from the government</a> [npr.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>About 2 \ % of NPR 's funding comes from the government [ npr.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>About 2\% of NPR's funding comes from the government [npr.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890339</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890565</id>
	<title>Re:NPR?</title>
	<author>commodore64\_love</author>
	<datestamp>1256643480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;&gt;you'd think they'd choose something other than NPR trying to mute gay bashes as an example</p><p>The Maine citizens who produced the "marriage is for heterosexuals" advertisement doesn't have a right to free speech?  They deserved to have their ad taken-down from youtube???  This is the anti-free speech position you are adopting?!?!?  Not very progressive of you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; &gt; you 'd think they 'd choose something other than NPR trying to mute gay bashes as an exampleThe Maine citizens who produced the " marriage is for heterosexuals " advertisement does n't have a right to free speech ?
They deserved to have their ad taken-down from youtube ? ? ?
This is the anti-free speech position you are adopting ? ! ? ! ?
Not very progressive of you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;&gt;you'd think they'd choose something other than NPR trying to mute gay bashes as an exampleThe Maine citizens who produced the "marriage is for heterosexuals" advertisement doesn't have a right to free speech?
They deserved to have their ad taken-down from youtube???
This is the anti-free speech position you are adopting?!?!?
Not very progressive of you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890319</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890619</id>
	<title>Re:NPR is on here?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256643720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The majority of NPR's funding comes from listener contributions. About 2\% comes from government grants. Even the most conservative assessment of where the funding comes from tops out at about 5\%. I'm just curious as to how you would enforce that 2\%-5\%. Should that fraction of each production be public domain? Should 2-5\% of all productions be public domain? Or should the donors own the copyright to the shows?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The majority of NPR 's funding comes from listener contributions .
About 2 \ % comes from government grants .
Even the most conservative assessment of where the funding comes from tops out at about 5 \ % .
I 'm just curious as to how you would enforce that 2 \ % -5 \ % .
Should that fraction of each production be public domain ?
Should 2-5 \ % of all productions be public domain ?
Or should the donors own the copyright to the shows ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The majority of NPR's funding comes from listener contributions.
About 2\% comes from government grants.
Even the most conservative assessment of where the funding comes from tops out at about 5\%.
I'm just curious as to how you would enforce that 2\%-5\%.
Should that fraction of each production be public domain?
Should 2-5\% of all productions be public domain?
Or should the donors own the copyright to the shows?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890339</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890359</id>
	<title>Re:NPR?</title>
	<author>schnikies79</author>
	<datestamp>1256642640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Free speech is free speech.  Picking and choosing your examples is just as bad as censorship.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Free speech is free speech .
Picking and choosing your examples is just as bad as censorship .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Free speech is free speech.
Picking and choosing your examples is just as bad as censorship.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890319</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29894173</id>
	<title>Re:They forgot one</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256720460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I, for one, refuse to touch anything<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/b/tards have been near with a 10 foot pole.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I , for one , refuse to touch anything /b/tards have been near with a 10 foot pole .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I, for one, refuse to touch anything /b/tards have been near with a 10 foot pole.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890147</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890225</id>
	<title>Re:They forgot one</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256642040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>EFF might not have enough lawyers to fight the take down notices from the Church of Scientology... Whoops, I just got one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>EFF might not have enough lawyers to fight the take down notices from the Church of Scientology... Whoops , I just got one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>EFF might not have enough lawyers to fight the take down notices from the Church of Scientology... Whoops, I just got one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890147</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890247</id>
	<title>How about a tally?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256642160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think given the high volume of abuse by some of these people, wouldn't some sort of tally/grouping work better?  Also, what exactly are the criteria being employed by the EFF here?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think given the high volume of abuse by some of these people , would n't some sort of tally/grouping work better ?
Also , what exactly are the criteria being employed by the EFF here ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think given the high volume of abuse by some of these people, wouldn't some sort of tally/grouping work better?
Also, what exactly are the criteria being employed by the EFF here?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29941349</id>
	<title>Re:NPR?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257087840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>NPR and EFF were trolled.  Any time core Democratic issues come up, opponents throw in some chaff about fags.  Delete fags.</htmltext>
<tokenext>NPR and EFF were trolled .
Any time core Democratic issues come up , opponents throw in some chaff about fags .
Delete fags .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NPR and EFF were trolled.
Any time core Democratic issues come up, opponents throw in some chaff about fags.
Delete fags.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890867</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890339</id>
	<title>NPR is on here?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256642520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since we the taxpayers are paying for National Public Radio, shouldn't all their productions be considered public domain, or at least open-licensed, under U.S. Congressional law?   </p><p><div class="quote"><p>Stand for Marriage Maine (SMM) created an ad criticizing same-sex marriage that excerpted a brief portion of an All Things Considered interview. Although the ad's use of the content was clearly necessary to its critical political message, NPR sent a takedown demand to YouTube resulting in the removal of the video. NPR failed to recognize that SMM's excerpting is simply another clear-cut example of a fair use in political speech -- the 21st century equivalent of an issue pamphlet.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since we the taxpayers are paying for National Public Radio , should n't all their productions be considered public domain , or at least open-licensed , under U.S. Congressional law ?
Stand for Marriage Maine ( SMM ) created an ad criticizing same-sex marriage that excerpted a brief portion of an All Things Considered interview .
Although the ad 's use of the content was clearly necessary to its critical political message , NPR sent a takedown demand to YouTube resulting in the removal of the video .
NPR failed to recognize that SMM 's excerpting is simply another clear-cut example of a fair use in political speech -- the 21st century equivalent of an issue pamphlet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since we the taxpayers are paying for National Public Radio, shouldn't all their productions be considered public domain, or at least open-licensed, under U.S. Congressional law?
Stand for Marriage Maine (SMM) created an ad criticizing same-sex marriage that excerpted a brief portion of an All Things Considered interview.
Although the ad's use of the content was clearly necessary to its critical political message, NPR sent a takedown demand to YouTube resulting in the removal of the video.
NPR failed to recognize that SMM's excerpting is simply another clear-cut example of a fair use in political speech -- the 21st century equivalent of an issue pamphlet.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891787</id>
	<title>Re:They forgot one</title>
	<author>nstlgc</author>
	<datestamp>1256650260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>MOD PARENT UP. The Church of Scientology has repeatedly used copyright to stifle free speech.</htmltext>
<tokenext>MOD PARENT UP .
The Church of Scientology has repeatedly used copyright to stifle free speech .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MOD PARENT UP.
The Church of Scientology has repeatedly used copyright to stifle free speech.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890147</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891019</id>
	<title>Re:NPR?</title>
	<author>bennomatic</author>
	<datestamp>1256645700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The antidote to speech with which you do not agree is more free speech, not limits on speech.  As much as I might not like that message, if we start getting into battles about what's acceptable and what's not, then it's inevitable that everyone will be unhappy with the result.
<br> <br>
That ad was ridiculous, but it did not incite violence, did not include anything approaching hate speech.  It was idiocy and should--and could--be countered by other communication presenting the other side.
<br> <br>
It's a pity that catering to the lowest common denominator works, to some degree, but suggesting that it should have been OK to sue to present that ad altogether just because it promoted the views of the asinine would be going down a very dark path.
<br> <br>
Now, if that quote attributed to teacher Allen were somehow fabricated or edited such that it was inaccurate, then sure, it should be blocked because it contains libel.  Otherwise, it's up to clearer heads to simply counter it.</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The antidote to speech with which you do not agree is more free speech , not limits on speech .
As much as I might not like that message , if we start getting into battles about what 's acceptable and what 's not , then it 's inevitable that everyone will be unhappy with the result .
That ad was ridiculous , but it did not incite violence , did not include anything approaching hate speech .
It was idiocy and should--and could--be countered by other communication presenting the other side .
It 's a pity that catering to the lowest common denominator works , to some degree , but suggesting that it should have been OK to sue to present that ad altogether just because it promoted the views of the asinine would be going down a very dark path .
Now , if that quote attributed to teacher Allen were somehow fabricated or edited such that it was inaccurate , then sure , it should be blocked because it contains libel .
Otherwise , it 's up to clearer heads to simply counter it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The antidote to speech with which you do not agree is more free speech, not limits on speech.
As much as I might not like that message, if we start getting into battles about what's acceptable and what's not, then it's inevitable that everyone will be unhappy with the result.
That ad was ridiculous, but it did not incite violence, did not include anything approaching hate speech.
It was idiocy and should--and could--be countered by other communication presenting the other side.
It's a pity that catering to the lowest common denominator works, to some degree, but suggesting that it should have been OK to sue to present that ad altogether just because it promoted the views of the asinine would be going down a very dark path.
Now, if that quote attributed to teacher Allen were somehow fabricated or edited such that it was inaccurate, then sure, it should be blocked because it contains libel.
Otherwise, it's up to clearer heads to simply counter it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890319</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890515</id>
	<title>Re:NBC - MSNBC ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256643180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tell that to Glenn Beck and the lawyer defending gb1990.com, troll.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tell that to Glenn Beck and the lawyer defending gb1990.com , troll .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tell that to Glenn Beck and the lawyer defending gb1990.com, troll.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890239</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29901409</id>
	<title>Re:Mod Parent troll</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1256761740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Parent is trolling</i></p><p>And you're <a href="http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2005/4/22/103829/784" title="kuro5hin.org">biting.</a> [kuro5hin.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Parent is trollingAnd you 're biting .
[ kuro5hin.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Parent is trollingAnd you're biting.
[kuro5hin.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890757</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891341</id>
	<title>EFF privacy?</title>
	<author>blakhol</author>
	<datestamp>1256647620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was very surprised to find that the unique email address that I registered with at the EFF seems to have been sold to another group.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was very surprised to find that the unique email address that I registered with at the EFF seems to have been sold to another group .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was very surprised to find that the unique email address that I registered with at the EFF seems to have been sold to another group.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29892633</id>
	<title>One network is missing...</title>
	<author>mi</author>
	<datestamp>1256657820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>NPR, NBC, CBS</p></div></blockquote><p>But Fox is not there?.. How come? Why are <em>they</em> so special? Certainly could've come after all those calling them "Faux", for just one example...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>NPR , NBC , CBSBut Fox is not there ? . .
How come ?
Why are they so special ?
Certainly could 've come after all those calling them " Faux " , for just one example.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NPR, NBC, CBSBut Fox is not there?..
How come?
Why are they so special?
Certainly could've come after all those calling them "Faux", for just one example...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890757</id>
	<title>Mod Parent troll</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256644380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Parent is trolling; Fox has an <a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;client=firefox-a&amp;rls=org.mozilla\%3Aen-US\%3Aofficial&amp;hs=wLv&amp;q=Fox+DMCA+censorship&amp;aq=f&amp;oq=&amp;aqi=" title="google.com">extensive history of censorship.</a> [google.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Parent is trolling ; Fox has an extensive history of censorship .
[ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Parent is trolling; Fox has an extensive history of censorship.
[google.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890239</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890245</id>
	<title>Re:They forgot one</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256642160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sensor my penis penetrating <a href="http://goatse.fr/" title="goatse.fr" rel="nofollow">your anus</a> [goatse.fr]. I'd like to see you try.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sensor my penis penetrating your anus [ goatse.fr ] .
I 'd like to see you try .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sensor my penis penetrating your anus [goatse.fr].
I'd like to see you try.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890147</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890337</id>
	<title>Re:NBC - MSNBC ?</title>
	<author>fatmonkeyboy</author>
	<datestamp>1256642520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about <a href="http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/01/fox-news-censors-political-expression" title="eff.org">this</a> [eff.org]?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about this [ eff.org ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about this [eff.org]?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890239</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29895983</id>
	<title>Re:They forgot one</title>
	<author>elrous0</author>
	<datestamp>1256739300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That was the first thing that hit me. Those guys should win a lifetime achievement award or something. Maybe they sued and forced the EFF to take down their award.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That was the first thing that hit me .
Those guys should win a lifetime achievement award or something .
Maybe they sued and forced the EFF to take down their award .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That was the first thing that hit me.
Those guys should win a lifetime achievement award or something.
Maybe they sued and forced the EFF to take down their award.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890147</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890917</id>
	<title>Re:NBC - MSNBC ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256645220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's one of the sillier posts I've ever seen.  There are lots of things that a media outlet can do that are worthy of complaints even if they are not under the umbrella of censorship.
<br> <br>
Examples:
<ul>
<li> Promoting lies and misrepresentations as if they were facts.</li>
<li> Creating a fake "grassroots" movement and promoting it as if it were real.</li>
<li> Publishing verbatim talking points from one political party as if they were objective news.</li>
<li> Claiming to be a news agency while dropping any hints of objective reporting.</li>
</ul><p>

Now, it's normal for a media outlet to have its own slant or bias; even a corporation evolves a "culture" which colors what is reported.  However, Fox is not even rationally consistent with its judgements; take, for example, back to back reports on Britney Spears' younger sister being pregnant vs. Sarah Palin's daughter being pregnant.  Bill O'Reilly went from calling Spears' parents "pinheads" to saying that "the liberal media's judgement of Palin is outrageous" without taking a breath.  It would be funny if it weren't so tragic.
<br> <br>
Local Fox affiliates have normal news.  The parent  news agency, with their "Fox and Friends", Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly and more, are entertainment at best, a propaganda agency at worst, even in those segments where they claim to be news.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's one of the sillier posts I 've ever seen .
There are lots of things that a media outlet can do that are worthy of complaints even if they are not under the umbrella of censorship .
Examples : Promoting lies and misrepresentations as if they were facts .
Creating a fake " grassroots " movement and promoting it as if it were real .
Publishing verbatim talking points from one political party as if they were objective news .
Claiming to be a news agency while dropping any hints of objective reporting .
Now , it 's normal for a media outlet to have its own slant or bias ; even a corporation evolves a " culture " which colors what is reported .
However , Fox is not even rationally consistent with its judgements ; take , for example , back to back reports on Britney Spears ' younger sister being pregnant vs. Sarah Palin 's daughter being pregnant .
Bill O'Reilly went from calling Spears ' parents " pinheads " to saying that " the liberal media 's judgement of Palin is outrageous " without taking a breath .
It would be funny if it were n't so tragic .
Local Fox affiliates have normal news .
The parent news agency , with their " Fox and Friends " , Beck , Hannity , O'Reilly and more , are entertainment at best , a propaganda agency at worst , even in those segments where they claim to be news .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's one of the sillier posts I've ever seen.
There are lots of things that a media outlet can do that are worthy of complaints even if they are not under the umbrella of censorship.
Examples:

 Promoting lies and misrepresentations as if they were facts.
Creating a fake "grassroots" movement and promoting it as if it were real.
Publishing verbatim talking points from one political party as if they were objective news.
Claiming to be a news agency while dropping any hints of objective reporting.
Now, it's normal for a media outlet to have its own slant or bias; even a corporation evolves a "culture" which colors what is reported.
However, Fox is not even rationally consistent with its judgements; take, for example, back to back reports on Britney Spears' younger sister being pregnant vs. Sarah Palin's daughter being pregnant.
Bill O'Reilly went from calling Spears' parents "pinheads" to saying that "the liberal media's judgement of Palin is outrageous" without taking a breath.
It would be funny if it weren't so tragic.
Local Fox affiliates have normal news.
The parent  news agency, with their "Fox and Friends", Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly and more, are entertainment at best, a propaganda agency at worst, even in those segments where they claim to be news.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890239</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891329</id>
	<title>I can't believe they omitted Dissociated Press</title>
	<author>ChipMonk</author>
	<datestamp>1256647560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...who used their own news wire to send out a pre-emptive takedown notice to basically the entire Internet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...who used their own news wire to send out a pre-emptive takedown notice to basically the entire Internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...who used their own news wire to send out a pre-emptive takedown notice to basically the entire Internet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890685</id>
	<title>Re:They forgot one</title>
	<author>Afforess</author>
	<datestamp>1256644020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Gentlemen, Start your attorneys!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Gentlemen , Start your attorneys !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gentlemen, Start your attorneys!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890225</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890943</id>
	<title>shocking!</title>
	<author>Trepidity</author>
	<datestamp>1256645340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A list of abusive, lying corporations that includes De Beers on it!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A list of abusive , lying corporations that includes De Beers on it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A list of abusive, lying corporations that includes De Beers on it!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890761</id>
	<title>Re:NPR is on here?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256644380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your premise seems to be <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National\_Public\_Radio#Funding" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">unfunded</a> [wikipedia.org].</p><p>For everybody else's luck, EFF was impartial and also added <a href="http://www.eff.org/takedowns/same-sex-marriage-opponents-silence-critical-clip" title="eff.org" rel="nofollow">a same silence attempt from the same-sex marriage opponents.</a> [eff.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your premise seems to be unfunded [ wikipedia.org ] .For everybody else 's luck , EFF was impartial and also added a same silence attempt from the same-sex marriage opponents .
[ eff.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your premise seems to be unfunded [wikipedia.org].For everybody else's luck, EFF was impartial and also added a same silence attempt from the same-sex marriage opponents.
[eff.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890339</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29895045</id>
	<title>How about American Food industry?</title>
	<author>citizenr</author>
	<datestamp>1256732520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Its a crime (felony) to criticize food products in some states (Texas for example). Your basically fucked unless your name is Oprah and you got $1 mill laying around to defend yourself.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Its a crime ( felony ) to criticize food products in some states ( Texas for example ) .
Your basically fucked unless your name is Oprah and you got $ 1 mill laying around to defend yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its a crime (felony) to criticize food products in some states (Texas for example).
Your basically fucked unless your name is Oprah and you got $1 mill laying around to defend yourself.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29892893
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890605
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890339
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29895995
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890225
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890147
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890397
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890147
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891323
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890795
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890339
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29895983
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890147
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890319
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890531
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890339
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29941349
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890319
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890335
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890239
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890337
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890239
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29894173
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890147
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890797
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890339
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890319
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29894355
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891123
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890605
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890339
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29892559
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890239
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29898461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890339
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890935
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890339
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891787
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890147
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29914123
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29896031
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890215
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890761
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890339
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29899605
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891161
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890515
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890239
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890239
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890619
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890339
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891019
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890319
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29898293
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890147
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890245
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890147
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29901409
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890757
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890239
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891479
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890359
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890319
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_2013250_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890225
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890147
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_2013250.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890239
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890337
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29892559
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890515
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890335
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890611
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890757
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29901409
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890917
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_2013250.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890339
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890619
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29898461
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890605
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29892893
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891123
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29894355
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890531
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890761
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890797
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890795
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891323
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890935
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_2013250.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890379
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_2013250.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890247
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_2013250.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890943
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_2013250.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890215
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29896031
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29914123
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_2013250.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890147
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891787
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29895983
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890397
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890245
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29898293
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890225
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29895995
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890685
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29894173
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_2013250.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890475
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_2013250.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29892937
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_2013250.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891161
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29899605
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_2013250.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29892633
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_2013250.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890319
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890867
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29941349
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890807
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890359
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891479
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890565
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29891019
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_2013250.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_2013250.29890485
</commentlist>
</conversation>
