<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_05_1617220</id>
	<title>EU Telecom Deal Finished &mdash; No Three Strikes</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1257440880000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>a\_n\_d\_e\_r\_s writes <i>"The battle was hard, but the final text of the agreement ensures that people in the EU are <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/06/technology/internet/06net.html">not disconnected from the Internet</a> without a chance to get <a href="http://christianengstrom.wordpress.com/2009/11/05/telecom-package-final-agreed-text/">a fair and impartial hearing beforehand</a>. The important part is: 'Accordingly, these measures may only be taken with due respect for the principle of presumption of innocence and the right to privacy. A prior fair and impartial procedure shall be guaranteed, including the right to be heard of the person or persons concerned, subject to the need for appropriate conditions and procedural arrangements in duly substantiated cases of urgency in conformity with European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The right to an effective and timely judicial review shall be guaranteed.' This means that if someone is accused of copyright infringement, they can't just be disconnected from Internet. It lets the accused get a chance to disagree and take it to court first. The urgency clause means that a computer can be disconnected if it is part of an ongoing DDoS attack. Next, this has to be implemented into the EU nations' own laws, so the final ruling on how this will be implemented is not out yet.  But, overall, it looks like a great success in stopping informal three-strikes disconnections."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>a \ _n \ _d \ _e \ _r \ _s writes " The battle was hard , but the final text of the agreement ensures that people in the EU are not disconnected from the Internet without a chance to get a fair and impartial hearing beforehand .
The important part is : 'Accordingly , these measures may only be taken with due respect for the principle of presumption of innocence and the right to privacy .
A prior fair and impartial procedure shall be guaranteed , including the right to be heard of the person or persons concerned , subject to the need for appropriate conditions and procedural arrangements in duly substantiated cases of urgency in conformity with European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms .
The right to an effective and timely judicial review shall be guaranteed .
' This means that if someone is accused of copyright infringement , they ca n't just be disconnected from Internet .
It lets the accused get a chance to disagree and take it to court first .
The urgency clause means that a computer can be disconnected if it is part of an ongoing DDoS attack .
Next , this has to be implemented into the EU nations ' own laws , so the final ruling on how this will be implemented is not out yet .
But , overall , it looks like a great success in stopping informal three-strikes disconnections .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a\_n\_d\_e\_r\_s writes "The battle was hard, but the final text of the agreement ensures that people in the EU are not disconnected from the Internet without a chance to get a fair and impartial hearing beforehand.
The important part is: 'Accordingly, these measures may only be taken with due respect for the principle of presumption of innocence and the right to privacy.
A prior fair and impartial procedure shall be guaranteed, including the right to be heard of the person or persons concerned, subject to the need for appropriate conditions and procedural arrangements in duly substantiated cases of urgency in conformity with European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
The right to an effective and timely judicial review shall be guaranteed.
' This means that if someone is accused of copyright infringement, they can't just be disconnected from Internet.
It lets the accused get a chance to disagree and take it to court first.
The urgency clause means that a computer can be disconnected if it is part of an ongoing DDoS attack.
Next, this has to be implemented into the EU nations' own laws, so the final ruling on how this will be implemented is not out yet.
But, overall, it looks like a great success in stopping informal three-strikes disconnections.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29999314</id>
	<title>Re:Electricity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257413940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Just wandering</i></p><p>How are you posting to slashdot if you're wandering?</p><p>I wish you guys would stop relying on your spell checkers. Wandering is a completely different thing than wondering, and it takes a second to decode it. A mispeling that a spel cheker <i>will</i> catch isn't nearlly so badd.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just wanderingHow are you posting to slashdot if you 're wandering ? I wish you guys would stop relying on your spell checkers .
Wandering is a completely different thing than wondering , and it takes a second to decode it .
A mispeling that a spel cheker will catch is n't nearlly so badd .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just wanderingHow are you posting to slashdot if you're wandering?I wish you guys would stop relying on your spell checkers.
Wandering is a completely different thing than wondering, and it takes a second to decode it.
A mispeling that a spel cheker will catch isn't nearlly so badd.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996674</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996792</id>
	<title>Just legalize downloading already</title>
	<author>jabjoe</author>
	<datestamp>1257446160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1720068211869162779#" title="google.com">http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1720068211869162779#</a> [google.com]
<br> <br>
Seriously, does anyone techy wait for programs they want to watch to be broadcasted in their country?
Everyone techy (and more of the young are techy), at least that I know, watches what they want, when they want. Some old stuff I watch I don't think you can even legally get hold of! Streaming cuts it for some, but not myself as I like to watch in my media player of choice, streaming doesn't fit into my net use and I'm damned if I'll download it again to watch it again.</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //video.google.com/videoplay ? docid = -1720068211869162779 # [ google.com ] Seriously , does anyone techy wait for programs they want to watch to be broadcasted in their country ?
Everyone techy ( and more of the young are techy ) , at least that I know , watches what they want , when they want .
Some old stuff I watch I do n't think you can even legally get hold of !
Streaming cuts it for some , but not myself as I like to watch in my media player of choice , streaming does n't fit into my net use and I 'm damned if I 'll download it again to watch it again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1720068211869162779# [google.com]
 
Seriously, does anyone techy wait for programs they want to watch to be broadcasted in their country?
Everyone techy (and more of the young are techy), at least that I know, watches what they want, when they want.
Some old stuff I watch I don't think you can even legally get hold of!
Streaming cuts it for some, but not myself as I like to watch in my media player of choice, streaming doesn't fit into my net use and I'm damned if I'll download it again to watch it again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997226</id>
	<title>win for cops and intelligence agencies</title>
	<author>michaelhawk</author>
	<datestamp>1257448200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Accordingly, these measures may only be taken with due respect for the principle of presumption of innocence and the right to privacy."
<p>-</p><p>
This is a win for intelligence agencies and other organizations who want to be able to inspect every packet.  This decision has reduced the likelihood we will get real privacy by the development of encrypted anonymizing p2p systems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Accordingly , these measures may only be taken with due respect for the principle of presumption of innocence and the right to privacy .
" - This is a win for intelligence agencies and other organizations who want to be able to inspect every packet .
This decision has reduced the likelihood we will get real privacy by the development of encrypted anonymizing p2p systems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Accordingly, these measures may only be taken with due respect for the principle of presumption of innocence and the right to privacy.
"
-
This is a win for intelligence agencies and other organizations who want to be able to inspect every packet.
This decision has reduced the likelihood we will get real privacy by the development of encrypted anonymizing p2p systems.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997772</id>
	<title>Re:Well played. The noobs think they got something</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257450720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To re-use your analogy, the 3rd offense is equivalent to having your driving license annulled. I'll bet most people are willing to contest the charges for *that*.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To re-use your analogy , the 3rd offense is equivalent to having your driving license annulled .
I 'll bet most people are willing to contest the charges for * that * .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To re-use your analogy, the 3rd offense is equivalent to having your driving license annulled.
I'll bet most people are willing to contest the charges for *that*.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996762</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30004466</id>
	<title>Re:Telecom Deal Still Up for Grabs-3Strikes Possib</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257511860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Alas, the member state in the UK is listening to industry slave Voldemort, er, Mandelson on this one.  Of course he'll also be out of a job in a few months, so it's not all bad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Alas , the member state in the UK is listening to industry slave Voldemort , er , Mandelson on this one .
Of course he 'll also be out of a job in a few months , so it 's not all bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Alas, the member state in the UK is listening to industry slave Voldemort, er, Mandelson on this one.
Of course he'll also be out of a job in a few months, so it's not all bad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996658</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996802</id>
	<title>European Council</title>
	<author>SwedishPenguin</author>
	<datestamp>1257446160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The fact that the European Council (Swede's take note, this includes our own infrastructure minister, from a party that officially claims to be supporting our rights but in practice has done the opposite) even argued for suspending the right to a fair trial indicates that there is something seriously wrong with the entire system. How can these people be allowed to reign free? We need to realize that the council consists of our own governments and hold them responsible for whatever the council does. The council is not a democratic institution, they conduct negotiations in secret, they advocate draconian measures, they frequently force the European Parliament, the only elected body of the EU, to bend down to it's will. We need to get rid of these people NOW! They are a very dangerous bunch of people.<br>Even with this wording, some, including many parliaments, will interpret the text as not requiring a court hearing, and implement it as such.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The fact that the European Council ( Swede 's take note , this includes our own infrastructure minister , from a party that officially claims to be supporting our rights but in practice has done the opposite ) even argued for suspending the right to a fair trial indicates that there is something seriously wrong with the entire system .
How can these people be allowed to reign free ?
We need to realize that the council consists of our own governments and hold them responsible for whatever the council does .
The council is not a democratic institution , they conduct negotiations in secret , they advocate draconian measures , they frequently force the European Parliament , the only elected body of the EU , to bend down to it 's will .
We need to get rid of these people NOW !
They are a very dangerous bunch of people.Even with this wording , some , including many parliaments , will interpret the text as not requiring a court hearing , and implement it as such .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The fact that the European Council (Swede's take note, this includes our own infrastructure minister, from a party that officially claims to be supporting our rights but in practice has done the opposite) even argued for suspending the right to a fair trial indicates that there is something seriously wrong with the entire system.
How can these people be allowed to reign free?
We need to realize that the council consists of our own governments and hold them responsible for whatever the council does.
The council is not a democratic institution, they conduct negotiations in secret, they advocate draconian measures, they frequently force the European Parliament, the only elected body of the EU, to bend down to it's will.
We need to get rid of these people NOW!
They are a very dangerous bunch of people.Even with this wording, some, including many parliaments, will interpret the text as not requiring a court hearing, and implement it as such.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997096</id>
	<title>Re:European Council</title>
	<author>lordholm</author>
	<datestamp>1257447660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agreed, I have for a long time bitched about the council and how impossible it is for it to fall in its whole, since that would mean that the member-states' governments would all fall at the same time.</p><p>I hear a lot of complaints of the commission, but the commission has fallen when it lost its parliamentary support and the commission rules at the parliaments approval. The council however, are not accountable as such, have the right to make law (the commission do not have that right, they are just implementing the EP and ECs decisions in accordance to the treaties) and are not directly elected.</p><p>The council is problematic and should as soon as possible be replaced with a directly elected senate, that is disjoint from the member-states' governments. But then, we are talking about the "f-word", so people will scream like stuck pigs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed , I have for a long time bitched about the council and how impossible it is for it to fall in its whole , since that would mean that the member-states ' governments would all fall at the same time.I hear a lot of complaints of the commission , but the commission has fallen when it lost its parliamentary support and the commission rules at the parliaments approval .
The council however , are not accountable as such , have the right to make law ( the commission do not have that right , they are just implementing the EP and ECs decisions in accordance to the treaties ) and are not directly elected.The council is problematic and should as soon as possible be replaced with a directly elected senate , that is disjoint from the member-states ' governments .
But then , we are talking about the " f-word " , so people will scream like stuck pigs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed, I have for a long time bitched about the council and how impossible it is for it to fall in its whole, since that would mean that the member-states' governments would all fall at the same time.I hear a lot of complaints of the commission, but the commission has fallen when it lost its parliamentary support and the commission rules at the parliaments approval.
The council however, are not accountable as such, have the right to make law (the commission do not have that right, they are just implementing the EP and ECs decisions in accordance to the treaties) and are not directly elected.The council is problematic and should as soon as possible be replaced with a directly elected senate, that is disjoint from the member-states' governments.
But then, we are talking about the "f-word", so people will scream like stuck pigs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996802</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997304</id>
	<title>This is not a victory</title>
	<author>tkrotchko</author>
	<datestamp>1257448620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They asked for everything including the kitchen sink.</p><p>They got everything except the kitchen sink, and you're trumpeting this as a success of rights?</p><p>This was the plan all along.  Ask for everything settle for half.  Except they got about 80\% of what they wanted and they gave up nothing in exchange.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They asked for everything including the kitchen sink.They got everything except the kitchen sink , and you 're trumpeting this as a success of rights ? This was the plan all along .
Ask for everything settle for half .
Except they got about 80 \ % of what they wanted and they gave up nothing in exchange .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They asked for everything including the kitchen sink.They got everything except the kitchen sink, and you're trumpeting this as a success of rights?This was the plan all along.
Ask for everything settle for half.
Except they got about 80\% of what they wanted and they gave up nothing in exchange.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30004672</id>
	<title>Re:Treaties</title>
	<author>nickco3</author>
	<datestamp>1257515040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Don't treaties like ACTA trump national laws?</p><p>All depends what your national laws say about treaties.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Do n't treaties like ACTA trump national laws ? All depends what your national laws say about treaties .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Don't treaties like ACTA trump national laws?All depends what your national laws say about treaties.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30011950</id>
	<title>Re:Impartial?</title>
	<author>rtb61</author>
	<datestamp>1257519720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> There is a poison pill in that idea in some countries have barratry laws <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barratry" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barratry</a> [wikipedia.org] and losers pays. So while it is possible to play the I have more money to spend on lawyers than you do upon an individual basis, attempting to do it on a mass scale will inevitably blow up in your face, and result in a bunch of successful appeals and massive Punitive damages <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punitive\_damages" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punitive\_damages</a> [wikipedia.org], which is of course why the RIAA et al did not play lets sue everyone in Australia, Canada and the UK etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a poison pill in that idea in some countries have barratry laws http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barratry [ wikipedia.org ] and losers pays .
So while it is possible to play the I have more money to spend on lawyers than you do upon an individual basis , attempting to do it on a mass scale will inevitably blow up in your face , and result in a bunch of successful appeals and massive Punitive damages http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punitive \ _damages [ wikipedia.org ] , which is of course why the RIAA et al did not play lets sue everyone in Australia , Canada and the UK etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> There is a poison pill in that idea in some countries have barratry laws http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barratry [wikipedia.org] and losers pays.
So while it is possible to play the I have more money to spend on lawyers than you do upon an individual basis, attempting to do it on a mass scale will inevitably blow up in your face, and result in a bunch of successful appeals and massive Punitive damages http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punitive\_damages [wikipedia.org], which is of course why the RIAA et al did not play lets sue everyone in Australia, Canada and the UK etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996694</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30002516</id>
	<title>Communication is a privilege, not a right</title>
	<author>mykos</author>
	<datestamp>1257434040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Remember: communication is a privilege, not a right.  Commit slander, libel, or insider trading verbally?  Lose your tongue and lips.  Commit them via writing?  Lose your hands.  Is this where we're going?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Remember : communication is a privilege , not a right .
Commit slander , libel , or insider trading verbally ?
Lose your tongue and lips .
Commit them via writing ?
Lose your hands .
Is this where we 're going ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Remember: communication is a privilege, not a right.
Commit slander, libel, or insider trading verbally?
Lose your tongue and lips.
Commit them via writing?
Lose your hands.
Is this where we're going?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30005388</id>
	<title>Re:Telecom Deal Still Up for Grabs-3Strikes Possib</title>
	<author>Elldallan</author>
	<datestamp>1257521280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>From what I understand thats because EU don't have the right to mandate legislation except when it concerns internal free trade or the movement of goods and/or people.</htmltext>
<tokenext>From what I understand thats because EU do n't have the right to mandate legislation except when it concerns internal free trade or the movement of goods and/or people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From what I understand thats because EU don't have the right to mandate legislation except when it concerns internal free trade or the movement of goods and/or people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996658</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996958</id>
	<title>Re:Well played. The noobs think they got something</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257447000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't contest speeding tickets, because it is not cost effective for most minor offenses. In my country, one has to take a whole day off work to fight a ticket and it's cheaper to just pay the damn thing plus the insurance hit.</p><p>Losing my right to an internet connection has a value to me that is much higher than a day of work. I would be guaranteed to take the trial option, and I suspect most people feel similarly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't contest speeding tickets , because it is not cost effective for most minor offenses .
In my country , one has to take a whole day off work to fight a ticket and it 's cheaper to just pay the damn thing plus the insurance hit.Losing my right to an internet connection has a value to me that is much higher than a day of work .
I would be guaranteed to take the trial option , and I suspect most people feel similarly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't contest speeding tickets, because it is not cost effective for most minor offenses.
In my country, one has to take a whole day off work to fight a ticket and it's cheaper to just pay the damn thing plus the insurance hit.Losing my right to an internet connection has a value to me that is much higher than a day of work.
I would be guaranteed to take the trial option, and I suspect most people feel similarly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996762</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30002570</id>
	<title>Re:Treaties</title>
	<author>rdnetto</author>
	<datestamp>1257434640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since ACTA is still being written, my guess is it will be updated to use loopholes in this. It would be a pretty big blow to them if every country in the EU refused to sign it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since ACTA is still being written , my guess is it will be updated to use loopholes in this .
It would be a pretty big blow to them if every country in the EU refused to sign it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since ACTA is still being written, my guess is it will be updated to use loopholes in this.
It would be a pretty big blow to them if every country in the EU refused to sign it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996762</id>
	<title>Well played. The noobs think they got something.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257446040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This compromise was reached with the votes of the Pirate Party member of the EU parliament, who touts it as "more than they had hoped for". He doesn't realize that they got <b>nothing</b>. Here's how three-strikes will be implemented: Have you ever gotten a speeding ticket? Did you pay without going to trial? Why? People will get a notification of copyright infringement, another one and a third one. Each comes with an explanation that they have the right to contest the notification. They will not contest it. After the third strike, their internet access will be cut off, and they will again have the guaranteed, irrevocable right to a fair trial before that happens. All it takes is for them to say "I didn't do it." But just like traffic violations, few will contest the charges and therefore it will be possible to actually do these trials. No more "they can't put us all in jail". The entertainment industry is only up against the few who dare to use their right to a fair trial. The rest gets the "just" punishment without so much as a hearing, and it will be perfectly in line with this "victory" for the civil liberties groups.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This compromise was reached with the votes of the Pirate Party member of the EU parliament , who touts it as " more than they had hoped for " .
He does n't realize that they got nothing .
Here 's how three-strikes will be implemented : Have you ever gotten a speeding ticket ?
Did you pay without going to trial ?
Why ? People will get a notification of copyright infringement , another one and a third one .
Each comes with an explanation that they have the right to contest the notification .
They will not contest it .
After the third strike , their internet access will be cut off , and they will again have the guaranteed , irrevocable right to a fair trial before that happens .
All it takes is for them to say " I did n't do it .
" But just like traffic violations , few will contest the charges and therefore it will be possible to actually do these trials .
No more " they ca n't put us all in jail " .
The entertainment industry is only up against the few who dare to use their right to a fair trial .
The rest gets the " just " punishment without so much as a hearing , and it will be perfectly in line with this " victory " for the civil liberties groups .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This compromise was reached with the votes of the Pirate Party member of the EU parliament, who touts it as "more than they had hoped for".
He doesn't realize that they got nothing.
Here's how three-strikes will be implemented: Have you ever gotten a speeding ticket?
Did you pay without going to trial?
Why? People will get a notification of copyright infringement, another one and a third one.
Each comes with an explanation that they have the right to contest the notification.
They will not contest it.
After the third strike, their internet access will be cut off, and they will again have the guaranteed, irrevocable right to a fair trial before that happens.
All it takes is for them to say "I didn't do it.
" But just like traffic violations, few will contest the charges and therefore it will be possible to actually do these trials.
No more "they can't put us all in jail".
The entertainment industry is only up against the few who dare to use their right to a fair trial.
The rest gets the "just" punishment without so much as a hearing, and it will be perfectly in line with this "victory" for the civil liberties groups.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997860</id>
	<title>Differing opinion.</title>
	<author>Balinares</author>
	<datestamp>1257451080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hear your point, but I beg to differ.</p><p>1/ I understand the fair hearing clause is sufficient to invalidate the horrible HADOPI law in France. In fact, I suspect it was put in there specifically for this purpose. The Sarkozy government tried to make Internet access termination automatic by hammering it into the same simplified, no-hearing judiciary subsystem that handles traffic fines, and this clause explicitly disallows that.</p><p>2/ The clause of due respect for presumption of innocence means that the onus will be on the recording industry representative to prove that it was <i>you</i> who downloaded, so suing on the basis of the IP address alone may not be sufficient anymore. The HADOPI law tried to make the owner of the account associated with the IP automatically guilty for anything that happened on that IP. This may not fly anymore.</p><p>3/ If a standard judiciary procedure is required, then it means a judge will have to decide of your sentence fairly. Making Internet termination an option, not an obligation. And judges don't tend to apply the maximal sentence without good reason. That, and French judges aren't exactly fond of the Sarkozy government, as a whole.</p><p>Now, don't you worry, I'm pretty sure that the Sarkozy government will (once <i>again</i>) rewrite their broken law to be just about as bad as the EU will let them get away with. But this is still a step up from the current state of things.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hear your point , but I beg to differ.1/ I understand the fair hearing clause is sufficient to invalidate the horrible HADOPI law in France .
In fact , I suspect it was put in there specifically for this purpose .
The Sarkozy government tried to make Internet access termination automatic by hammering it into the same simplified , no-hearing judiciary subsystem that handles traffic fines , and this clause explicitly disallows that.2/ The clause of due respect for presumption of innocence means that the onus will be on the recording industry representative to prove that it was you who downloaded , so suing on the basis of the IP address alone may not be sufficient anymore .
The HADOPI law tried to make the owner of the account associated with the IP automatically guilty for anything that happened on that IP .
This may not fly anymore.3/ If a standard judiciary procedure is required , then it means a judge will have to decide of your sentence fairly .
Making Internet termination an option , not an obligation .
And judges do n't tend to apply the maximal sentence without good reason .
That , and French judges are n't exactly fond of the Sarkozy government , as a whole.Now , do n't you worry , I 'm pretty sure that the Sarkozy government will ( once again ) rewrite their broken law to be just about as bad as the EU will let them get away with .
But this is still a step up from the current state of things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hear your point, but I beg to differ.1/ I understand the fair hearing clause is sufficient to invalidate the horrible HADOPI law in France.
In fact, I suspect it was put in there specifically for this purpose.
The Sarkozy government tried to make Internet access termination automatic by hammering it into the same simplified, no-hearing judiciary subsystem that handles traffic fines, and this clause explicitly disallows that.2/ The clause of due respect for presumption of innocence means that the onus will be on the recording industry representative to prove that it was you who downloaded, so suing on the basis of the IP address alone may not be sufficient anymore.
The HADOPI law tried to make the owner of the account associated with the IP automatically guilty for anything that happened on that IP.
This may not fly anymore.3/ If a standard judiciary procedure is required, then it means a judge will have to decide of your sentence fairly.
Making Internet termination an option, not an obligation.
And judges don't tend to apply the maximal sentence without good reason.
That, and French judges aren't exactly fond of the Sarkozy government, as a whole.Now, don't you worry, I'm pretty sure that the Sarkozy government will (once again) rewrite their broken law to be just about as bad as the EU will let them get away with.
But this is still a step up from the current state of things.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996762</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29998424</id>
	<title>Re:No great victory</title>
	<author>Dragonslicer</author>
	<datestamp>1257453360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I thought the whole idea was internet being an inalienable right that no one can take away from you?</p></div><p>So is freedom, but the government can still imprison you if you violate the law. The problem wasn't that you could have your Internet connection cut, but that it could happen completely outside the regular justice system and contrary to the principles of the justice system, especially presumption of innocence.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought the whole idea was internet being an inalienable right that no one can take away from you ? So is freedom , but the government can still imprison you if you violate the law .
The problem was n't that you could have your Internet connection cut , but that it could happen completely outside the regular justice system and contrary to the principles of the justice system , especially presumption of innocence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought the whole idea was internet being an inalienable right that no one can take away from you?So is freedom, but the government can still imprison you if you violate the law.
The problem wasn't that you could have your Internet connection cut, but that it could happen completely outside the regular justice system and contrary to the principles of the justice system, especially presumption of innocence.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996478</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30003732</id>
	<title>Re:But I thought that 3 Strikes had been kept</title>
	<author>Builder</author>
	<datestamp>1257498660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's been done is that the three strikes part has been removed from the EU directive. However, previously there was language in that directive that would forbid any country from implementing a 3 strikes law on their own (remember, the EU passes some laws, but member countries can still pass their own)</p><p>The removal of this text now makes it possible for member countries to implement their own three strikes laws.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's been done is that the three strikes part has been removed from the EU directive .
However , previously there was language in that directive that would forbid any country from implementing a 3 strikes law on their own ( remember , the EU passes some laws , but member countries can still pass their own ) The removal of this text now makes it possible for member countries to implement their own three strikes laws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's been done is that the three strikes part has been removed from the EU directive.
However, previously there was language in that directive that would forbid any country from implementing a 3 strikes law on their own (remember, the EU passes some laws, but member countries can still pass their own)The removal of this text now makes it possible for member countries to implement their own three strikes laws.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30012054</id>
	<title>Dont worry</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257521340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The French will find someway to frack it up again - they always do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The French will find someway to frack it up again - they always do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The French will find someway to frack it up again - they always do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997418</id>
	<title>Re:Well played. The noobs think they got something</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257449340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I, on the other hand, think that most people would indeed be willing to fight an accusation that could take away their internet access for the rest of their lives.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I , on the other hand , think that most people would indeed be willing to fight an accusation that could take away their internet access for the rest of their lives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I, on the other hand, think that most people would indeed be willing to fight an accusation that could take away their internet access for the rest of their lives.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996762</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996478</id>
	<title>No great victory</title>
	<author>genjix</author>
	<datestamp>1257444600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought the whole idea was internet being an inalienable right that no one can take away from you?</p><p>How's this the major victory?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought the whole idea was internet being an inalienable right that no one can take away from you ? How 's this the major victory ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought the whole idea was internet being an inalienable right that no one can take away from you?How's this the major victory?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30005068</id>
	<title>Re:Well played. The noobs think they got something</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257518880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In my country (Spain), everybody contests speeding tickets. It's done through lawyer groups who contest all your fines for between 50 and 250 per year.</p><p>More than 80\% never pay (I swear you can find the real statistic on the web).</p><p>The power of the lawyers mainly consists in taking all the thousands upon thousands of fines and sending then simultaneously throught the slowest and most complex legal path.</p><p>You can even use this personally without being a lawyer. I just contested and won 18 different 90 fines. In that case, I was not right, I just contested it in a propper way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In my country ( Spain ) , everybody contests speeding tickets .
It 's done through lawyer groups who contest all your fines for between 50 and 250 per year.More than 80 \ % never pay ( I swear you can find the real statistic on the web ) .The power of the lawyers mainly consists in taking all the thousands upon thousands of fines and sending then simultaneously throught the slowest and most complex legal path.You can even use this personally without being a lawyer .
I just contested and won 18 different 90 fines .
In that case , I was not right , I just contested it in a propper way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my country (Spain), everybody contests speeding tickets.
It's done through lawyer groups who contest all your fines for between 50 and 250 per year.More than 80\% never pay (I swear you can find the real statistic on the web).The power of the lawyers mainly consists in taking all the thousands upon thousands of fines and sending then simultaneously throught the slowest and most complex legal path.You can even use this personally without being a lawyer.
I just contested and won 18 different 90 fines.
In that case, I was not right, I just contested it in a propper way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996762</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29998748</id>
	<title>Re:European Council</title>
	<author>SwedishPenguin</author>
	<datestamp>1257411600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm afraid it's not as simple as that. While the parliament get some more areas of responsibility, it does not get to be free of the council "co-decision" procedure, and the council gets more power as well. The parliament will bend over backwards to satisfy the council just as it always has, and the council will continue to push draconian laws and will continue with their policy of complete non-transparency.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm afraid it 's not as simple as that .
While the parliament get some more areas of responsibility , it does not get to be free of the council " co-decision " procedure , and the council gets more power as well .
The parliament will bend over backwards to satisfy the council just as it always has , and the council will continue to push draconian laws and will continue with their policy of complete non-transparency .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm afraid it's not as simple as that.
While the parliament get some more areas of responsibility, it does not get to be free of the council "co-decision" procedure, and the council gets more power as well.
The parliament will bend over backwards to satisfy the council just as it always has, and the council will continue to push draconian laws and will continue with their policy of complete non-transparency.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997922</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29999002</id>
	<title>Re:Impartial?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257412680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Funny? That was Informative you insensitive clods!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Funny ?
That was Informative you insensitive clods !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Funny?
That was Informative you insensitive clods!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996694</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996590</id>
	<title>manipulation?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257445140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What about setting up people to censor them?  Disconnecting shouldn't even be an option.  Internet access is to integral to ones communication and freedom of speech.  And it can punish others who might not have offended (like other users of that computer).  Stupid law and a big loss in my book.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What about setting up people to censor them ?
Disconnecting should n't even be an option .
Internet access is to integral to ones communication and freedom of speech .
And it can punish others who might not have offended ( like other users of that computer ) .
Stupid law and a big loss in my book .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about setting up people to censor them?
Disconnecting shouldn't even be an option.
Internet access is to integral to ones communication and freedom of speech.
And it can punish others who might not have offended (like other users of that computer).
Stupid law and a big loss in my book.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30001974</id>
	<title>Re:Court System Strain</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1257428220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It doesn't guarantee you a court hearing before they disconnect you: just a "procedure".  That could be a brief review by a bureaucrat who has already made up his mind.  You get to appeal to a court, but only after you lose at the "procedure" level.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It does n't guarantee you a court hearing before they disconnect you : just a " procedure " .
That could be a brief review by a bureaucrat who has already made up his mind .
You get to appeal to a court , but only after you lose at the " procedure " level .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It doesn't guarantee you a court hearing before they disconnect you: just a "procedure".
That could be a brief review by a bureaucrat who has already made up his mind.
You get to appeal to a court, but only after you lose at the "procedure" level.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996638</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29999240</id>
	<title>Re:Well played. The noobs think they got something</title>
	<author>Husgaard</author>
	<datestamp>1257413580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
If you read <a href="http://christianengstrom.wordpress.com/" title="wordpress.com">his blog</a> [wordpress.com] (in swedish), you will know that he knows the fight isn't yet over, and that the compromise isn't the best possible solution.
</p><p>
But compare with what the Council of Ministers wanted before the compromise: They wanted to be able to cut off people from the net without any evidence of illegal activity, only accusations. Without any judicial intervention, and presuming that people are guilty until they prove their innocence (if possible).
</p><p>
This is the first major international political victory of the Pirate Party.
</p><p>
Now it is required that people are presumed innocent until proven guilty. It is required that a juridical entity rules on the matter <em>before</em> people are punished by cutting them off the net.
</p><p>
We pirates may still be on the defence, but our defence works great.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you read his blog [ wordpress.com ] ( in swedish ) , you will know that he knows the fight is n't yet over , and that the compromise is n't the best possible solution .
But compare with what the Council of Ministers wanted before the compromise : They wanted to be able to cut off people from the net without any evidence of illegal activity , only accusations .
Without any judicial intervention , and presuming that people are guilty until they prove their innocence ( if possible ) .
This is the first major international political victory of the Pirate Party .
Now it is required that people are presumed innocent until proven guilty .
It is required that a juridical entity rules on the matter before people are punished by cutting them off the net .
We pirates may still be on the defence , but our defence works great .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
If you read his blog [wordpress.com] (in swedish), you will know that he knows the fight isn't yet over, and that the compromise isn't the best possible solution.
But compare with what the Council of Ministers wanted before the compromise: They wanted to be able to cut off people from the net without any evidence of illegal activity, only accusations.
Without any judicial intervention, and presuming that people are guilty until they prove their innocence (if possible).
This is the first major international political victory of the Pirate Party.
Now it is required that people are presumed innocent until proven guilty.
It is required that a juridical entity rules on the matter before people are punished by cutting them off the net.
We pirates may still be on the defence, but our defence works great.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996762</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30006984</id>
	<title>Re:Impartial?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1257531600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmm... That would make it a very successful strategy, to use a dummy as your lawyer: A blowup doll, Bush, your dog, or just do it yourself.</p><p>As long as it's free, of course. Just bleed them dry by creating huge and expensive delays, or forcing the lawyers to bill them for reading thousands of pages of random shit. ^^<br>Anyone care to invent a pledge generator that can spit out 1000-page speeches?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmm... That would make it a very successful strategy , to use a dummy as your lawyer : A blowup doll , Bush , your dog , or just do it yourself.As long as it 's free , of course .
Just bleed them dry by creating huge and expensive delays , or forcing the lawyers to bill them for reading thousands of pages of random shit .
^ ^ Anyone care to invent a pledge generator that can spit out 1000-page speeches ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmm... That would make it a very successful strategy, to use a dummy as your lawyer: A blowup doll, Bush, your dog, or just do it yourself.As long as it's free, of course.
Just bleed them dry by creating huge and expensive delays, or forcing the lawyers to bill them for reading thousands of pages of random shit.
^^Anyone care to invent a pledge generator that can spit out 1000-page speeches?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996694</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996638</id>
	<title>Court System Strain</title>
	<author>davegravy</author>
	<datestamp>1257445380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they have to have a hearing for each case, won't this seriously bog down the court system?</p><p>Will the industry then be limited to going after only the biggest offenders?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they have to have a hearing for each case , wo n't this seriously bog down the court system ? Will the industry then be limited to going after only the biggest offenders ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they have to have a hearing for each case, won't this seriously bog down the court system?Will the industry then be limited to going after only the biggest offenders?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30002536</id>
	<title>Re:Court System Strain</title>
	<author>rdnetto</author>
	<datestamp>1257434340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If they have to have a hearing for each case, won't this seriously bog down the court system?</p><p>Will the industry then be limited to going after only the biggest offenders?</p></div><p>No, they'll just keep using blackmail and extortion, the same way they do now.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they have to have a hearing for each case , wo n't this seriously bog down the court system ? Will the industry then be limited to going after only the biggest offenders ? No , they 'll just keep using blackmail and extortion , the same way they do now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they have to have a hearing for each case, won't this seriously bog down the court system?Will the industry then be limited to going after only the biggest offenders?No, they'll just keep using blackmail and extortion, the same way they do now.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996638</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997922</id>
	<title>Re:European Council</title>
	<author>Balinares</author>
	<datestamp>1257451320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; How can these people be allowed to reign free?</p><p>The Rome treaty.</p><p>I understand the balance of power will be shifting back in favor of the Parliament when the Lisbon treaty goes into effect.</p><p>So elect your representatives wisely, good folks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; How can these people be allowed to reign free ? The Rome treaty.I understand the balance of power will be shifting back in favor of the Parliament when the Lisbon treaty goes into effect.So elect your representatives wisely , good folks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; How can these people be allowed to reign free?The Rome treaty.I understand the balance of power will be shifting back in favor of the Parliament when the Lisbon treaty goes into effect.So elect your representatives wisely, good folks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996802</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997072</id>
	<title>Re:Electricity</title>
	<author>blueg3</author>
	<datestamp>1257447540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Weren't the original 3-strikes laws for drug convictions, mandating prison time for the 3rd offense?</p><p>Probably worse than having your electricity shut off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Were n't the original 3-strikes laws for drug convictions , mandating prison time for the 3rd offense ? Probably worse than having your electricity shut off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Weren't the original 3-strikes laws for drug convictions, mandating prison time for the 3rd offense?Probably worse than having your electricity shut off.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996674</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996604</id>
	<title>Re:Impartial?</title>
	<author>MoellerPlesset2</author>
	<datestamp>1257445200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Who decides what "a prior fair and impartial procedure" is?</p></div></blockquote><p>

- The member states, when they pass the laws intended to implement this.<br>
- The member states courts, when ruling and setting precedent on those laws.<br>
- The European Court, should someone challenge whether the implementation is within the bounds of the directive.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who decides what " a prior fair and impartial procedure " is ?
- The member states , when they pass the laws intended to implement this .
- The member states courts , when ruling and setting precedent on those laws .
- The European Court , should someone challenge whether the implementation is within the bounds of the directive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who decides what "a prior fair and impartial procedure" is?
- The member states, when they pass the laws intended to implement this.
- The member states courts, when ruling and setting precedent on those laws.
- The European Court, should someone challenge whether the implementation is within the bounds of the directive.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996506</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996608</id>
	<title>Interesting....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257445200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The urgency clause means that a computer can be disconnected if it is part of an ongoing DDoS attack.</i></p><p>RIAA Lawyer: But your honour, this person's use of bittorrent is slowing down our tracker but an infinitesimal amount.  We need to shut it down.<br>Judge: No problem. Saves me the trouble of listening to more trials.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The urgency clause means that a computer can be disconnected if it is part of an ongoing DDoS attack.RIAA Lawyer : But your honour , this person 's use of bittorrent is slowing down our tracker but an infinitesimal amount .
We need to shut it down.Judge : No problem .
Saves me the trouble of listening to more trials .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The urgency clause means that a computer can be disconnected if it is part of an ongoing DDoS attack.RIAA Lawyer: But your honour, this person's use of bittorrent is slowing down our tracker but an infinitesimal amount.
We need to shut it down.Judge: No problem.
Saves me the trouble of listening to more trials.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996506</id>
	<title>Impartial?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257444780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who decides what "a prior fair and impartial procedure" is?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who decides what " a prior fair and impartial procedure " is ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who decides what "a prior fair and impartial procedure" is?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30003828</id>
	<title>Impartial? READ AGAIN:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257500940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><b>GROUPAMA was caught in a software PIRACY case of $200m<b> and has made an unofficial affidavit (claiming that it was not guilty) to divert Police investigators from the evidences officially collected one month ago at a different office.</b></b></p><p><b><b>In its affidavit, <b>GROUPAMA argued that bank secrecy entitled it to limit the scope of Police investigations</b> to a building that was not the place where evidences about the infraction were officially collected.</b></b></p><p><b><b>After the <b>Police falsification of criminal records</b> was discovered and denounced by the victim, <b>GROUPAMA managed to have the General Prosecutor of Paris to state that Police was 'right' to remove the criminal file</b> and focus only on the irrelevant information provided by GROUPAMA itself.</b></b></p><p><b><b>As a consequence, FINAMA and GROUPAMA have reported false information to the markets regarding their own accounts (where the fraud describbed below has never been reported).</b></b></p><p><b><b>This unfortunate event is more than likely to compromize the confidence ratings of French (bank and insurance) regulated markets on the proven basis that the numbers cannot be trusted.</b></b></p><p><b><b><b>It will also make it harder for EU States to pretend that leaving the law in the hands of national authorities is something that can be considered reliable.</b></b></b></p><p><b><b>All the details, including the General Prosecutor reply, the BEFTI investigation file and the unofficial affidavit cooked by GROUPAMA have been made publicly available:</b></b></p><p><b><b>http://remoteanything.com/archives/groupama.pdf</b></b></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>GROUPAMA was caught in a software PIRACY case of $ 200m and has made an unofficial affidavit ( claiming that it was not guilty ) to divert Police investigators from the evidences officially collected one month ago at a different office.In its affidavit , GROUPAMA argued that bank secrecy entitled it to limit the scope of Police investigations to a building that was not the place where evidences about the infraction were officially collected.After the Police falsification of criminal records was discovered and denounced by the victim , GROUPAMA managed to have the General Prosecutor of Paris to state that Police was 'right ' to remove the criminal file and focus only on the irrelevant information provided by GROUPAMA itself.As a consequence , FINAMA and GROUPAMA have reported false information to the markets regarding their own accounts ( where the fraud describbed below has never been reported ) .This unfortunate event is more than likely to compromize the confidence ratings of French ( bank and insurance ) regulated markets on the proven basis that the numbers can not be trusted.It will also make it harder for EU States to pretend that leaving the law in the hands of national authorities is something that can be considered reliable.All the details , including the General Prosecutor reply , the BEFTI investigation file and the unofficial affidavit cooked by GROUPAMA have been made publicly available : http : //remoteanything.com/archives/groupama.pdf</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GROUPAMA was caught in a software PIRACY case of $200m and has made an unofficial affidavit (claiming that it was not guilty) to divert Police investigators from the evidences officially collected one month ago at a different office.In its affidavit, GROUPAMA argued that bank secrecy entitled it to limit the scope of Police investigations to a building that was not the place where evidences about the infraction were officially collected.After the Police falsification of criminal records was discovered and denounced by the victim, GROUPAMA managed to have the General Prosecutor of Paris to state that Police was 'right' to remove the criminal file and focus only on the irrelevant information provided by GROUPAMA itself.As a consequence, FINAMA and GROUPAMA have reported false information to the markets regarding their own accounts (where the fraud describbed below has never been reported).This unfortunate event is more than likely to compromize the confidence ratings of French (bank and insurance) regulated markets on the proven basis that the numbers cannot be trusted.It will also make it harder for EU States to pretend that leaving the law in the hands of national authorities is something that can be considered reliable.All the details, including the General Prosecutor reply, the BEFTI investigation file and the unofficial affidavit cooked by GROUPAMA have been made publicly available:http://remoteanything.com/archives/groupama.pdf</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996506</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30001996</id>
	<title>Re:Treaties</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1257428640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Don't treaties like ACTA trump national laws?</p><p>Only to the extent that they become national laws.  In many jurisdictions treaties do not have any effect inside the country until the government enacts enabling legislation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Do n't treaties like ACTA trump national laws ? Only to the extent that they become national laws .
In many jurisdictions treaties do not have any effect inside the country until the government enacts enabling legislation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Don't treaties like ACTA trump national laws?Only to the extent that they become national laws.
In many jurisdictions treaties do not have any effect inside the country until the government enacts enabling legislation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996674</id>
	<title>Electricity</title>
	<author>Exception Duck</author>
	<datestamp>1257445560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just wandering, are there any other comparable situations where this is done,<br>if I get busted 3 times for growing mariuana, do they cut off the electricity ? or water ?</p><p>The only thing I can think of is a driving licence, but in that case, lives can be in danger... so it's not really the same thing.</p><p>Well, thank you EU, good luck rest of world fighting this nonsense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just wandering , are there any other comparable situations where this is done,if I get busted 3 times for growing mariuana , do they cut off the electricity ?
or water ? The only thing I can think of is a driving licence , but in that case , lives can be in danger... so it 's not really the same thing.Well , thank you EU , good luck rest of world fighting this nonsense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just wandering, are there any other comparable situations where this is done,if I get busted 3 times for growing mariuana, do they cut off the electricity ?
or water ?The only thing I can think of is a driving licence, but in that case, lives can be in danger... so it's not really the same thing.Well, thank you EU, good luck rest of world fighting this nonsense.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996588</id>
	<title>Re:Impartial?</title>
	<author>Mikkeles</author>
	<datestamp>1257445140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The <a href="http://www.echr.coe.int/echr/" title="coe.int">European Court of Human Rights</a> [coe.int].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The European Court of Human Rights [ coe.int ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The European Court of Human Rights [coe.int].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996506</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29999420</id>
	<title>Re:European Council</title>
	<author>Husgaard</author>
	<datestamp>1257414360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How can these people be allowed to reign free?</p></div><p>
They can't in the long run as long as democracy works.
</p><p>
Christian Engstr&#246;m was elected into the EU-Parliament because of the actions of the Swedish government.
</p><p>
And next year the Swedish government is going to loose their power, according to the polls. Their demolition of citizen's rights is probably one of the main reasons. And with a bit of luck, the Pirate Party is going to enter the Swedish parliament next year.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How can these people be allowed to reign free ?
They ca n't in the long run as long as democracy works .
Christian Engstr   m was elected into the EU-Parliament because of the actions of the Swedish government .
And next year the Swedish government is going to loose their power , according to the polls .
Their demolition of citizen 's rights is probably one of the main reasons .
And with a bit of luck , the Pirate Party is going to enter the Swedish parliament next year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How can these people be allowed to reign free?
They can't in the long run as long as democracy works.
Christian Engström was elected into the EU-Parliament because of the actions of the Swedish government.
And next year the Swedish government is going to loose their power, according to the polls.
Their demolition of citizen's rights is probably one of the main reasons.
And with a bit of luck, the Pirate Party is going to enter the Swedish parliament next year.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996802</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30000866</id>
	<title>Re:Well played. The noobs think they got something</title>
	<author>Imrik</author>
	<datestamp>1257420840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think most people are missing the point. Yes, you'll obviously contest the one that denies you internet, but if you don't contest the two before it the system essentially becomes a one strike system with the two previous counts being used as evidence to make it seem more likely that you also committed the third offense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think most people are missing the point .
Yes , you 'll obviously contest the one that denies you internet , but if you do n't contest the two before it the system essentially becomes a one strike system with the two previous counts being used as evidence to make it seem more likely that you also committed the third offense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think most people are missing the point.
Yes, you'll obviously contest the one that denies you internet, but if you don't contest the two before it the system essentially becomes a one strike system with the two previous counts being used as evidence to make it seem more likely that you also committed the third offense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996762</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996636</id>
	<title>But I thought that 3 Strikes had been kept</title>
	<author>Nyrath the nearly wi</author>
	<datestamp>1257445380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/05/telecoms\_package/" title="theregister.co.uk">http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/05/telecoms\_package/</a> [theregister.co.uk]

<p> <i>A plan by the European Parliament to restrict the power of national governments to disconnect illegal filesharers has been dumped to win agreement on new telecoms competition laws.</i>
</p><p> <i>Long-running negotiations over the EU Telecoms Package were completed last night when MEPs agreed to drop amendments that would have made internet access a fundamental right.</i>
</p><p> <i>After months of negotiations, the agreed package now demands only "appropriate, proportionate and necessary" measures can be taken to enforce copyright. There must be a possibility of judicial review for those disconnected, but not automatic court oversight.</i>
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/05/telecoms \ _package/ [ theregister.co.uk ] A plan by the European Parliament to restrict the power of national governments to disconnect illegal filesharers has been dumped to win agreement on new telecoms competition laws .
Long-running negotiations over the EU Telecoms Package were completed last night when MEPs agreed to drop amendments that would have made internet access a fundamental right .
After months of negotiations , the agreed package now demands only " appropriate , proportionate and necessary " measures can be taken to enforce copyright .
There must be a possibility of judicial review for those disconnected , but not automatic court oversight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/05/telecoms\_package/ [theregister.co.uk]

 A plan by the European Parliament to restrict the power of national governments to disconnect illegal filesharers has been dumped to win agreement on new telecoms competition laws.
Long-running negotiations over the EU Telecoms Package were completed last night when MEPs agreed to drop amendments that would have made internet access a fundamental right.
After months of negotiations, the agreed package now demands only "appropriate, proportionate and necessary" measures can be taken to enforce copyright.
There must be a possibility of judicial review for those disconnected, but not automatic court oversight.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30006950</id>
	<title>As the old rule goes:</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1257531360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The urgency clause means that a computer can be disconnected if it is part of an ongoing DDoS attack.</p></div><p>Or "That rule would never be used. It's only there for extreme emergencies. Don't worry!"<br>To which I answer with a quote:</p><p>&ldquo;Whenever a controversial law is proposed, and its supporters, when confronted with an egregious abuse it would permit, use a phrase along the lines of 'Perhaps in theory, but the law would never be applied in that way' - they're <em>lying</em>. They intend to use the law that way as early and as often as possible.&rdquo;<br>cf: DMCA, Patriot Act, Prevention of Terrorism Act (UK), Enabling Act (Weimar Germany)...<br>&mdash; <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=169254&amp;cid=14107454" title="slashdot.org">meringuoid (568297)</a> [slashdot.org] @ 2005-11-24 16:40 (<a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=169254&amp;cid=14107454" title="slashdot.org">#14107454</a> [slashdot.org])</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The urgency clause means that a computer can be disconnected if it is part of an ongoing DDoS attack.Or " That rule would never be used .
It 's only there for extreme emergencies .
Do n't worry !
" To which I answer with a quote :    Whenever a controversial law is proposed , and its supporters , when confronted with an egregious abuse it would permit , use a phrase along the lines of 'Perhaps in theory , but the law would never be applied in that way ' - they 're lying .
They intend to use the law that way as early and as often as possible.    cf : DMCA , Patriot Act , Prevention of Terrorism Act ( UK ) , Enabling Act ( Weimar Germany ) ...    meringuoid ( 568297 ) [ slashdot.org ] @ 2005-11-24 16 : 40 ( # 14107454 [ slashdot.org ] )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The urgency clause means that a computer can be disconnected if it is part of an ongoing DDoS attack.Or "That rule would never be used.
It's only there for extreme emergencies.
Don't worry!
"To which I answer with a quote:“Whenever a controversial law is proposed, and its supporters, when confronted with an egregious abuse it would permit, use a phrase along the lines of 'Perhaps in theory, but the law would never be applied in that way' - they're lying.
They intend to use the law that way as early and as often as possible.”cf: DMCA, Patriot Act, Prevention of Terrorism Act (UK), Enabling Act (Weimar Germany)...— meringuoid (568297) [slashdot.org] @ 2005-11-24 16:40 (#14107454 [slashdot.org])
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996848</id>
	<title>Re:Court System Strain</title>
	<author>MozeeToby</author>
	<datestamp>1257446400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If they have to have a hearing for each case, won't this seriously bog down the court system?</p></div><p>Tough tooties.  If 90\% of your population is criminalized as a result of legislation you pass, perhaps you should reconsider that legislation?  But that isn't what will happen.  The people this law was written for (the content holders) will kick and scream until the government agrees to 'streamline' the process.  And we'll be right back to DMCA or 3 strikes style laws.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they have to have a hearing for each case , wo n't this seriously bog down the court system ? Tough tooties .
If 90 \ % of your population is criminalized as a result of legislation you pass , perhaps you should reconsider that legislation ?
But that is n't what will happen .
The people this law was written for ( the content holders ) will kick and scream until the government agrees to 'streamline ' the process .
And we 'll be right back to DMCA or 3 strikes style laws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they have to have a hearing for each case, won't this seriously bog down the court system?Tough tooties.
If 90\% of your population is criminalized as a result of legislation you pass, perhaps you should reconsider that legislation?
But that isn't what will happen.
The people this law was written for (the content holders) will kick and scream until the government agrees to 'streamline' the process.
And we'll be right back to DMCA or 3 strikes style laws.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996638</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997352</id>
	<title>Treaties</title>
	<author>ThatsNotPudding</author>
	<datestamp>1257448920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't treaties like ACTA trump national laws?  Isn't that really the whole point of the evil that is ACTA?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't treaties like ACTA trump national laws ?
Is n't that really the whole point of the evil that is ACTA ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't treaties like ACTA trump national laws?
Isn't that really the whole point of the evil that is ACTA?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996816</id>
	<title>Re:ACTA</title>
	<author>Conchobair</author>
	<datestamp>1257446220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or this might be why they are not pushing harder for the strikes rule.  It's coming soon anyways.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or this might be why they are not pushing harder for the strikes rule .
It 's coming soon anyways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or this might be why they are not pushing harder for the strikes rule.
It's coming soon anyways.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996550</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996606</id>
	<title>a "great success?"</title>
	<author>grahamsaa</author>
	<datestamp>1257445200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>In a word, no.  I'd rather have a court determine who is or is not able to access the internet than an ISP or a copyright holder, but forced disconnection from the internet shouldn't be an option at all.  If record companies or other copyright owners want to punish someone for illegally sharing content, there are civil remedies for that.  They can sue for damages (and I mean actual damages, not ridiculously inflated damages). <br> <br>
This is not a great success.  Instead, it appears to be the beginning of a failed policy.  Let's hope that internet access is eventually considered to be a fundamental human right, because with our growing dependence on technology, it should be.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In a word , no .
I 'd rather have a court determine who is or is not able to access the internet than an ISP or a copyright holder , but forced disconnection from the internet should n't be an option at all .
If record companies or other copyright owners want to punish someone for illegally sharing content , there are civil remedies for that .
They can sue for damages ( and I mean actual damages , not ridiculously inflated damages ) .
This is not a great success .
Instead , it appears to be the beginning of a failed policy .
Let 's hope that internet access is eventually considered to be a fundamental human right , because with our growing dependence on technology , it should be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a word, no.
I'd rather have a court determine who is or is not able to access the internet than an ISP or a copyright holder, but forced disconnection from the internet shouldn't be an option at all.
If record companies or other copyright owners want to punish someone for illegally sharing content, there are civil remedies for that.
They can sue for damages (and I mean actual damages, not ridiculously inflated damages).
This is not a great success.
Instead, it appears to be the beginning of a failed policy.
Let's hope that internet access is eventually considered to be a fundamental human right, because with our growing dependence on technology, it should be.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996550</id>
	<title>ACTA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257444900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Now what happens if ACTA gets signed? According to <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/11/04/144240/Secret-Copyright-Treaty-Leaks-Its-Bad-Very-Bad?art\_pos=28" title="slashdot.org">yesterdays article</a> [slashdot.org], ACTA may be requiring some form of n-strikes law. Maybe this will prompt the european negotiators to remove the language from ACTA. Naaaaaa, that would be too sensible...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now what happens if ACTA gets signed ?
According to yesterdays article [ slashdot.org ] , ACTA may be requiring some form of n-strikes law .
Maybe this will prompt the european negotiators to remove the language from ACTA .
Naaaaaa , that would be too sensible.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now what happens if ACTA gets signed?
According to yesterdays article [slashdot.org], ACTA may be requiring some form of n-strikes law.
Maybe this will prompt the european negotiators to remove the language from ACTA.
Naaaaaa, that would be too sensible...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996658</id>
	<title>Telecom Deal Still Up for Grabs-3Strikes Possible!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257445440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Reading up a bit, I stand corrected...  its a pretty crappy deal. From <a href="http://www.laquadrature.net/en/Europe-only-goes-half-way-in-protecting-internet-rights" title="laquadrature.net">Europe only goes half-way in protecting Internet rights</a> [laquadrature.net]<p><div class="quote"><p>"However, the text only speaks of "a prior fair and impartial procedure" instead of a prior ruling by the judicial authorities, guaranteed by the original "amendment 138", and contains loopholes and ambiguities. The invalidation of freedom-killer measures such as "three strikes policies" will now depend on interpretation by the European Court of Justice and national courts. Moreover, the text only relates to measures taken by Member States and thereby fails to bar telecom operators and entertainment industries from knocking down the founding principle of Net neutrality."</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Reading up a bit , I stand corrected... its a pretty crappy deal .
From Europe only goes half-way in protecting Internet rights [ laquadrature.net ] " However , the text only speaks of " a prior fair and impartial procedure " instead of a prior ruling by the judicial authorities , guaranteed by the original " amendment 138 " , and contains loopholes and ambiguities .
The invalidation of freedom-killer measures such as " three strikes policies " will now depend on interpretation by the European Court of Justice and national courts .
Moreover , the text only relates to measures taken by Member States and thereby fails to bar telecom operators and entertainment industries from knocking down the founding principle of Net neutrality .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reading up a bit, I stand corrected...  its a pretty crappy deal.
From Europe only goes half-way in protecting Internet rights [laquadrature.net]"However, the text only speaks of "a prior fair and impartial procedure" instead of a prior ruling by the judicial authorities, guaranteed by the original "amendment 138", and contains loopholes and ambiguities.
The invalidation of freedom-killer measures such as "three strikes policies" will now depend on interpretation by the European Court of Justice and national courts.
Moreover, the text only relates to measures taken by Member States and thereby fails to bar telecom operators and entertainment industries from knocking down the founding principle of Net neutrality.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996506</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29999118</id>
	<title>Re:Electricity</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1257413100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>if I get busted 3 times for growing mariuana, do they cut off the electricity ? or water ?</i></p><p>You won't care, you'll be in prison anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if I get busted 3 times for growing mariuana , do they cut off the electricity ?
or water ? You wo n't care , you 'll be in prison anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if I get busted 3 times for growing mariuana, do they cut off the electricity ?
or water ?You won't care, you'll be in prison anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996674</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996624</id>
	<title>Re:Impartial?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257445260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Who decides what "a prior fair and impartial procedure" is?</p></div><p>Affirmative action, yo.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who decides what " a prior fair and impartial procedure " is ? Affirmative action , yo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who decides what "a prior fair and impartial procedure" is?Affirmative action, yo.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996506</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996596</id>
	<title>Re:Impartial?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257445140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Who decides what "a prior fair and impartial procedure" is?</p></div><p>If you keep disagreeing with the judges: The European Court For Human Rights in Strasbourg.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who decides what " a prior fair and impartial procedure " is ? If you keep disagreeing with the judges : The European Court For Human Rights in Strasbourg .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who decides what "a prior fair and impartial procedure" is?If you keep disagreeing with the judges: The European Court For Human Rights in Strasbourg.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996506</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996694</id>
	<title>Re:Impartial?</title>
	<author>zmollusc</author>
	<datestamp>1257445680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>According to my law guidebook "a prior fair and impartial procedure" involves an adversarial legal setup with two legal teams. Each team drains its client's bank account as fast as money transfer technology makes possible and the first client to go bankrupt loses the case.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>According to my law guidebook " a prior fair and impartial procedure " involves an adversarial legal setup with two legal teams .
Each team drains its client 's bank account as fast as money transfer technology makes possible and the first client to go bankrupt loses the case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to my law guidebook "a prior fair and impartial procedure" involves an adversarial legal setup with two legal teams.
Each team drains its client's bank account as fast as money transfer technology makes possible and the first client to go bankrupt loses the case.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996506</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30002220</id>
	<title>Re:Electricity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257431100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unlimited mobile Internet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unlimited mobile Internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unlimited mobile Internet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29999314</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30002570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997352
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30000866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997860
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996550
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29998424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996478
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30002220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29999314
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996674
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997096
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996802
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996604
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29999118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996674
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30002536
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30011950
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30003828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29999240
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30004466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29998748
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996802
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29999002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30004672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997352
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30001974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30005068
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997072
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996674
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30005388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30003732
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30006984
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29999420
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996802
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_1617220_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30001996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997352
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_1617220.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996506
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996694
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30011950
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29999002
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30006984
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996588
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996658
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30004466
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30005388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996604
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30003828
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996624
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996596
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_1617220.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996802
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29999420
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997096
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997922
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29998748
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_1617220.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996638
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30001974
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996848
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30002536
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_1617220.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996674
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29999314
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30002220
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29999118
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997072
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_1617220.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996478
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29998424
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_1617220.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996550
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996816
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_1617220.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996762
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30000866
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997772
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997860
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29999240
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30005068
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996958
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_1617220.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996606
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_1617220.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996590
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_1617220.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29997352
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30001996
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30002570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30004672
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_1617220.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996792
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_1617220.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.29996636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_1617220.30003732
</commentlist>
</conversation>
