<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_13_1310212</id>
	<title>City Laws Only Available Via $200 License</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1258120800000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>MrLint writes <i>"The City of <a href="http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=864641"> Schenectady has decided that their laws are copyrighted</a>, and that you cannot know them without paying for an 'exclusive license' for $200. This is not a first &mdash; <a href="//yro.slashdot.org/story/09/09/16/1925206/Professor-Posts-Illegal-Copy-of-Guide-To-Oregon-Public-Record-Laws">Oregon has claimed</a> publishing of laws online is a copyright violation."</i> This case is nuanced. The city has contracted with a private company to convert and encode its laws so they can be made available on the Web for free. While the company works on this project, it considers the electronic versions of the laws its property and offers a CD version, bundled with its software, for $200. The man who requested a copy of the laws plans to appeal.</htmltext>
<tokenext>MrLint writes " The City of Schenectady has decided that their laws are copyrighted , and that you can not know them without paying for an 'exclusive license ' for $ 200 .
This is not a first    Oregon has claimed publishing of laws online is a copyright violation .
" This case is nuanced .
The city has contracted with a private company to convert and encode its laws so they can be made available on the Web for free .
While the company works on this project , it considers the electronic versions of the laws its property and offers a CD version , bundled with its software , for $ 200 .
The man who requested a copy of the laws plans to appeal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MrLint writes "The City of  Schenectady has decided that their laws are copyrighted, and that you cannot know them without paying for an 'exclusive license' for $200.
This is not a first — Oregon has claimed publishing of laws online is a copyright violation.
" This case is nuanced.
The city has contracted with a private company to convert and encode its laws so they can be made available on the Web for free.
While the company works on this project, it considers the electronic versions of the laws its property and offers a CD version, bundled with its software, for $200.
The man who requested a copy of the laws plans to appeal.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30092908</id>
	<title>Vogons' argument</title>
	<author>cpghost</author>
	<datestamp>1258113180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's an official place where laws are being published and displayed, and there are unofficial <b>services</b> that duplicate those laws, so it is more convenient to check them out. The official place could be something like a well defined place in your city hall.... or in the basement of the local planning department on Alpha Centauri:<blockquote><div><p>There's no point acting all surprised about it. All the planning charts and demolition orders have been on display in your local planning department in Alpha Centauri for fifty of your Earth years, so you've had plenty of time to lodge any formal complaint and it's far too late to start making a fuss about it now.</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's an official place where laws are being published and displayed , and there are unofficial services that duplicate those laws , so it is more convenient to check them out .
The official place could be something like a well defined place in your city hall.... or in the basement of the local planning department on Alpha Centauri : There 's no point acting all surprised about it .
All the planning charts and demolition orders have been on display in your local planning department in Alpha Centauri for fifty of your Earth years , so you 've had plenty of time to lodge any formal complaint and it 's far too late to start making a fuss about it now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's an official place where laws are being published and displayed, and there are unofficial services that duplicate those laws, so it is more convenient to check them out.
The official place could be something like a well defined place in your city hall.... or in the basement of the local planning department on Alpha Centauri:There's no point acting all surprised about it.
All the planning charts and demolition orders have been on display in your local planning department in Alpha Centauri for fifty of your Earth years, so you've had plenty of time to lodge any formal complaint and it's far too late to start making a fuss about it now.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086426</id>
	<title>Re:Outrageous</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1258126260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't doubt that there are a fair few superfluous laws on the books(in that city, and generally), and that unnecessary complexity is a major vice; but I suspect that most of the actual thickness is contributed by things like building codes.<br> <br>

Even in a hypothetical libertarian utopia where the state handles nothing but defense and the bare outlines of criminal law, you are going to end up with some <i>very</i> lengthy laws, either directly or by reference. For instance, "due process" is pithy; but what it actually means, once you get to the level of court procedure, access to lawyers, details of how one can/cannot be detained and under what circumstances, etc, etc. would be hard to encapsulate in under book length. You could keep the law code itself short by simply refusing to go into detail and handwaving, or by referring to outside codes of practice; but that doesn't really help. If you do the first, you don't really have a rule of law at all. If you do the second, you simply have a very long code of laws that is split up among numerous documents, with your actual "law code" serving as little more than an index.<br> <br>

Once you get into the realm of things like building codes, which are necessarily pretty technical, this problem just becomes greater.<br> <br>

This is not to say that complexity is good(it isn't, one should always strive for Einstein's "simple as possible; but no simpler"); but it does mean that you have to be careful to distinguish between unnecessary and invidious complexity, and necessary complexity. It's like the use of technical jargon. People complain, often rightly, that it is used to confuse and intimidate laymen and keep them from questioning experts; but there are plenty of things that are simply <i>complex</i> and cannot be usefully simplified without distortion.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't doubt that there are a fair few superfluous laws on the books ( in that city , and generally ) , and that unnecessary complexity is a major vice ; but I suspect that most of the actual thickness is contributed by things like building codes .
Even in a hypothetical libertarian utopia where the state handles nothing but defense and the bare outlines of criminal law , you are going to end up with some very lengthy laws , either directly or by reference .
For instance , " due process " is pithy ; but what it actually means , once you get to the level of court procedure , access to lawyers , details of how one can/can not be detained and under what circumstances , etc , etc .
would be hard to encapsulate in under book length .
You could keep the law code itself short by simply refusing to go into detail and handwaving , or by referring to outside codes of practice ; but that does n't really help .
If you do the first , you do n't really have a rule of law at all .
If you do the second , you simply have a very long code of laws that is split up among numerous documents , with your actual " law code " serving as little more than an index .
Once you get into the realm of things like building codes , which are necessarily pretty technical , this problem just becomes greater .
This is not to say that complexity is good ( it is n't , one should always strive for Einstein 's " simple as possible ; but no simpler " ) ; but it does mean that you have to be careful to distinguish between unnecessary and invidious complexity , and necessary complexity .
It 's like the use of technical jargon .
People complain , often rightly , that it is used to confuse and intimidate laymen and keep them from questioning experts ; but there are plenty of things that are simply complex and can not be usefully simplified without distortion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't doubt that there are a fair few superfluous laws on the books(in that city, and generally), and that unnecessary complexity is a major vice; but I suspect that most of the actual thickness is contributed by things like building codes.
Even in a hypothetical libertarian utopia where the state handles nothing but defense and the bare outlines of criminal law, you are going to end up with some very lengthy laws, either directly or by reference.
For instance, "due process" is pithy; but what it actually means, once you get to the level of court procedure, access to lawyers, details of how one can/cannot be detained and under what circumstances, etc, etc.
would be hard to encapsulate in under book length.
You could keep the law code itself short by simply refusing to go into detail and handwaving, or by referring to outside codes of practice; but that doesn't really help.
If you do the first, you don't really have a rule of law at all.
If you do the second, you simply have a very long code of laws that is split up among numerous documents, with your actual "law code" serving as little more than an index.
Once you get into the realm of things like building codes, which are necessarily pretty technical, this problem just becomes greater.
This is not to say that complexity is good(it isn't, one should always strive for Einstein's "simple as possible; but no simpler"); but it does mean that you have to be careful to distinguish between unnecessary and invidious complexity, and necessary complexity.
It's like the use of technical jargon.
People complain, often rightly, that it is used to confuse and intimidate laymen and keep them from questioning experts; but there are plenty of things that are simply complex and cannot be usefully simplified without distortion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086462</id>
	<title>Re:New form of taxes!</title>
	<author>bleh-of-the-huns</author>
	<datestamp>1258126380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You could have easily appealed that.  There is a huge difference between ignorance of the law, and being psychic and knowing they had tried to notify you.</p><p>When you sent the ticket in, with your correct address, you met your obligations with regards to that ticket.  It is up to the courts and police to notify you at the correct address.  No reasonable judge or court system could expect an individual who never received notification, because the courts sent the information to the incorrect address to realize they had a suspended license (or for any other legal matter).</p><p>I was also charged with driving on a suspended license in VA, and I made a deal with the prosecutor prior to ever seeing the judge, and I also had no idea that my license was suspended.  The difference is, they did notify me at the correct address, however at some point VA stopped using certified mail that require an signature of receipt when sending out suspension notices, and started using normal mail, I just had not gotten around to opening it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You could have easily appealed that .
There is a huge difference between ignorance of the law , and being psychic and knowing they had tried to notify you.When you sent the ticket in , with your correct address , you met your obligations with regards to that ticket .
It is up to the courts and police to notify you at the correct address .
No reasonable judge or court system could expect an individual who never received notification , because the courts sent the information to the incorrect address to realize they had a suspended license ( or for any other legal matter ) .I was also charged with driving on a suspended license in VA , and I made a deal with the prosecutor prior to ever seeing the judge , and I also had no idea that my license was suspended .
The difference is , they did notify me at the correct address , however at some point VA stopped using certified mail that require an signature of receipt when sending out suspension notices , and started using normal mail , I just had not gotten around to opening it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You could have easily appealed that.
There is a huge difference between ignorance of the law, and being psychic and knowing they had tried to notify you.When you sent the ticket in, with your correct address, you met your obligations with regards to that ticket.
It is up to the courts and police to notify you at the correct address.
No reasonable judge or court system could expect an individual who never received notification, because the courts sent the information to the incorrect address to realize they had a suspended license (or for any other legal matter).I was also charged with driving on a suspended license in VA, and I made a deal with the prosecutor prior to ever seeing the judge, and I also had no idea that my license was suspended.
The difference is, they did notify me at the correct address, however at some point VA stopped using certified mail that require an signature of receipt when sending out suspension notices, and started using normal mail, I just had not gotten around to opening it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30092076</id>
	<title>What?</title>
	<author>clint999</author>
	<datestamp>1258108200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>At some point, most people would have had a "huh... what happened to that ticket" thing pop up in their brains, prompting action.</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>At some point , most people would have had a " huh... what happened to that ticket " thing pop up in their brains , prompting action .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At some point, most people would have had a "huh... what happened to that ticket" thing pop up in their brains, prompting action.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30089282</id>
	<title>Perfect Defense Strategy (IANAL)</title>
	<author>rootednoob</author>
	<datestamp>1258139340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Judge: How do to you plee to the charge of violating City Code 19353.b?
Defendant: Can I see a copy of your license?
Judge: My license for what?
Defendant: Your license to publicly display, use, or reference copyrighted materials, in this case the City Code.
Judge: Of course not. Why would I need a license? There Public Laws.
Defendant: But they are copyright none the less. As a constituant governed by these laws, I co-own these laws and unless you provide me with a copy of you license for public display, I'm going to have to issue you a take DMCA Takedown notice...
Judge: You're in contempt of court!!!
Defendant: Unfortunately, your honor, the procedures that govern 'contempt of court' are also Copyrighted, I'm afraid I'll have to issue another DMCA notice. Furthermore, your flagrant disregard for copyright law is a clear indication of Judaical incompetence, and grounds for a mistrial....</htmltext>
<tokenext>Judge : How do to you plee to the charge of violating City Code 19353.b ?
Defendant : Can I see a copy of your license ?
Judge : My license for what ?
Defendant : Your license to publicly display , use , or reference copyrighted materials , in this case the City Code .
Judge : Of course not .
Why would I need a license ?
There Public Laws .
Defendant : But they are copyright none the less .
As a constituant governed by these laws , I co-own these laws and unless you provide me with a copy of you license for public display , I 'm going to have to issue you a take DMCA Takedown notice.. . Judge : You 're in contempt of court ! ! !
Defendant : Unfortunately , your honor , the procedures that govern 'contempt of court ' are also Copyrighted , I 'm afraid I 'll have to issue another DMCA notice .
Furthermore , your flagrant disregard for copyright law is a clear indication of Judaical incompetence , and grounds for a mistrial... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Judge: How do to you plee to the charge of violating City Code 19353.b?
Defendant: Can I see a copy of your license?
Judge: My license for what?
Defendant: Your license to publicly display, use, or reference copyrighted materials, in this case the City Code.
Judge: Of course not.
Why would I need a license?
There Public Laws.
Defendant: But they are copyright none the less.
As a constituant governed by these laws, I co-own these laws and unless you provide me with a copy of you license for public display, I'm going to have to issue you a take DMCA Takedown notice...
Judge: You're in contempt of court!!!
Defendant: Unfortunately, your honor, the procedures that govern 'contempt of court' are also Copyrighted, I'm afraid I'll have to issue another DMCA notice.
Furthermore, your flagrant disregard for copyright law is a clear indication of Judaical incompetence, and grounds for a mistrial....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30092252</id>
	<title>Re:To forestall the anti-government ranters . . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258109160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Go Internet Texoma!  Woo Peter Veeck!  Woo Larry Vaden!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Go Internet Texoma !
Woo Peter Veeck !
Woo Larry Vaden !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Go Internet Texoma!
Woo Peter Veeck!
Woo Larry Vaden!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238</id>
	<title>Do people on a jury have to pay $200 as well?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258125300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do people on a jury have to pay $200 as well? As it can be real hard to be on a jury and not know the law.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do people on a jury have to pay $ 200 as well ?
As it can be real hard to be on a jury and not know the law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do people on a jury have to pay $200 as well?
As it can be real hard to be on a jury and not know the law.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086838</id>
	<title>The law isn't subject to copyright.</title>
	<author>FellowConspirator</author>
	<datestamp>1258128120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The law isn't subject to copyright as it's merely a collection of facts (the laws themselves), not a creative work as understood by copyright law. That's aside and apart from the fact that text of the laws are legally public records. The town is not only obligated to produce them on demand, but can be compelled to provide a reproduction of them by FOIA request (unless they plan to go to court and claim that they can't comply on national security grounds). Granted, they can charge you their cost in reproducing anything beyond the first 50 pages you request, but they can't charge you more.</p><p>If it's on CD, that's great. The cost of a CD-R is less than $1 -- that sounds reasonable to me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The law is n't subject to copyright as it 's merely a collection of facts ( the laws themselves ) , not a creative work as understood by copyright law .
That 's aside and apart from the fact that text of the laws are legally public records .
The town is not only obligated to produce them on demand , but can be compelled to provide a reproduction of them by FOIA request ( unless they plan to go to court and claim that they ca n't comply on national security grounds ) .
Granted , they can charge you their cost in reproducing anything beyond the first 50 pages you request , but they ca n't charge you more.If it 's on CD , that 's great .
The cost of a CD-R is less than $ 1 -- that sounds reasonable to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The law isn't subject to copyright as it's merely a collection of facts (the laws themselves), not a creative work as understood by copyright law.
That's aside and apart from the fact that text of the laws are legally public records.
The town is not only obligated to produce them on demand, but can be compelled to provide a reproduction of them by FOIA request (unless they plan to go to court and claim that they can't comply on national security grounds).
Granted, they can charge you their cost in reproducing anything beyond the first 50 pages you request, but they can't charge you more.If it's on CD, that's great.
The cost of a CD-R is less than $1 -- that sounds reasonable to me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30091434</id>
	<title>Nuanced?</title>
	<author>slave\_to\_coffee</author>
	<datestamp>1258104780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What exactly is nuanced about this? A corrupt public servant and a private company collude to charge taxpayers $200 to view something that very clearly should be freely available. This is corrupt in a very un-nuanced way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What exactly is nuanced about this ?
A corrupt public servant and a private company collude to charge taxpayers $ 200 to view something that very clearly should be freely available .
This is corrupt in a very un-nuanced way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What exactly is nuanced about this?
A corrupt public servant and a private company collude to charge taxpayers $200 to view something that very clearly should be freely available.
This is corrupt in a very un-nuanced way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088158</id>
	<title>Re:Outrageous</title>
	<author>bws111</author>
	<datestamp>1258134420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do you want the food you eat to be safe?  Do you want to go into a building and be reasonably sure that it isn't going to collapse, and if there is a fire you can get out?  Do you want your landlord to be able to turn off your heat in the middle of winter?  Do you want your local gas station to be able to charge you for a gallon of gas but only give you<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.9 gal?  Do you want the street in front of your house to have drag races?  Do you want your neighbor to open a public bar in his living room?  All those things are determined by laws.  Only a very few local laws apply to individual citizens, and they are for the most part obvious; pay your taxes, don't build without a permit, generally be a good neighbor.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you want the food you eat to be safe ?
Do you want to go into a building and be reasonably sure that it is n't going to collapse , and if there is a fire you can get out ?
Do you want your landlord to be able to turn off your heat in the middle of winter ?
Do you want your local gas station to be able to charge you for a gallon of gas but only give you .9 gal ?
Do you want the street in front of your house to have drag races ?
Do you want your neighbor to open a public bar in his living room ?
All those things are determined by laws .
Only a very few local laws apply to individual citizens , and they are for the most part obvious ; pay your taxes , do n't build without a permit , generally be a good neighbor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you want the food you eat to be safe?
Do you want to go into a building and be reasonably sure that it isn't going to collapse, and if there is a fire you can get out?
Do you want your landlord to be able to turn off your heat in the middle of winter?
Do you want your local gas station to be able to charge you for a gallon of gas but only give you .9 gal?
Do you want the street in front of your house to have drag races?
Do you want your neighbor to open a public bar in his living room?
All those things are determined by laws.
Only a very few local laws apply to individual citizens, and they are for the most part obvious; pay your taxes, don't build without a permit, generally be a good neighbor.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086814</id>
	<title>Re:Outrageous</title>
	<author>brianber</author>
	<datestamp>1258127940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>How the hell is anyone supposed to avoid being a criminal when there are books and books of laws one has to obey?<br></i></p><p>And you have cut to the crux of the matter. The government has little to no means of controlling a law abiding citizen, but as soon as we all become criminals they can do almost anything to us.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How the hell is anyone supposed to avoid being a criminal when there are books and books of laws one has to obey ? And you have cut to the crux of the matter .
The government has little to no means of controlling a law abiding citizen , but as soon as we all become criminals they can do almost anything to us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How the hell is anyone supposed to avoid being a criminal when there are books and books of laws one has to obey?And you have cut to the crux of the matter.
The government has little to no means of controlling a law abiding citizen, but as soon as we all become criminals they can do almost anything to us.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086228</id>
	<title>How is that the case?</title>
	<author>Overzeetop</author>
	<datestamp>1258125240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I publish a book in CD form, I don't create a new, copyrightable work. I might have the copyright on the software reader, but the work itself belongs to the original author (presumably the city council, and normally public domain), not the transcriber. They might require you purchase their $200 reader, and give you the law text for free. They could also charge you a "convenience fee" for delivering the content in a mroe useful form, provided they are licensed to do so (which would be the case for a public domain work). It sounds like they're claiming copyright on the law, which is generally frowned upon as is disallowing citizens to read the law without going though a third party.</p><p>Don't law offices generally pay for annual versions of the local law, all neatly printed and bound so that the conference room bookshelves look nice?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I publish a book in CD form , I do n't create a new , copyrightable work .
I might have the copyright on the software reader , but the work itself belongs to the original author ( presumably the city council , and normally public domain ) , not the transcriber .
They might require you purchase their $ 200 reader , and give you the law text for free .
They could also charge you a " convenience fee " for delivering the content in a mroe useful form , provided they are licensed to do so ( which would be the case for a public domain work ) .
It sounds like they 're claiming copyright on the law , which is generally frowned upon as is disallowing citizens to read the law without going though a third party.Do n't law offices generally pay for annual versions of the local law , all neatly printed and bound so that the conference room bookshelves look nice ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I publish a book in CD form, I don't create a new, copyrightable work.
I might have the copyright on the software reader, but the work itself belongs to the original author (presumably the city council, and normally public domain), not the transcriber.
They might require you purchase their $200 reader, and give you the law text for free.
They could also charge you a "convenience fee" for delivering the content in a mroe useful form, provided they are licensed to do so (which would be the case for a public domain work).
It sounds like they're claiming copyright on the law, which is generally frowned upon as is disallowing citizens to read the law without going though a third party.Don't law offices generally pay for annual versions of the local law, all neatly printed and bound so that the conference room bookshelves look nice?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087712</id>
	<title>Building Codes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258132440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is really nothing new. Any municipal/state/county ordinance that incorporates the various building codes (eg. UBC) by reference are essentially doing the same thing. Without paying hundreds of dollars, you have no reasonable access to the laws you need to follow in order to build or modify a building.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is really nothing new .
Any municipal/state/county ordinance that incorporates the various building codes ( eg .
UBC ) by reference are essentially doing the same thing .
Without paying hundreds of dollars , you have no reasonable access to the laws you need to follow in order to build or modify a building .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is really nothing new.
Any municipal/state/county ordinance that incorporates the various building codes (eg.
UBC) by reference are essentially doing the same thing.
Without paying hundreds of dollars, you have no reasonable access to the laws you need to follow in order to build or modify a building.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086528</id>
	<title>Re:New form of taxes!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258126620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Question:  Did you hire a lawyer?</p><p>If not, that was your problem.  A lawyer could have taken that same situation and made it stick.</p><p>At least on appeal anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Question : Did you hire a lawyer ? If not , that was your problem .
A lawyer could have taken that same situation and made it stick.At least on appeal anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Question:  Did you hire a lawyer?If not, that was your problem.
A lawyer could have taken that same situation and made it stick.At least on appeal anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086556</id>
	<title>It came from Schenectady</title>
	<author>Mathinker</author>
	<datestamp>1258126740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry\_Longyear#Short\_story\_collections" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">It came from Schenectady</a> [wikipedia.org] (buyable from Amazon)</p><p>(I think it was Longyear who, when asked from where he got all the ideas for his science fiction stories, replied that he would send money to a P.O. box in Schenectady and that the ideas got sent to him by reply mail.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It came from Schenectady [ wikipedia.org ] ( buyable from Amazon ) ( I think it was Longyear who , when asked from where he got all the ideas for his science fiction stories , replied that he would send money to a P.O .
box in Schenectady and that the ideas got sent to him by reply mail .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It came from Schenectady [wikipedia.org] (buyable from Amazon)(I think it was Longyear who, when asked from where he got all the ideas for his science fiction stories, replied that he would send money to a P.O.
box in Schenectady and that the ideas got sent to him by reply mail.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087468</id>
	<title>Re:To forestall the anti-government ranters . . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258131120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even if it could be subject to copyright, it would constitute a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work\_for\_hire" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Work for Hire</a> [wikipedia.org], wouldn't it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if it could be subject to copyright , it would constitute a Work for Hire [ wikipedia.org ] , would n't it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if it could be subject to copyright, it would constitute a Work for Hire [wikipedia.org], wouldn't it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30090616</id>
	<title>Ignorance of fact, strict liability, and the DMV.</title>
	<author>Valdrax</author>
	<datestamp>1258144320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Up-front note:  IANAL, I have no intention of becoming a traffic lawyer, and the thrust of this post is that you need to talk to one if you're in this kind of situation.</p><p>Actually, ignorance of fact is only a defense if a violation or crime has some mental state (mens rea) requirement and your ignorance negates that requirement.  (e.g. "Knowingly," "with intent to," etc.)  Most traffic violations are <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict\_liability\_(criminal)" title="wikipedia.org">strict liability offenses</a> [wikipedia.org], and your ignorance of the facts would be irrelevant.</p><p>Improper notice is a possible argument, but that's going to depend largely on your jurisdiction, and you <em>will</em> need an attorney to navigate these issues.  (It's probably way too late for the original poster here, but FYI for everyone else.)</p><p>Generally speaking, if the DMV sent it to the address that's on file and didn't get it returned in the mail, the court is going to side with the prosecution.  You have a responsibility under law in most states to notify the DMV if you move <em>precisely</em> to prevent this sort of thing from happening.  If the DMV doesn't have a current address on file, and a court notice or ticket goes missing in the mail, then <em>that is your fault</em>.</p><p>So keep those records up to date, and always call the state bar to do a cheap phone consultation with an attorney to make sure you know the law, even if you can't afford to have the attorney represent you in court.  If you're up against a statute that may result in a jail sentence (as is the case with driving with a suspended license in many jurisdictions), you want to know ahead of time, and you don't want to show up in a court room with a head full of misconceptions about the law and wind up in jail.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Up-front note : IANAL , I have no intention of becoming a traffic lawyer , and the thrust of this post is that you need to talk to one if you 're in this kind of situation.Actually , ignorance of fact is only a defense if a violation or crime has some mental state ( mens rea ) requirement and your ignorance negates that requirement .
( e.g. " Knowingly , " " with intent to , " etc .
) Most traffic violations are strict liability offenses [ wikipedia.org ] , and your ignorance of the facts would be irrelevant.Improper notice is a possible argument , but that 's going to depend largely on your jurisdiction , and you will need an attorney to navigate these issues .
( It 's probably way too late for the original poster here , but FYI for everyone else .
) Generally speaking , if the DMV sent it to the address that 's on file and did n't get it returned in the mail , the court is going to side with the prosecution .
You have a responsibility under law in most states to notify the DMV if you move precisely to prevent this sort of thing from happening .
If the DMV does n't have a current address on file , and a court notice or ticket goes missing in the mail , then that is your fault.So keep those records up to date , and always call the state bar to do a cheap phone consultation with an attorney to make sure you know the law , even if you ca n't afford to have the attorney represent you in court .
If you 're up against a statute that may result in a jail sentence ( as is the case with driving with a suspended license in many jurisdictions ) , you want to know ahead of time , and you do n't want to show up in a court room with a head full of misconceptions about the law and wind up in jail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Up-front note:  IANAL, I have no intention of becoming a traffic lawyer, and the thrust of this post is that you need to talk to one if you're in this kind of situation.Actually, ignorance of fact is only a defense if a violation or crime has some mental state (mens rea) requirement and your ignorance negates that requirement.
(e.g. "Knowingly," "with intent to," etc.
)  Most traffic violations are strict liability offenses [wikipedia.org], and your ignorance of the facts would be irrelevant.Improper notice is a possible argument, but that's going to depend largely on your jurisdiction, and you will need an attorney to navigate these issues.
(It's probably way too late for the original poster here, but FYI for everyone else.
)Generally speaking, if the DMV sent it to the address that's on file and didn't get it returned in the mail, the court is going to side with the prosecution.
You have a responsibility under law in most states to notify the DMV if you move precisely to prevent this sort of thing from happening.
If the DMV doesn't have a current address on file, and a court notice or ticket goes missing in the mail, then that is your fault.So keep those records up to date, and always call the state bar to do a cheap phone consultation with an attorney to make sure you know the law, even if you can't afford to have the attorney represent you in court.
If you're up against a statute that may result in a jail sentence (as is the case with driving with a suspended license in many jurisdictions), you want to know ahead of time, and you don't want to show up in a court room with a head full of misconceptions about the law and wind up in jail.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086578</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086336</id>
	<title>Best quality, Best reputation , Best services</title>
	<author>coolforsale91</author>
	<datestamp>1258125720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you want to have a warm winter,you have to know Ugg boots.Ugg boots are &ldquo;must have &rdquo; nike air max jordan<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,shoes, caoch,gucci,lv,dg, ed hardy handbags in the winter.Now here is an
onlinestore , discount 30\%-50\% off,free shipping, you may take a look, you may find the UGGS you want here.http://www.coolforsale.com
thanks...</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to have a warm winter,you have to know Ugg boots.Ugg boots are    must have    nike air max jordan ,shoes , caoch,gucci,lv,dg , ed hardy handbags in the winter.Now here is an onlinestore , discount 30 \ % -50 \ % off,free shipping , you may take a look , you may find the UGGS you want here.http : //www.coolforsale.com thanks.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to have a warm winter,you have to know Ugg boots.Ugg boots are “must have ” nike air max jordan ,shoes, caoch,gucci,lv,dg, ed hardy handbags in the winter.Now here is an
onlinestore , discount 30\%-50\% off,free shipping, you may take a look, you may find the UGGS you want here.http://www.coolforsale.com
thanks...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086532</id>
	<title>A big step (3700 years) backwards</title>
	<author>Palestrina</author>
	<datestamp>1258126620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Even King Hammurabi got it better than this.  At least he ensured <a href="http://www.robweir.com/blog/2008/01/brief-history-of-open.html" title="robweir.com">the laws were open to all</a> [robweir.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even King Hammurabi got it better than this .
At least he ensured the laws were open to all [ robweir.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even King Hammurabi got it better than this.
At least he ensured the laws were open to all [robweir.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086862</id>
	<title>Re:Schenectady is dying...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258128240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have friends that used to work at G.E.</p><p>Schenectady started laying huge assessments on some of their plant buildings, in an effort to drive up their taxes.  G.E. said "That building over there? And the other one over there? Oh, we're demolishing them, they're no longer in use." Then they knocked them down and planted grass.</p><p>This supposedly went on for a while. Numerous buildings were torn down to avoid the ridiculous assessments Schenectady was trying to lay down.</p><p>Finally, G.E. got fed up and pulled out.  They still have a building or two over there, but their operations have been drastically reduced.</p><p>The town itself is a ghost town now.  Everyone who could leave left.</p><p>I guess the big thing there now is "Home Invasion". Scary place, Schenectady.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have friends that used to work at G.E.Schenectady started laying huge assessments on some of their plant buildings , in an effort to drive up their taxes .
G.E. said " That building over there ?
And the other one over there ?
Oh , we 're demolishing them , they 're no longer in use .
" Then they knocked them down and planted grass.This supposedly went on for a while .
Numerous buildings were torn down to avoid the ridiculous assessments Schenectady was trying to lay down.Finally , G.E .
got fed up and pulled out .
They still have a building or two over there , but their operations have been drastically reduced.The town itself is a ghost town now .
Everyone who could leave left.I guess the big thing there now is " Home Invasion " .
Scary place , Schenectady .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have friends that used to work at G.E.Schenectady started laying huge assessments on some of their plant buildings, in an effort to drive up their taxes.
G.E. said "That building over there?
And the other one over there?
Oh, we're demolishing them, they're no longer in use.
" Then they knocked them down and planted grass.This supposedly went on for a while.
Numerous buildings were torn down to avoid the ridiculous assessments Schenectady was trying to lay down.Finally, G.E.
got fed up and pulled out.
They still have a building or two over there, but their operations have been drastically reduced.The town itself is a ghost town now.
Everyone who could leave left.I guess the big thing there now is "Home Invasion".
Scary place, Schenectady.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086292</id>
	<title>Summary</title>
	<author>MarkvW</author>
	<datestamp>1258125600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>TFA reports that the code is available in multiple public locations.  The citizen can make copies of the ordinances from those sources.</p><p>That the city code is a twisted mess is no big surprise.  A lot of municipalities have that problem.</p><p>The assertion of copyright is stupid, just stupid.  The morons will soon realize that they have to retreat from that lunatic undemocratic position or they will be sued under New York's FOIA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>TFA reports that the code is available in multiple public locations .
The citizen can make copies of the ordinances from those sources.That the city code is a twisted mess is no big surprise .
A lot of municipalities have that problem.The assertion of copyright is stupid , just stupid .
The morons will soon realize that they have to retreat from that lunatic undemocratic position or they will be sued under New York 's FOIA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TFA reports that the code is available in multiple public locations.
The citizen can make copies of the ordinances from those sources.That the city code is a twisted mess is no big surprise.
A lot of municipalities have that problem.The assertion of copyright is stupid, just stupid.
The morons will soon realize that they have to retreat from that lunatic undemocratic position or they will be sued under New York's FOIA.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214</id>
	<title>Outrageous</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1258125180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As I was reading TFA there was another thing I saw that outraiged me besides the ludicrous copyrighting of laws.</p><blockquote><div><p>Eiss dropped by City Hall a couple of weeks ago and asked for a copy of the city code, a two-part document that includes the City Charter and the administrative code, a full set of local ordinances governing everything from building inspections to waste disposal.</p><p>Because it's voluminous -- the paper version fills two thick, black, 3-ring binders, says Corporation Counsel L. John Van Norden -- Eiss asked for it in electronic format, probably a disk.</p></div></blockquote><p>Why does a city's laws and codes have to be two fat binders? Perhaps I'm making a wrong assumption (or just have my head up my ass; I'm on my first cup of coffee this morning), but a thick binder where I work is about four inches thick.</p><p>Why so many codes and regulations? And not only does one have to obey these laws, but there are the state and Federal laws you have to abide by as well.</p><p>How the hell is anyone supposed to avoid being a criminal when there are books and books of laws one has to obey?</p><p>I'd like to see a new federal law that says all laws, codes, and ordinances expire after a period of ten years, after which time lawmakers can re-enact those laws if they deem necessary. We have WAY too many laws.</p><p>And I'd like to see the next copyright revision state plainly and emphatically that no government can copyright anything whatever.</p><p>Someone please violate this city's bogus copyright and get the laws on the internet. And publically shame the city and its leaders for their insanity. I know if I lived in Schenectady I'd be voting against the incumbants (of course, I usually do here anyway).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As I was reading TFA there was another thing I saw that outraiged me besides the ludicrous copyrighting of laws.Eiss dropped by City Hall a couple of weeks ago and asked for a copy of the city code , a two-part document that includes the City Charter and the administrative code , a full set of local ordinances governing everything from building inspections to waste disposal.Because it 's voluminous -- the paper version fills two thick , black , 3-ring binders , says Corporation Counsel L. John Van Norden -- Eiss asked for it in electronic format , probably a disk.Why does a city 's laws and codes have to be two fat binders ?
Perhaps I 'm making a wrong assumption ( or just have my head up my ass ; I 'm on my first cup of coffee this morning ) , but a thick binder where I work is about four inches thick.Why so many codes and regulations ?
And not only does one have to obey these laws , but there are the state and Federal laws you have to abide by as well.How the hell is anyone supposed to avoid being a criminal when there are books and books of laws one has to obey ? I 'd like to see a new federal law that says all laws , codes , and ordinances expire after a period of ten years , after which time lawmakers can re-enact those laws if they deem necessary .
We have WAY too many laws.And I 'd like to see the next copyright revision state plainly and emphatically that no government can copyright anything whatever.Someone please violate this city 's bogus copyright and get the laws on the internet .
And publically shame the city and its leaders for their insanity .
I know if I lived in Schenectady I 'd be voting against the incumbants ( of course , I usually do here anyway ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As I was reading TFA there was another thing I saw that outraiged me besides the ludicrous copyrighting of laws.Eiss dropped by City Hall a couple of weeks ago and asked for a copy of the city code, a two-part document that includes the City Charter and the administrative code, a full set of local ordinances governing everything from building inspections to waste disposal.Because it's voluminous -- the paper version fills two thick, black, 3-ring binders, says Corporation Counsel L. John Van Norden -- Eiss asked for it in electronic format, probably a disk.Why does a city's laws and codes have to be two fat binders?
Perhaps I'm making a wrong assumption (or just have my head up my ass; I'm on my first cup of coffee this morning), but a thick binder where I work is about four inches thick.Why so many codes and regulations?
And not only does one have to obey these laws, but there are the state and Federal laws you have to abide by as well.How the hell is anyone supposed to avoid being a criminal when there are books and books of laws one has to obey?I'd like to see a new federal law that says all laws, codes, and ordinances expire after a period of ten years, after which time lawmakers can re-enact those laws if they deem necessary.
We have WAY too many laws.And I'd like to see the next copyright revision state plainly and emphatically that no government can copyright anything whatever.Someone please violate this city's bogus copyright and get the laws on the internet.
And publically shame the city and its leaders for their insanity.
I know if I lived in Schenectady I'd be voting against the incumbants (of course, I usually do here anyway).
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086400</id>
	<title>No need to overreact</title>
	<author>7-Vodka</author>
	<datestamp>1258126140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This isn't a big conspiracy. This is city government. If you've ever been to a small city governmental meeting you know that the proportion of complete idiots pontificating over each other is quite high.<br>
In this case the majority of people in the room when this was decided were that kind of people.<p>
Give it a little bit and their asses are gonna be toast in court and they're going to realize that they can't rule over the city folk like dictators. Unfortunately they will never realize the real magnitude of their stupidity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is n't a big conspiracy .
This is city government .
If you 've ever been to a small city governmental meeting you know that the proportion of complete idiots pontificating over each other is quite high .
In this case the majority of people in the room when this was decided were that kind of people .
Give it a little bit and their asses are gon na be toast in court and they 're going to realize that they ca n't rule over the city folk like dictators .
Unfortunately they will never realize the real magnitude of their stupidity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This isn't a big conspiracy.
This is city government.
If you've ever been to a small city governmental meeting you know that the proportion of complete idiots pontificating over each other is quite high.
In this case the majority of people in the room when this was decided were that kind of people.
Give it a little bit and their asses are gonna be toast in court and they're going to realize that they can't rule over the city folk like dictators.
Unfortunately they will never realize the real magnitude of their stupidity.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086588</id>
	<title>It goes both ways</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258126800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, if I copyright my tax forms, can I charge the government for each copy they receive?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , if I copyright my tax forms , can I charge the government for each copy they receive ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, if I copyright my tax forms, can I charge the government for each copy they receive?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30092250</id>
	<title>Building Codes</title>
	<author>jthayden</author>
	<datestamp>1258109160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anyone know the rule on building codes for this?  My town has adopted a version of the International Building Codes.  I've found places to buy it online, but no free version.

It seems ludicrous to me that I have to pay money to find out how to follow the codes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone know the rule on building codes for this ?
My town has adopted a version of the International Building Codes .
I 've found places to buy it online , but no free version .
It seems ludicrous to me that I have to pay money to find out how to follow the codes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone know the rule on building codes for this?
My town has adopted a version of the International Building Codes.
I've found places to buy it online, but no free version.
It seems ludicrous to me that I have to pay money to find out how to follow the codes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086482</id>
	<title>Recurring revenue</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258126500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a good, law abiding citizen you need to keep abreast of any new laws that may affect you. So, presumably, you will be spending $200 every year just be sure that you ''don't do wrong''.<p>
What a way to squeeze money from a few people and make criminals of the rest of us.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a good , law abiding citizen you need to keep abreast of any new laws that may affect you .
So , presumably , you will be spending $ 200 every year just be sure that you ''do n't do wrong'' .
What a way to squeeze money from a few people and make criminals of the rest of us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a good, law abiding citizen you need to keep abreast of any new laws that may affect you.
So, presumably, you will be spending $200 every year just be sure that you ''don't do wrong''.
What a way to squeeze money from a few people and make criminals of the rest of us.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30090270</id>
	<title>seen this before</title>
	<author>spidercoz</author>
	<datestamp>1258143060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>on an ep of Deep Space 9 when Quark went home to Ferenginar.</htmltext>
<tokenext>on an ep of Deep Space 9 when Quark went home to Ferenginar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>on an ep of Deep Space 9 when Quark went home to Ferenginar.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088134</id>
	<title>Re:Do people on a jury have to pay $200 as well?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258134300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have you ever been on a jury? The judge and lawyers will tell you the laws applicable to the case. They are all guilty of copyright infringement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you ever been on a jury ?
The judge and lawyers will tell you the laws applicable to the case .
They are all guilty of copyright infringement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you ever been on a jury?
The judge and lawyers will tell you the laws applicable to the case.
They are all guilty of copyright infringement.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088820</id>
	<title>What a load of BS!</title>
	<author>TavisJohn</author>
	<datestamp>1258137600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am sorry, but the government is for the people and by the people, therefore the laws are OWNED BY THE PEOPLE, and should be be FREELY MADE AVAILABLE to anyone who asks!</p><p>WTF is the city worried about, that another city will use their laws?  Who would that harm?</p><p>Talk about a waste of public funds!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am sorry , but the government is for the people and by the people , therefore the laws are OWNED BY THE PEOPLE , and should be be FREELY MADE AVAILABLE to anyone who asks ! WTF is the city worried about , that another city will use their laws ?
Who would that harm ? Talk about a waste of public funds !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am sorry, but the government is for the people and by the people, therefore the laws are OWNED BY THE PEOPLE, and should be be FREELY MADE AVAILABLE to anyone who asks!WTF is the city worried about, that another city will use their laws?
Who would that harm?Talk about a waste of public funds!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086344</id>
	<title>to continue reading this article</title>
	<author>archangel9</author>
	<datestamp>1258125780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>you will need to come by my office.  I printed this page of comments and put it on a CD for $200.  You can also purchase the "audiobook" version, where I hire an old 4-pack/day biker to read the article and comments into a $12 USB microphone, doing voice interpretations where necessary depending on comment score.  That downloadable copy is $300, because it comes with a 15-second RIAA warning.</htmltext>
<tokenext>you will need to come by my office .
I printed this page of comments and put it on a CD for $ 200 .
You can also purchase the " audiobook " version , where I hire an old 4-pack/day biker to read the article and comments into a $ 12 USB microphone , doing voice interpretations where necessary depending on comment score .
That downloadable copy is $ 300 , because it comes with a 15-second RIAA warning .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you will need to come by my office.
I printed this page of comments and put it on a CD for $200.
You can also purchase the "audiobook" version, where I hire an old 4-pack/day biker to read the article and comments into a $12 USB microphone, doing voice interpretations where necessary depending on comment score.
That downloadable copy is $300, because it comes with a 15-second RIAA warning.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086578</id>
	<title>Re:New form of taxes!</title>
	<author>russotto</author>
	<datestamp>1258126800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>  I discovered what had happened after some digging at the bureau of public records. I explained what had happened to the judge and he told me the ignorance of the law is ones own fault period.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Judge was an idiot.  Ignorance of the \_law\_ is no excuse.  Ignorance of specific FACTS often is; ignorance of the law in your case would be if you knew your license was suspended but you didn't know that driving with a suspended license was illegal.</p><p>In this case, the courts will (as usual) rule for the government.  On two grounds<br>1) You can always head down to the state capital and examine the laws in their law library, on paper.<br>2) States have long been incorporating copyrighted codes into their laws by reference, and the courts have been perfectly happy to let them do it.  Want to add an electrical outlet?  That'll be $$$$ for the NEC, please.</p><p>The more interesting case will be if some enterprising person buys the $200 CD, strips the laws themselves out of it (minus any formatting or commentary by the publishing company), and posts them or starts selling his own CD.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I discovered what had happened after some digging at the bureau of public records .
I explained what had happened to the judge and he told me the ignorance of the law is ones own fault period .
Judge was an idiot .
Ignorance of the \ _law \ _ is no excuse .
Ignorance of specific FACTS often is ; ignorance of the law in your case would be if you knew your license was suspended but you did n't know that driving with a suspended license was illegal.In this case , the courts will ( as usual ) rule for the government .
On two grounds1 ) You can always head down to the state capital and examine the laws in their law library , on paper.2 ) States have long been incorporating copyrighted codes into their laws by reference , and the courts have been perfectly happy to let them do it .
Want to add an electrical outlet ?
That 'll be $ $ $ $ for the NEC , please.The more interesting case will be if some enterprising person buys the $ 200 CD , strips the laws themselves out of it ( minus any formatting or commentary by the publishing company ) , and posts them or starts selling his own CD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>  I discovered what had happened after some digging at the bureau of public records.
I explained what had happened to the judge and he told me the ignorance of the law is ones own fault period.
Judge was an idiot.
Ignorance of the \_law\_ is no excuse.
Ignorance of specific FACTS often is; ignorance of the law in your case would be if you knew your license was suspended but you didn't know that driving with a suspended license was illegal.In this case, the courts will (as usual) rule for the government.
On two grounds1) You can always head down to the state capital and examine the laws in their law library, on paper.2) States have long been incorporating copyrighted codes into their laws by reference, and the courts have been perfectly happy to let them do it.
Want to add an electrical outlet?
That'll be $$$$ for the NEC, please.The more interesting case will be if some enterprising person buys the $200 CD, strips the laws themselves out of it (minus any formatting or commentary by the publishing company), and posts them or starts selling his own CD.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087276</id>
	<title>"Considers"</title>
	<author>jevring</author>
	<datestamp>1258130280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How can you just <b>consider</b> something your property without any legal basis for ownership? Can I just consider the images on a webpage my property just because they are currently stored on disk or in memory on my computer? Furthermore, can a bank consider their customer's assets their (the bank's) property?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How can you just consider something your property without any legal basis for ownership ?
Can I just consider the images on a webpage my property just because they are currently stored on disk or in memory on my computer ?
Furthermore , can a bank consider their customer 's assets their ( the bank 's ) property ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How can you just consider something your property without any legal basis for ownership?
Can I just consider the images on a webpage my property just because they are currently stored on disk or in memory on my computer?
Furthermore, can a bank consider their customer's assets their (the bank's) property?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30090560</id>
	<title>A Fair and Speedy Trial</title>
	<author>Jewbird</author>
	<datestamp>1258144080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Franz Kafka would be proud</htmltext>
<tokenext>Franz Kafka would be proud</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Franz Kafka would be proud</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086366</id>
	<title>Democracy working for the rich?</title>
	<author>pnblake</author>
	<datestamp>1258125900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I couldn't think of a better example of the government excluding the poor.  People, of all financial backgrounds, deserve to have access to the laws of the land.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I could n't think of a better example of the government excluding the poor .
People , of all financial backgrounds , deserve to have access to the laws of the land .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I couldn't think of a better example of the government excluding the poor.
People, of all financial backgrounds, deserve to have access to the laws of the land.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086456</id>
	<title>Re:Outrageous</title>
	<author>Rary</author>
	<datestamp>1258126380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Someone please violate this city's bogus copyright and get the laws on the internet.</p></div><p>That's exactly what they're currently working on doing. And it's not the laws that are copyrighted, it's one particular electronic presentation of those laws. The laws are still available for free at the public library, among other places.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone please violate this city 's bogus copyright and get the laws on the internet.That 's exactly what they 're currently working on doing .
And it 's not the laws that are copyrighted , it 's one particular electronic presentation of those laws .
The laws are still available for free at the public library , among other places .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone please violate this city's bogus copyright and get the laws on the internet.That's exactly what they're currently working on doing.
And it's not the laws that are copyrighted, it's one particular electronic presentation of those laws.
The laws are still available for free at the public library, among other places.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087724</id>
	<title>What's the problem?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258132440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The city makes its laws available on paper for a fee, and at the library for free, just like any other city or town in the nation.  Next year the free version will be online as well as in the library, and today the for-fee version is also available on CD.  Lots of businesses make money by re-packaging government-published works.  That doesn't mean that their product must be provided to everyone at no charge.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The city makes its laws available on paper for a fee , and at the library for free , just like any other city or town in the nation .
Next year the free version will be online as well as in the library , and today the for-fee version is also available on CD .
Lots of businesses make money by re-packaging government-published works .
That does n't mean that their product must be provided to everyone at no charge .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The city makes its laws available on paper for a fee, and at the library for free, just like any other city or town in the nation.
Next year the free version will be online as well as in the library, and today the for-fee version is also available on CD.
Lots of businesses make money by re-packaging government-published works.
That doesn't mean that their product must be provided to everyone at no charge.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087506</id>
	<title>Re:Schenectady is dying...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258131300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well of course. It has a zip code of 12345.</p><p>That sounds like the combination some idiot would have on his luggage!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well of course .
It has a zip code of 12345.That sounds like the combination some idiot would have on his luggage !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well of course.
It has a zip code of 12345.That sounds like the combination some idiot would have on his luggage!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086516</id>
	<title>Stop reading TFA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258126620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As I was reading TFA there was another thing I saw that outraiged me besides the ludicrous copyrighting of laws.</p></div><p>Problem solved!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As I was reading TFA there was another thing I saw that outraiged me besides the ludicrous copyrighting of laws.Problem solved !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As I was reading TFA there was another thing I saw that outraiged me besides the ludicrous copyrighting of laws.Problem solved!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088622</id>
	<title>And so it begins...</title>
	<author>Torodung</author>
	<datestamp>1258136820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is a solution to this: <b>Pirate Party in 2012</b>. That's the damned solution. Shame on any municipality for claiming that laws, which are in the public domain <i>by definition</i>, can be restricted from copy, as a <i>product</i>. The laws to which we assent must be accessible to anyone affected by them <i>upon demand</i>, and furnished conveniently at cost, in order for us to assent to them and in order for justice to function, even limping and lopsided as it has been for the past few decades.</p><p>As regards the law, we are <b>entitled citizens</b>, not <b>privileged consumers</b>. If there is no law to that effect, it should be added to the <i>Freedom of Information Act</i> immediately and become a Federal mandate.</p><p>Barring that, or uniform state code of some kind, the solution is very simple: If government will not grant us justice nor peace, as is its duty, we will steal it. Copyright infringement will become a service, not a crime. By whatever means necessary.</p><p>Your move Schenectady.</p><p>--<br>Toro</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a solution to this : Pirate Party in 2012 .
That 's the damned solution .
Shame on any municipality for claiming that laws , which are in the public domain by definition , can be restricted from copy , as a product .
The laws to which we assent must be accessible to anyone affected by them upon demand , and furnished conveniently at cost , in order for us to assent to them and in order for justice to function , even limping and lopsided as it has been for the past few decades.As regards the law , we are entitled citizens , not privileged consumers .
If there is no law to that effect , it should be added to the Freedom of Information Act immediately and become a Federal mandate.Barring that , or uniform state code of some kind , the solution is very simple : If government will not grant us justice nor peace , as is its duty , we will steal it .
Copyright infringement will become a service , not a crime .
By whatever means necessary.Your move Schenectady.--Toro</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a solution to this: Pirate Party in 2012.
That's the damned solution.
Shame on any municipality for claiming that laws, which are in the public domain by definition, can be restricted from copy, as a product.
The laws to which we assent must be accessible to anyone affected by them upon demand, and furnished conveniently at cost, in order for us to assent to them and in order for justice to function, even limping and lopsided as it has been for the past few decades.As regards the law, we are entitled citizens, not privileged consumers.
If there is no law to that effect, it should be added to the Freedom of Information Act immediately and become a Federal mandate.Barring that, or uniform state code of some kind, the solution is very simple: If government will not grant us justice nor peace, as is its duty, we will steal it.
Copyright infringement will become a service, not a crime.
By whatever means necessary.Your move Schenectady.--Toro</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087100</id>
	<title>Re:Do people on a jury have to pay $200 as well?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258129380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a juror, you are not required to have an extensive knowledge of the law (or any knowledge, really). Part of the proceeding will be for the judge and attorneys to explain the law as part of their case(s).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a juror , you are not required to have an extensive knowledge of the law ( or any knowledge , really ) .
Part of the proceeding will be for the judge and attorneys to explain the law as part of their case ( s ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a juror, you are not required to have an extensive knowledge of the law (or any knowledge, really).
Part of the proceeding will be for the judge and attorneys to explain the law as part of their case(s).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086604</id>
	<title>Re:Outrageous</title>
	<author>nomadic</author>
	<datestamp>1258126860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>How the hell is anyone supposed to avoid being a criminal when there are books and books of laws one has to obey?</i>
<br>
<br>
Most of those laws don't apply to you, or any one person.  If you're a bar owner you're expected to know the section of the laws dealing with alcohol.  If you're a developer you're expected to know about zoning.  If you're a contractor you're expected to know about required permits.  Each of those sections isn't that difficult to learn.<br>
<br>
<i>Someone please violate this city's bogus copyright and get the laws on the internet. And publically shame the city and its leaders for their insanity. I know if I lived in Schenectady I'd be voting against the incumbants (of course, I usually do here anyway).
</i>
<br>
<br>
You don't even have to go to the link to understand what's going on, the story submission says quite clearly that the city isn't asserting copyright, it's a private company that, in the process of putting the laws online for free access, is selling CD copies of their work in process.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How the hell is anyone supposed to avoid being a criminal when there are books and books of laws one has to obey ?
Most of those laws do n't apply to you , or any one person .
If you 're a bar owner you 're expected to know the section of the laws dealing with alcohol .
If you 're a developer you 're expected to know about zoning .
If you 're a contractor you 're expected to know about required permits .
Each of those sections is n't that difficult to learn .
Someone please violate this city 's bogus copyright and get the laws on the internet .
And publically shame the city and its leaders for their insanity .
I know if I lived in Schenectady I 'd be voting against the incumbants ( of course , I usually do here anyway ) .
You do n't even have to go to the link to understand what 's going on , the story submission says quite clearly that the city is n't asserting copyright , it 's a private company that , in the process of putting the laws online for free access , is selling CD copies of their work in process .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How the hell is anyone supposed to avoid being a criminal when there are books and books of laws one has to obey?
Most of those laws don't apply to you, or any one person.
If you're a bar owner you're expected to know the section of the laws dealing with alcohol.
If you're a developer you're expected to know about zoning.
If you're a contractor you're expected to know about required permits.
Each of those sections isn't that difficult to learn.
Someone please violate this city's bogus copyright and get the laws on the internet.
And publically shame the city and its leaders for their insanity.
I know if I lived in Schenectady I'd be voting against the incumbants (of course, I usually do here anyway).
You don't even have to go to the link to understand what's going on, the story submission says quite clearly that the city isn't asserting copyright, it's a private company that, in the process of putting the laws online for free access, is selling CD copies of their work in process.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30089098</id>
	<title>naunced? BS</title>
	<author>sohp</author>
	<datestamp>1258138620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This case is NOT nuanced. Only the lawyers for the company that stands to make a buck want folks to think that. Did the printing company that, in olden days, typeset, print, and bind the laws in paper copies expect to profit from an exclusive license? No, they expected to get paid to do the printing and hand over the copies to the government. Possibly they could print up additional copies and sell them but they didn't expect to have any rights to the content.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This case is NOT nuanced .
Only the lawyers for the company that stands to make a buck want folks to think that .
Did the printing company that , in olden days , typeset , print , and bind the laws in paper copies expect to profit from an exclusive license ?
No , they expected to get paid to do the printing and hand over the copies to the government .
Possibly they could print up additional copies and sell them but they did n't expect to have any rights to the content .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This case is NOT nuanced.
Only the lawyers for the company that stands to make a buck want folks to think that.
Did the printing company that, in olden days, typeset, print, and bind the laws in paper copies expect to profit from an exclusive license?
No, they expected to get paid to do the printing and hand over the copies to the government.
Possibly they could print up additional copies and sell them but they didn't expect to have any rights to the content.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30091740</id>
	<title>Laws are facts</title>
	<author>bl968</author>
	<datestamp>1258106400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems to me that one can easily argue that laws are facts,and as since facts can not be copyrighted...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems to me that one can easily argue that laws are facts,and as since facts can not be copyrighted.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems to me that one can easily argue that laws are facts,and as since facts can not be copyrighted...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088506</id>
	<title>Re:Do people on a jury have to pay $200 as well?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258136400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jurors aren't supposed to know the law; they are merely finders of fact in a given case.  This is why lawyers don't get on juries.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jurors are n't supposed to know the law ; they are merely finders of fact in a given case .
This is why lawyers do n't get on juries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jurors aren't supposed to know the law; they are merely finders of fact in a given case.
This is why lawyers don't get on juries.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086112</id>
	<title>New form of taxes!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258124580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wonder how the 'ignorance of the law is no excuse' standpoint would be upheld given that you may not be economically able to know the laws...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder how the 'ignorance of the law is no excuse ' standpoint would be upheld given that you may not be economically able to know the laws.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder how the 'ignorance of the law is no excuse' standpoint would be upheld given that you may not be economically able to know the laws...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30114272</id>
	<title>Re:New business opportunities.</title>
	<author>petermgreen</author>
	<datestamp>1258380000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think if you tried something like that then it would not take long for an arrest warrent to be issued, likely a no-knock warrant.</p><p>Better hope you have a method for conducting the transaction anonymously.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think if you tried something like that then it would not take long for an arrest warrent to be issued , likely a no-knock warrant.Better hope you have a method for conducting the transaction anonymously .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think if you tried something like that then it would not take long for an arrest warrent to be issued, likely a no-knock warrant.Better hope you have a method for conducting the transaction anonymously.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086562</id>
	<title>Re:Do people on a jury have to pay $200 as well?</title>
	<author>TimHunter</author>
	<datestamp>1258126740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nobody expects jurors to know the law. Before the jury starts deliberating, the judge explains the law and how the jury is supposed to assess the evidence and testimony according to the law. This is called "instructing the jury." Typically the judge and the lawyers for each side work out the exact wording of the instruction so that it's fair to both sides. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury\_instructions" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury\_instructions</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody expects jurors to know the law .
Before the jury starts deliberating , the judge explains the law and how the jury is supposed to assess the evidence and testimony according to the law .
This is called " instructing the jury .
" Typically the judge and the lawyers for each side work out the exact wording of the instruction so that it 's fair to both sides .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury \ _instructions [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody expects jurors to know the law.
Before the jury starts deliberating, the judge explains the law and how the jury is supposed to assess the evidence and testimony according to the law.
This is called "instructing the jury.
" Typically the judge and the lawyers for each side work out the exact wording of the instruction so that it's fair to both sides.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury\_instructions [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087260</id>
	<title>Re:Do people on a jury have to pay $200 as well?</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1258130100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The jury decides matters of fact, the Judge matters of law.<br> <br>The jury has the responsibility to decide, firstly, if the facts of the case as presented by the prosecution and defense councils are in fact a breach of the law, as explained by the Judge. That is their primary role.<br> <br>Their second (and mostly neglected) role is to hear the law explained to them, and decide if it is just. These 12 people, for however long the case goes on for, are the most powerful people in the courtroom, as they can stir up a <b>world of shit</b> if they think the law is either unjust, or being applied unjustly.<br> <br>Most jurours wouldn't dream of going against the "will of the court" however most don't know they're immune from punishment for not following its direction. Unfortunately, however, almost no judge offers juries the notion of "jury nullification" as an option (they won't research it themselves) and instruct them to return "guilty" or "not guilty" as verdicts. Mostly because there is very little "new law" discussed in Crown court, and if it is it's typically appealed trough the Appeal, Supreme, and Lords.<br> <br>IANAL, but I have been on jury duty, and know quite a few legal advisors, barristers, solicitors and magistrates. This is UK-applicable info, but I have a feeling the rules are similar in the US. Seeing as we colonised you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The jury decides matters of fact , the Judge matters of law .
The jury has the responsibility to decide , firstly , if the facts of the case as presented by the prosecution and defense councils are in fact a breach of the law , as explained by the Judge .
That is their primary role .
Their second ( and mostly neglected ) role is to hear the law explained to them , and decide if it is just .
These 12 people , for however long the case goes on for , are the most powerful people in the courtroom , as they can stir up a world of shit if they think the law is either unjust , or being applied unjustly .
Most jurours would n't dream of going against the " will of the court " however most do n't know they 're immune from punishment for not following its direction .
Unfortunately , however , almost no judge offers juries the notion of " jury nullification " as an option ( they wo n't research it themselves ) and instruct them to return " guilty " or " not guilty " as verdicts .
Mostly because there is very little " new law " discussed in Crown court , and if it is it 's typically appealed trough the Appeal , Supreme , and Lords .
IANAL , but I have been on jury duty , and know quite a few legal advisors , barristers , solicitors and magistrates .
This is UK-applicable info , but I have a feeling the rules are similar in the US .
Seeing as we colonised you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The jury decides matters of fact, the Judge matters of law.
The jury has the responsibility to decide, firstly, if the facts of the case as presented by the prosecution and defense councils are in fact a breach of the law, as explained by the Judge.
That is their primary role.
Their second (and mostly neglected) role is to hear the law explained to them, and decide if it is just.
These 12 people, for however long the case goes on for, are the most powerful people in the courtroom, as they can stir up a world of shit if they think the law is either unjust, or being applied unjustly.
Most jurours wouldn't dream of going against the "will of the court" however most don't know they're immune from punishment for not following its direction.
Unfortunately, however, almost no judge offers juries the notion of "jury nullification" as an option (they won't research it themselves) and instruct them to return "guilty" or "not guilty" as verdicts.
Mostly because there is very little "new law" discussed in Crown court, and if it is it's typically appealed trough the Appeal, Supreme, and Lords.
IANAL, but I have been on jury duty, and know quite a few legal advisors, barristers, solicitors and magistrates.
This is UK-applicable info, but I have a feeling the rules are similar in the US.
Seeing as we colonised you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086720</id>
	<title>Re:Schenectady is dying...</title>
	<author>bleh-of-the-huns</author>
	<datestamp>1258127580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The way I read it, is that they are going to put the laws online, free of charge for anyone to view, but till that happens, in the mean time, they are offering it on a CD for $200.  While I think that is a high dollar value for a CD and a few minutes of copying, that is their choice.  I remember when Solaris first start being offered for free, I still had to pay $30 for the media and shipping.  Same thing here, and the reason for the CD is obvious, the laws and codes probably kill off a forest or 2 every time it gets printed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The way I read it , is that they are going to put the laws online , free of charge for anyone to view , but till that happens , in the mean time , they are offering it on a CD for $ 200 .
While I think that is a high dollar value for a CD and a few minutes of copying , that is their choice .
I remember when Solaris first start being offered for free , I still had to pay $ 30 for the media and shipping .
Same thing here , and the reason for the CD is obvious , the laws and codes probably kill off a forest or 2 every time it gets printed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The way I read it, is that they are going to put the laws online, free of charge for anyone to view, but till that happens, in the mean time, they are offering it on a CD for $200.
While I think that is a high dollar value for a CD and a few minutes of copying, that is their choice.
I remember when Solaris first start being offered for free, I still had to pay $30 for the media and shipping.
Same thing here, and the reason for the CD is obvious, the laws and codes probably kill off a forest or 2 every time it gets printed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088004</id>
	<title>Yet another dishonest submitter</title>
	<author>mea37</author>
	<datestamp>1258133700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The headline and TFS both state that the code is <i>only</i> available to citizens for a $200 license.  This is not true.  RTFA.</p><p>This is a case of a company trying to weasle a buck and a city government not thinking through the options that might best serve a citizen.  There was a fair amount of stupidity involved in the manner of refusing the FOI request, but that's about it.</p><p>The law is available for anyone to review - just not to take home their own copy without considerable expense.  It will be available online for free in the near future, and where this guy ran into trouble is he specifically asked for a more convenient form of the information than the city is presently in a position to provide without more creativity than they exercise by defualt.</p><p>Bottom line - the city officials should get better educated, and it sounds like they're doing just that as they consider options to fill this request; in other words, business as usual, nothing to see here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The headline and TFS both state that the code is only available to citizens for a $ 200 license .
This is not true .
RTFA.This is a case of a company trying to weasle a buck and a city government not thinking through the options that might best serve a citizen .
There was a fair amount of stupidity involved in the manner of refusing the FOI request , but that 's about it.The law is available for anyone to review - just not to take home their own copy without considerable expense .
It will be available online for free in the near future , and where this guy ran into trouble is he specifically asked for a more convenient form of the information than the city is presently in a position to provide without more creativity than they exercise by defualt.Bottom line - the city officials should get better educated , and it sounds like they 're doing just that as they consider options to fill this request ; in other words , business as usual , nothing to see here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The headline and TFS both state that the code is only available to citizens for a $200 license.
This is not true.
RTFA.This is a case of a company trying to weasle a buck and a city government not thinking through the options that might best serve a citizen.
There was a fair amount of stupidity involved in the manner of refusing the FOI request, but that's about it.The law is available for anyone to review - just not to take home their own copy without considerable expense.
It will be available online for free in the near future, and where this guy ran into trouble is he specifically asked for a more convenient form of the information than the city is presently in a position to provide without more creativity than they exercise by defualt.Bottom line - the city officials should get better educated, and it sounds like they're doing just that as they consider options to fill this request; in other words, business as usual, nothing to see here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086576</id>
	<title>Re:New form of taxes!</title>
	<author>SQLGuru</author>
	<datestamp>1258126800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You could have tried the "I am not the John Doe that the ticket was given to.  My name is John Doe, but I have never lived at 121 Main Street."  Probably would have been just as effective, but since you were screwed either way.......</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You could have tried the " I am not the John Doe that the ticket was given to .
My name is John Doe , but I have never lived at 121 Main Street .
" Probably would have been just as effective , but since you were screwed either way...... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You could have tried the "I am not the John Doe that the ticket was given to.
My name is John Doe, but I have never lived at 121 Main Street.
"  Probably would have been just as effective, but since you were screwed either way.......</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086478</id>
	<title>hey</title>
	<author>nomadic</author>
	<datestamp>1258126500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>This case is nuanced.</i>
<br>
<br>
Hey, whoah, slow down there chief.  Remember what website you're posting on, we don't want to hear that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This case is nuanced .
Hey , whoah , slow down there chief .
Remember what website you 're posting on , we do n't want to hear that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This case is nuanced.
Hey, whoah, slow down there chief.
Remember what website you're posting on, we don't want to hear that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30094820</id>
	<title>The laws themselves are not copyrighted</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258130640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps I'm getting confused here, but what's the big deal? The vast majority of comments here seem to be along the lines of "You can't copyright laws, that's just evil" without realising that nobody's actual copyrighted the laws themselves. What they've done is copyrighted the particular electronic format of the reports. The laws are still accessable at most local libraries, so you can make yourself aware of them. Yes, they should be online, and Schenectady should make them available online to improve access to justice. Since they are doing so, the real thing left to argue about is whether or not Schenectady is doing it quickly enough - most of the comments haven't focussed on that, but have instead been discussing how it's unfair that an electronic copy of the laws can be the subject of copyright.</p><p>The problem with that sort of attitude is it doesn't work when you apply it to other areas of the law. Case law is still the law, therefore the majority opinion of Slashdot would be that it should be free to read online. I agree with that, but that doesn't mean that a privately owned company publishing that same case law shouldn't be able to have copyright in their law reports. I'm an Australian law student, so it's easiest for me to illustrate this with an Australian example. The High Court (our equiv of the Supreme Court) often makes binding case law. That case law is available online, through austlii.edu.au and numerous other places. However, the Commonwealth Law Reports, which are published by the Lawbook Co. are copyrighted. So, if I link someone to, say, the text of Wik v Queensland on austlii.edu.au, that's fine. If I make an unauthorised copying of the case from the CLR, that's not fine.</p><p>I hope this helps clarify the position here - the materials are currently subject to copyright, in the format that they are currently in. They will eventually be made available online. When that happens, you'll be able to use them fine. Until then, you can still check them from your library. It's important to stress that the company that's producing the electronic copy of the laws is allowed to copyright them - even though those laws are the exact same ones the City is currently using.</p><p>Make sense?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps I 'm getting confused here , but what 's the big deal ?
The vast majority of comments here seem to be along the lines of " You ca n't copyright laws , that 's just evil " without realising that nobody 's actual copyrighted the laws themselves .
What they 've done is copyrighted the particular electronic format of the reports .
The laws are still accessable at most local libraries , so you can make yourself aware of them .
Yes , they should be online , and Schenectady should make them available online to improve access to justice .
Since they are doing so , the real thing left to argue about is whether or not Schenectady is doing it quickly enough - most of the comments have n't focussed on that , but have instead been discussing how it 's unfair that an electronic copy of the laws can be the subject of copyright.The problem with that sort of attitude is it does n't work when you apply it to other areas of the law .
Case law is still the law , therefore the majority opinion of Slashdot would be that it should be free to read online .
I agree with that , but that does n't mean that a privately owned company publishing that same case law should n't be able to have copyright in their law reports .
I 'm an Australian law student , so it 's easiest for me to illustrate this with an Australian example .
The High Court ( our equiv of the Supreme Court ) often makes binding case law .
That case law is available online , through austlii.edu.au and numerous other places .
However , the Commonwealth Law Reports , which are published by the Lawbook Co. are copyrighted .
So , if I link someone to , say , the text of Wik v Queensland on austlii.edu.au , that 's fine .
If I make an unauthorised copying of the case from the CLR , that 's not fine.I hope this helps clarify the position here - the materials are currently subject to copyright , in the format that they are currently in .
They will eventually be made available online .
When that happens , you 'll be able to use them fine .
Until then , you can still check them from your library .
It 's important to stress that the company that 's producing the electronic copy of the laws is allowed to copyright them - even though those laws are the exact same ones the City is currently using.Make sense ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps I'm getting confused here, but what's the big deal?
The vast majority of comments here seem to be along the lines of "You can't copyright laws, that's just evil" without realising that nobody's actual copyrighted the laws themselves.
What they've done is copyrighted the particular electronic format of the reports.
The laws are still accessable at most local libraries, so you can make yourself aware of them.
Yes, they should be online, and Schenectady should make them available online to improve access to justice.
Since they are doing so, the real thing left to argue about is whether or not Schenectady is doing it quickly enough - most of the comments haven't focussed on that, but have instead been discussing how it's unfair that an electronic copy of the laws can be the subject of copyright.The problem with that sort of attitude is it doesn't work when you apply it to other areas of the law.
Case law is still the law, therefore the majority opinion of Slashdot would be that it should be free to read online.
I agree with that, but that doesn't mean that a privately owned company publishing that same case law shouldn't be able to have copyright in their law reports.
I'm an Australian law student, so it's easiest for me to illustrate this with an Australian example.
The High Court (our equiv of the Supreme Court) often makes binding case law.
That case law is available online, through austlii.edu.au and numerous other places.
However, the Commonwealth Law Reports, which are published by the Lawbook Co. are copyrighted.
So, if I link someone to, say, the text of Wik v Queensland on austlii.edu.au, that's fine.
If I make an unauthorised copying of the case from the CLR, that's not fine.I hope this helps clarify the position here - the materials are currently subject to copyright, in the format that they are currently in.
They will eventually be made available online.
When that happens, you'll be able to use them fine.
Until then, you can still check them from your library.
It's important to stress that the company that's producing the electronic copy of the laws is allowed to copyright them - even though those laws are the exact same ones the City is currently using.Make sense?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087240</id>
	<title>cheap?</title>
	<author>TheCarp</author>
	<datestamp>1258130040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would like to point out, as someone who has seen an FOIA request processed, there is often a fee per page of response. So, for example, we requested ALL of the parking tickets in town for some info as we tried to fight the overnight parking ban in town.</p><p>The response came back that it would be a significant cost at several cents per page to print out, and asked if we wanted to refine our request... so we narrowed it down to a few key streets.</p><p>So, in terms of getting a copy of the whole set of laws, $200 might not even be that expensive. I usually look stuff like this up online, but if its not available, how would you get it? I would assume you can go down to town hall and make your own copies at cost to you? Or at least read them?</p><p>-Steve</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would like to point out , as someone who has seen an FOIA request processed , there is often a fee per page of response .
So , for example , we requested ALL of the parking tickets in town for some info as we tried to fight the overnight parking ban in town.The response came back that it would be a significant cost at several cents per page to print out , and asked if we wanted to refine our request... so we narrowed it down to a few key streets.So , in terms of getting a copy of the whole set of laws , $ 200 might not even be that expensive .
I usually look stuff like this up online , but if its not available , how would you get it ?
I would assume you can go down to town hall and make your own copies at cost to you ?
Or at least read them ? -Steve</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would like to point out, as someone who has seen an FOIA request processed, there is often a fee per page of response.
So, for example, we requested ALL of the parking tickets in town for some info as we tried to fight the overnight parking ban in town.The response came back that it would be a significant cost at several cents per page to print out, and asked if we wanted to refine our request... so we narrowed it down to a few key streets.So, in terms of getting a copy of the whole set of laws, $200 might not even be that expensive.
I usually look stuff like this up online, but if its not available, how would you get it?
I would assume you can go down to town hall and make your own copies at cost to you?
Or at least read them?-Steve</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086846</id>
	<title>Re:Outrageous</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1258128120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Why does a city's laws and codes have to be two fat binders?</i> </p><p>Schenectady has a population of 61,000 people.</p><p>Density a little under 6,000 per square mile.</p><p> That's rather more people and property to manage and protect than your average small business.</p><p>When you are planning a new house, you need to be thinking about zoning laws and building codes.</p><p>Most encounters with the law are like that. They evolve out of a very specific set of circumstances.<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does a city 's laws and codes have to be two fat binders ?
Schenectady has a population of 61,000 people.Density a little under 6,000 per square mile .
That 's rather more people and property to manage and protect than your average small business.When you are planning a new house , you need to be thinking about zoning laws and building codes.Most encounters with the law are like that .
They evolve out of a very specific set of circumstances .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does a city's laws and codes have to be two fat binders?
Schenectady has a population of 61,000 people.Density a little under 6,000 per square mile.
That's rather more people and property to manage and protect than your average small business.When you are planning a new house, you need to be thinking about zoning laws and building codes.Most encounters with the law are like that.
They evolve out of a very specific set of circumstances.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086882</id>
	<title>Re:No need to overreact</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258128300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do stupid people EVER realize the magnitude of their stupidity?  It's just stupid to think so...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do stupid people EVER realize the magnitude of their stupidity ?
It 's just stupid to think so.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do stupid people EVER realize the magnitude of their stupidity?
It's just stupid to think so...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30095738</id>
	<title>incredible...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258231800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So when do these bastards start paying us RENT for their use of OUR offices and reimbursement for utilities?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So when do these bastards start paying us RENT for their use of OUR offices and reimbursement for utilities ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So when do these bastards start paying us RENT for their use of OUR offices and reimbursement for utilities?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086636</id>
	<title>New business opportunities.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258127040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dear City Council of  Schenectady</p><p>I would like to recommend to you an interesting article.</p><p>The subject is a result of my study <i>"Location, timer settings and defusing codes of explosive devices located in various public buildings of the City of Schenectady".</i></p><p>I'm convinced you would be very interested in the information contained therein. I am willing to sell you a copy of said article, but considering its literary and informational value, I estimate it to be worth $10mln.</p><p>Simultaneously I would like to state I have no connection with manufacturers of these devices nor people who planted them. This is merely an scientific work of an informative study that should be of interest to all citizens of the city.</p><p>Faithfully, yours,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dear City Council of SchenectadyI would like to recommend to you an interesting article.The subject is a result of my study " Location , timer settings and defusing codes of explosive devices located in various public buildings of the City of Schenectady " .I 'm convinced you would be very interested in the information contained therein .
I am willing to sell you a copy of said article , but considering its literary and informational value , I estimate it to be worth $ 10mln.Simultaneously I would like to state I have no connection with manufacturers of these devices nor people who planted them .
This is merely an scientific work of an informative study that should be of interest to all citizens of the city.Faithfully , yours , .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dear City Council of  SchenectadyI would like to recommend to you an interesting article.The subject is a result of my study "Location, timer settings and defusing codes of explosive devices located in various public buildings of the City of Schenectady".I'm convinced you would be very interested in the information contained therein.
I am willing to sell you a copy of said article, but considering its literary and informational value, I estimate it to be worth $10mln.Simultaneously I would like to state I have no connection with manufacturers of these devices nor people who planted them.
This is merely an scientific work of an informative study that should be of interest to all citizens of the city.Faithfully, yours, ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086420</id>
	<title>Welcome to government</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258126200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Welcome to government, where you don't have to be responsible for your own mistakes, because you make the rules.</p><p>The judge sounds like an idiot, and probably is. Does he realize what kind of funding the state's DMV would need if every state resident took him seriously, and contacted the DMV four or more times a year to make sure his/her license hasn't been suspended and to check that they don't have any outstanding tickets? And how much economic damage that might cause the state because of lost work?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Welcome to government , where you do n't have to be responsible for your own mistakes , because you make the rules.The judge sounds like an idiot , and probably is .
Does he realize what kind of funding the state 's DMV would need if every state resident took him seriously , and contacted the DMV four or more times a year to make sure his/her license has n't been suspended and to check that they do n't have any outstanding tickets ?
And how much economic damage that might cause the state because of lost work ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Welcome to government, where you don't have to be responsible for your own mistakes, because you make the rules.The judge sounds like an idiot, and probably is.
Does he realize what kind of funding the state's DMV would need if every state resident took him seriously, and contacted the DMV four or more times a year to make sure his/her license hasn't been suspended and to check that they don't have any outstanding tickets?
And how much economic damage that might cause the state because of lost work?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088496</id>
	<title>Re:Do people on a jury have to pay $200 as well?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258136340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You're not supposed to know the law when you're on jury. The judge will tell you the law at the end of the trial before you begin deliberations.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're not supposed to know the law when you 're on jury .
The judge will tell you the law at the end of the trial before you begin deliberations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're not supposed to know the law when you're on jury.
The judge will tell you the law at the end of the trial before you begin deliberations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30090072</id>
	<title>Re:Do people on a jury have to pay $200 as well?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1258142220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nah. It's a prerequisite that you don't know the law at all, if you want to become one of the jury.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nah .
It 's a prerequisite that you do n't know the law at all , if you want to become one of the jury .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nah.
It's a prerequisite that you don't know the law at all, if you want to become one of the jury.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088162</id>
	<title>Mandatory HHGTTG reference</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258134480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them had you? I mean like actually telling anyone or anything.</p><p>' But the plans were on display...'</p><p>on display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.'</p><p>
&nbsp; `That's the display department.'</p><p>
&nbsp; `With a torch.'</p><p>`Ah, well the lights had probably gone.'</p><p>
&nbsp; `So had the stairs.'</p><p>
&nbsp; `But look you found the notice didn't you?'</p><p>`Yes,' said Arthur, `yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck<br>
&nbsp; in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door<br>
&nbsp; saying "Beware of The Leopard".'</p><p>-- Douglas Adams.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...You had n't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them had you ?
I mean like actually telling anyone or anything .
' But the plans were on display...'on display ?
I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them .
'   ` That 's the display department .
'   ` With a torch .
' ` Ah , well the lights had probably gone .
'   ` So had the stairs .
'   ` But look you found the notice did n't you ?
' ` Yes, ' said Arthur , ` yes I did .
It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck   in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door   saying " Beware of The Leopard " .
'-- Douglas Adams .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them had you?
I mean like actually telling anyone or anything.
' But the plans were on display...'on display?
I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.
'
  `That's the display department.
'
  `With a torch.
'`Ah, well the lights had probably gone.
'
  `So had the stairs.
'
  `But look you found the notice didn't you?
'`Yes,' said Arthur, `yes I did.
It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck
  in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door
  saying "Beware of The Leopard".
'-- Douglas Adams.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088130</id>
	<title>Re:Do people on a jury have to pay $200 as well?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258134300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Juries are told what law applies. They are not supposed to use their own knowledge only the instructions given by the court.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Juries are told what law applies .
They are not supposed to use their own knowledge only the instructions given by the court .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Juries are told what law applies.
They are not supposed to use their own knowledge only the instructions given by the court.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088840</id>
	<title>Re:New form of taxes!</title>
	<author>rantingkitten</author>
	<datestamp>1258137660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The judge may have been an idiot but that is the usual view of judges who deal with traffic court, where normal conventions do not apply.  The state skirts around most protections guaranteed to you, the defendant, by classing the charges as "administrative violations" or something similar, rather than "criminal charges".  Since the Constitution only guarantees rights of the accused for <b>criminal</b> prosecutions, presto!  You suddenly have no right to a trial by jury, or for an attorney.  "Innocent until proven guilty," while not precisely codified by the Constitution, is also a concept that has no meaning in traffic court. <br>
<br>
This has been going on for a long, long, long time.  Here's Mr Samuel Clemens, aka Mark Twain, to describe it for us:<blockquote><div><p>We sat on wooden benches in a lock-up partitioned off from the Court Room, for four hours, awaiting judgment -not awaiting trial, because they don't try people there, but only just take a percentage of their cash, and let them go without further ceremony.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... I stayed by and watched them dispense justice a while and observed that in all small offences the policeman's charge on the books was received as entirely sufficient, and sentence passed without a question being asked of either accused or witnesses...</p></div></blockquote><p>

Nothing -- absolutely nothing -- has changed since Clemens' time, well over one hundred years later. <br>
<br>
Here's an example.  In 2005 my insurance lapsed for a day because I forgot to pay or something.  I don't know, it was years ago.  Anyway, in Georgia, apparently the state gets notified when this happens, and suspends your tag.  Not your <b>license</b>, mind you -- your tag.  I had no idea this happened, they just did it.  For the next several years I went about my business, including getting my tag updated annually, and even being pulled over a few times, with nary a word about this from any of the tag office clerks, police, or anyone else.  <br>
<br>
Finally, one cop noticed, pulled me over, and arrested me for driving on the suspended tag.  I went to jail because of this.  <br>
<br>
The judge decided it was my fault and blah blah blah ignorance is no excuse yadda yadda.  The truth is, I had been dutifully updating my tag every year as required, which should say something about my intent to fully comply with the law, and I'd think that any rational person would see that no offense was meant and no harm was done, so send me on my way.  But no.  <br>
<br>
That's how the justice system works.  The laws are so numerous, so convoluted, and updated and modified so frequently, that we as a society freely acknowledge that the average person has no way of understanding it, which is why we have specialty occupations like lawyers.  But we expect the average person to comply with all these laws he can't understand, too.  <br>
<br>
It really doesn't matter that the laws are theoretically available for anyone to read.  No mortal human has time for that.  Even lawyers tend to specialise in one specific area of law, and when asked about some other area, will give you mostly blank looks.<br>
<br>
To an extent, I think ignorance of the law is a fine excuse.  Clearly there are certain things that are known to be illegal across the vast majority of the populace, but there are way too many people being prosecuted and going through immense legal hassle over minor violations of obscure laws nobody knows or cares about except the state when they need some excuse to extort more money from the citizenry.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The judge may have been an idiot but that is the usual view of judges who deal with traffic court , where normal conventions do not apply .
The state skirts around most protections guaranteed to you , the defendant , by classing the charges as " administrative violations " or something similar , rather than " criminal charges " .
Since the Constitution only guarantees rights of the accused for criminal prosecutions , presto !
You suddenly have no right to a trial by jury , or for an attorney .
" Innocent until proven guilty , " while not precisely codified by the Constitution , is also a concept that has no meaning in traffic court .
This has been going on for a long , long , long time .
Here 's Mr Samuel Clemens , aka Mark Twain , to describe it for us : We sat on wooden benches in a lock-up partitioned off from the Court Room , for four hours , awaiting judgment -not awaiting trial , because they do n't try people there , but only just take a percentage of their cash , and let them go without further ceremony .
.... I stayed by and watched them dispense justice a while and observed that in all small offences the policeman 's charge on the books was received as entirely sufficient , and sentence passed without a question being asked of either accused or witnesses.. . Nothing -- absolutely nothing -- has changed since Clemens ' time , well over one hundred years later .
Here 's an example .
In 2005 my insurance lapsed for a day because I forgot to pay or something .
I do n't know , it was years ago .
Anyway , in Georgia , apparently the state gets notified when this happens , and suspends your tag .
Not your license , mind you -- your tag .
I had no idea this happened , they just did it .
For the next several years I went about my business , including getting my tag updated annually , and even being pulled over a few times , with nary a word about this from any of the tag office clerks , police , or anyone else .
Finally , one cop noticed , pulled me over , and arrested me for driving on the suspended tag .
I went to jail because of this .
The judge decided it was my fault and blah blah blah ignorance is no excuse yadda yadda .
The truth is , I had been dutifully updating my tag every year as required , which should say something about my intent to fully comply with the law , and I 'd think that any rational person would see that no offense was meant and no harm was done , so send me on my way .
But no .
That 's how the justice system works .
The laws are so numerous , so convoluted , and updated and modified so frequently , that we as a society freely acknowledge that the average person has no way of understanding it , which is why we have specialty occupations like lawyers .
But we expect the average person to comply with all these laws he ca n't understand , too .
It really does n't matter that the laws are theoretically available for anyone to read .
No mortal human has time for that .
Even lawyers tend to specialise in one specific area of law , and when asked about some other area , will give you mostly blank looks .
To an extent , I think ignorance of the law is a fine excuse .
Clearly there are certain things that are known to be illegal across the vast majority of the populace , but there are way too many people being prosecuted and going through immense legal hassle over minor violations of obscure laws nobody knows or cares about except the state when they need some excuse to extort more money from the citizenry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The judge may have been an idiot but that is the usual view of judges who deal with traffic court, where normal conventions do not apply.
The state skirts around most protections guaranteed to you, the defendant, by classing the charges as "administrative violations" or something similar, rather than "criminal charges".
Since the Constitution only guarantees rights of the accused for criminal prosecutions, presto!
You suddenly have no right to a trial by jury, or for an attorney.
"Innocent until proven guilty," while not precisely codified by the Constitution, is also a concept that has no meaning in traffic court.
This has been going on for a long, long, long time.
Here's Mr Samuel Clemens, aka Mark Twain, to describe it for us:We sat on wooden benches in a lock-up partitioned off from the Court Room, for four hours, awaiting judgment -not awaiting trial, because they don't try people there, but only just take a percentage of their cash, and let them go without further ceremony.
.... I stayed by and watched them dispense justice a while and observed that in all small offences the policeman's charge on the books was received as entirely sufficient, and sentence passed without a question being asked of either accused or witnesses...

Nothing -- absolutely nothing -- has changed since Clemens' time, well over one hundred years later.
Here's an example.
In 2005 my insurance lapsed for a day because I forgot to pay or something.
I don't know, it was years ago.
Anyway, in Georgia, apparently the state gets notified when this happens, and suspends your tag.
Not your license, mind you -- your tag.
I had no idea this happened, they just did it.
For the next several years I went about my business, including getting my tag updated annually, and even being pulled over a few times, with nary a word about this from any of the tag office clerks, police, or anyone else.
Finally, one cop noticed, pulled me over, and arrested me for driving on the suspended tag.
I went to jail because of this.
The judge decided it was my fault and blah blah blah ignorance is no excuse yadda yadda.
The truth is, I had been dutifully updating my tag every year as required, which should say something about my intent to fully comply with the law, and I'd think that any rational person would see that no offense was meant and no harm was done, so send me on my way.
But no.
That's how the justice system works.
The laws are so numerous, so convoluted, and updated and modified so frequently, that we as a society freely acknowledge that the average person has no way of understanding it, which is why we have specialty occupations like lawyers.
But we expect the average person to comply with all these laws he can't understand, too.
It really doesn't matter that the laws are theoretically available for anyone to read.
No mortal human has time for that.
Even lawyers tend to specialise in one specific area of law, and when asked about some other area, will give you mostly blank looks.
To an extent, I think ignorance of the law is a fine excuse.
Clearly there are certain things that are known to be illegal across the vast majority of the populace, but there are way too many people being prosecuted and going through immense legal hassle over minor violations of obscure laws nobody knows or cares about except the state when they need some excuse to extort more money from the citizenry.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086578</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086598</id>
	<title>Re:Do people on a jury have to pay $200 as well?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258126860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Juries are supposed to determine the facts of the case, not the law. (Cue argument on <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury\_nullification" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">jury nullification</a> [wikipedia.org].)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Juries are supposed to determine the facts of the case , not the law .
( Cue argument on jury nullification [ wikipedia.org ] .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Juries are supposed to determine the facts of the case, not the law.
(Cue argument on jury nullification [wikipedia.org].
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086574</id>
	<title>"Proprietary Software"?</title>
	<author>ahankinson</author>
	<datestamp>1258126800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What I find more troubling than the copyright situation is that the city is paying a company ("General Code") to index and make the records available, but that any disk that ships with this has to have a copy of General Code's software in order to read it! Which means, of course, that GC has a pretty sweet revenue stream in perpetuity - even the city counsellors themselves couldn't access it without the consent and continued existence of GC.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What I find more troubling than the copyright situation is that the city is paying a company ( " General Code " ) to index and make the records available , but that any disk that ships with this has to have a copy of General Code 's software in order to read it !
Which means , of course , that GC has a pretty sweet revenue stream in perpetuity - even the city counsellors themselves could n't access it without the consent and continued existence of GC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I find more troubling than the copyright situation is that the city is paying a company ("General Code") to index and make the records available, but that any disk that ships with this has to have a copy of General Code's software in order to read it!
Which means, of course, that GC has a pretty sweet revenue stream in perpetuity - even the city counsellors themselves couldn't access it without the consent and continued existence of GC.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30092958</id>
	<title>Re:To forestall the anti-government ranters . . .</title>
	<author>mikeytown2</author>
	<datestamp>1258113600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Link to this law
<a href="http://openjurist.org/293/f3d/791" title="openjurist.org" rel="nofollow">http://openjurist.org/293/f3d/791</a> [openjurist.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Link to this law http : //openjurist.org/293/f3d/791 [ openjurist.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Link to this law
http://openjurist.org/293/f3d/791 [openjurist.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30089506</id>
	<title>Re:Schenectady is dying...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258140000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey, at least you could still have a 12345 zip code, right?  That's pretty cool!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , at least you could still have a 12345 zip code , right ?
That 's pretty cool !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, at least you could still have a 12345 zip code, right?
That's pretty cool!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086550</id>
	<title>Lots of laws</title>
	<author>sjbe</author>
	<datestamp>1258126680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why so many codes and regulations?</p> </div><p>The short answer is that the society we live in is very complicated.  The basic principles are pretty simple but hammering out the details requires a lot of lawmaking.  These laws cover the corner cases of how we are to interact with each other.  Turns out the best (and probably only) way to do that anyone has come up with is to have a lot of laws.  This is better than the alternative which is basically monarchy.  Better to have the rules spelled out (even if complicated) than to depend on the capricious whims of rules.  (yes, yes, I know it's hard to tell the difference sometimes...)</p><p>Bear in mind too that those laws are just the regulations, codes, ordinances etc passed by legislative bodies.  There is another set of relevant law found in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case\_law" title="wikipedia.org">case law</a> [wikipedia.org].</p><p><div class="quote"><p>How the hell is anyone supposed to avoid being a criminal when there are books and books of laws one has to obey?</p></div><p>You aren't.  A government that cannot accuse you of breaking any laws cannot control you.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why so many codes and regulations ?
The short answer is that the society we live in is very complicated .
The basic principles are pretty simple but hammering out the details requires a lot of lawmaking .
These laws cover the corner cases of how we are to interact with each other .
Turns out the best ( and probably only ) way to do that anyone has come up with is to have a lot of laws .
This is better than the alternative which is basically monarchy .
Better to have the rules spelled out ( even if complicated ) than to depend on the capricious whims of rules .
( yes , yes , I know it 's hard to tell the difference sometimes... ) Bear in mind too that those laws are just the regulations , codes , ordinances etc passed by legislative bodies .
There is another set of relevant law found in case law [ wikipedia.org ] .How the hell is anyone supposed to avoid being a criminal when there are books and books of laws one has to obey ? You are n't .
A government that can not accuse you of breaking any laws can not control you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why so many codes and regulations?
The short answer is that the society we live in is very complicated.
The basic principles are pretty simple but hammering out the details requires a lot of lawmaking.
These laws cover the corner cases of how we are to interact with each other.
Turns out the best (and probably only) way to do that anyone has come up with is to have a lot of laws.
This is better than the alternative which is basically monarchy.
Better to have the rules spelled out (even if complicated) than to depend on the capricious whims of rules.
(yes, yes, I know it's hard to tell the difference sometimes...)Bear in mind too that those laws are just the regulations, codes, ordinances etc passed by legislative bodies.
There is another set of relevant law found in case law [wikipedia.org].How the hell is anyone supposed to avoid being a criminal when there are books and books of laws one has to obey?You aren't.
A government that cannot accuse you of breaking any laws cannot control you.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086658</id>
	<title>Can't break what you don't know</title>
	<author>adosch</author>
	<datestamp>1258127160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No law to worry about breaking if you don't know about them.  Not much different than the po-dunk town I live in; I can't even go down to city hall (which is a tin shack add-on to the town repair shop) and get a written or verbal list of city law just because of the flat-out dis-organization and un-realization from the city counsel themselves.  Seems to me people are doing them selves a favor in Schenectady not buying into this $200 joke.  Just another botched, baseless and wasted revenue attempt IMHO.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No law to worry about breaking if you do n't know about them .
Not much different than the po-dunk town I live in ; I ca n't even go down to city hall ( which is a tin shack add-on to the town repair shop ) and get a written or verbal list of city law just because of the flat-out dis-organization and un-realization from the city counsel themselves .
Seems to me people are doing them selves a favor in Schenectady not buying into this $ 200 joke .
Just another botched , baseless and wasted revenue attempt IMHO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No law to worry about breaking if you don't know about them.
Not much different than the po-dunk town I live in; I can't even go down to city hall (which is a tin shack add-on to the town repair shop) and get a written or verbal list of city law just because of the flat-out dis-organization and un-realization from the city counsel themselves.
Seems to me people are doing them selves a favor in Schenectady not buying into this $200 joke.
Just another botched, baseless and wasted revenue attempt IMHO.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086406</id>
	<title>Re:Outrageous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258126200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>How the hell is anyone supposed to avoid being a criminal when there are books and books of laws one has to obey?</p></div></blockquote><p>
"Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed?" said
Dr. Ferris.  "We want them broken. You'd better get it straight that
it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against-then you'll know that
this is not the age for beautiful gestures. We're after power and we
mean it.  You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and
you'd better get wise to it. There's no way to rule innocent men.
The only power any government has is the power to crack down on
criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them.
One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible
for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding
citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of
laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively
interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then
you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr.  Rearden, that's
the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."
</p><p>
- one of the bad guys from Ayn Rand's <em>Atlas Shrugged</em>
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How the hell is anyone supposed to avoid being a criminal when there are books and books of laws one has to obey ?
" Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed ?
" said Dr. Ferris. " We want them broken .
You 'd better get it straight that it 's not a bunch of boy scouts you 're up against-then you 'll know that this is not the age for beautiful gestures .
We 're after power and we mean it .
You fellows were pikers , but we know the real trick , and you 'd better get wise to it .
There 's no way to rule innocent men .
The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals .
Well , when there are n't enough criminals , one makes them .
One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws .
Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens ?
What 's there in that for anyone ?
But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt .
Now that 's the system , Mr. Rearden , that 's the game , and once you understand it , you 'll be much easier to deal with .
" - one of the bad guys from Ayn Rand 's Atlas Shrugged</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How the hell is anyone supposed to avoid being a criminal when there are books and books of laws one has to obey?
"Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed?
" said
Dr. Ferris.  "We want them broken.
You'd better get it straight that
it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against-then you'll know that
this is not the age for beautiful gestures.
We're after power and we
mean it.
You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and
you'd better get wise to it.
There's no way to rule innocent men.
The only power any government has is the power to crack down on
criminals.
Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them.
One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible
for men to live without breaking laws.
Who wants a nation of law-abiding
citizens?
What's there in that for anyone?
But just pass the kind of
laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively
interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then
you cash in on guilt.
Now that's the system, Mr.  Rearden, that's
the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with.
"

- one of the bad guys from Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086648</id>
	<title>Re:New form of taxes!</title>
	<author>DustyShadow</author>
	<datestamp>1258127100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In my experience the "ignorance of the law is no excuse" standpoint holds up whether or not you have a good excuse for your ignorance.  The police once copied down my address incorrectly on a ticket (they ignored my correct address on the copy of the ticket I mailed in) causing a summons to court, a notice of default judgement against me, a notice that my ticket was unpaid and a notice that my license had been suspended to be sent to the wrong address.  I was later charged with driving with a suspended license after an accident a few months later.  I discovered what had happened after some digging at the bureau of public records.  I explained what had happened to the judge and he told me the ignorance of the law is ones own fault period.  The fact that the state had tried to contact me was sufficient on their part.  It is always your responsibility to become informed of the law regardless of any difficulties you have.</p></div><p>That judge is an idiot. You weren't ignorant of the laws. You were ignorant of the <b>facts</b>.  Sorry that happened.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In my experience the " ignorance of the law is no excuse " standpoint holds up whether or not you have a good excuse for your ignorance .
The police once copied down my address incorrectly on a ticket ( they ignored my correct address on the copy of the ticket I mailed in ) causing a summons to court , a notice of default judgement against me , a notice that my ticket was unpaid and a notice that my license had been suspended to be sent to the wrong address .
I was later charged with driving with a suspended license after an accident a few months later .
I discovered what had happened after some digging at the bureau of public records .
I explained what had happened to the judge and he told me the ignorance of the law is ones own fault period .
The fact that the state had tried to contact me was sufficient on their part .
It is always your responsibility to become informed of the law regardless of any difficulties you have.That judge is an idiot .
You were n't ignorant of the laws .
You were ignorant of the facts .
Sorry that happened .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my experience the "ignorance of the law is no excuse" standpoint holds up whether or not you have a good excuse for your ignorance.
The police once copied down my address incorrectly on a ticket (they ignored my correct address on the copy of the ticket I mailed in) causing a summons to court, a notice of default judgement against me, a notice that my ticket was unpaid and a notice that my license had been suspended to be sent to the wrong address.
I was later charged with driving with a suspended license after an accident a few months later.
I discovered what had happened after some digging at the bureau of public records.
I explained what had happened to the judge and he told me the ignorance of the law is ones own fault period.
The fact that the state had tried to contact me was sufficient on their part.
It is always your responsibility to become informed of the law regardless of any difficulties you have.That judge is an idiot.
You weren't ignorant of the laws.
You were ignorant of the facts.
Sorry that happened.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30095962</id>
	<title>Re:Summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258193040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The city isn't claiming the laws are copy written. Just their printed form is.</p><p>Every city I've lived in, even the tiny little podunk ones, so long as they had their own courthouse, maintains a law library which contains all the local ordinances and codes and, is freely accessible to the public. Anyone who wants to know the law can go to the law library and, free of charge, inform themselves about anything that they wish.<br>Like any other book though, you can get it at the library for free but if you want a copy of your own, you gotta buy it.</p><p>The law is much the same. The laws are public domain but in written form, they are protected by copyright by whoever makes up the story.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The city is n't claiming the laws are copy written .
Just their printed form is.Every city I 've lived in , even the tiny little podunk ones , so long as they had their own courthouse , maintains a law library which contains all the local ordinances and codes and , is freely accessible to the public .
Anyone who wants to know the law can go to the law library and , free of charge , inform themselves about anything that they wish.Like any other book though , you can get it at the library for free but if you want a copy of your own , you got ta buy it.The law is much the same .
The laws are public domain but in written form , they are protected by copyright by whoever makes up the story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The city isn't claiming the laws are copy written.
Just their printed form is.Every city I've lived in, even the tiny little podunk ones, so long as they had their own courthouse, maintains a law library which contains all the local ordinances and codes and, is freely accessible to the public.
Anyone who wants to know the law can go to the law library and, free of charge, inform themselves about anything that they wish.Like any other book though, you can get it at the library for free but if you want a copy of your own, you gotta buy it.The law is much the same.
The laws are public domain but in written form, they are protected by copyright by whoever makes up the story.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086706</id>
	<title>Re:Outrageous</title>
	<author>Mr. Slippery</author>
	<datestamp>1258127520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Why does a city's laws and codes have to be two fat binders? Perhaps I'm making a wrong assumption (or just have my head up my ass; I'm on my first cup of coffee this morning), but a thick binder where I work is about four inches thick.

</p><p>Why so many codes and regulations?</p></div>
</blockquote><p>Because industrial societies are complex, crowded places in which our actions can affect many people in unanticipated ways.

</p><p>Depending on what's at the county level and what's at the city level, city codes might include building and zoning codes; health department regulations; regulations about the operation of city services including the fire department, police, schools, water and sewers; policies regarding city employees; transportation-related laws and code regarding the construction and operation of roads and mass transit; business regulations; and local criminal codes.

</p><p>I've worked on many software projects where the documentation was much thicker than "two fat binders", and I'll bet that running a city is a more complex proposition than most software projects.</p><blockquote><div><p>I'd like to see a new federal law that says all laws, codes, and ordinances expire after a period of ten years</p></div></blockquote><p>You want the local traffic laws to expire every ten years? You want murder to become legal in ten years if the state legislature neglects to renew the homicide statutes?

</p><p>You want civil rights laws to expire? Or the Bill of Rights to lose its authority?

</p><p>I'm all for simplifying the legal code. But it's overly simpleminded to think that this can be done with some sort of universal sunset provision.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does a city 's laws and codes have to be two fat binders ?
Perhaps I 'm making a wrong assumption ( or just have my head up my ass ; I 'm on my first cup of coffee this morning ) , but a thick binder where I work is about four inches thick .
Why so many codes and regulations ?
Because industrial societies are complex , crowded places in which our actions can affect many people in unanticipated ways .
Depending on what 's at the county level and what 's at the city level , city codes might include building and zoning codes ; health department regulations ; regulations about the operation of city services including the fire department , police , schools , water and sewers ; policies regarding city employees ; transportation-related laws and code regarding the construction and operation of roads and mass transit ; business regulations ; and local criminal codes .
I 've worked on many software projects where the documentation was much thicker than " two fat binders " , and I 'll bet that running a city is a more complex proposition than most software projects.I 'd like to see a new federal law that says all laws , codes , and ordinances expire after a period of ten yearsYou want the local traffic laws to expire every ten years ?
You want murder to become legal in ten years if the state legislature neglects to renew the homicide statutes ?
You want civil rights laws to expire ?
Or the Bill of Rights to lose its authority ?
I 'm all for simplifying the legal code .
But it 's overly simpleminded to think that this can be done with some sort of universal sunset provision .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does a city's laws and codes have to be two fat binders?
Perhaps I'm making a wrong assumption (or just have my head up my ass; I'm on my first cup of coffee this morning), but a thick binder where I work is about four inches thick.
Why so many codes and regulations?
Because industrial societies are complex, crowded places in which our actions can affect many people in unanticipated ways.
Depending on what's at the county level and what's at the city level, city codes might include building and zoning codes; health department regulations; regulations about the operation of city services including the fire department, police, schools, water and sewers; policies regarding city employees; transportation-related laws and code regarding the construction and operation of roads and mass transit; business regulations; and local criminal codes.
I've worked on many software projects where the documentation was much thicker than "two fat binders", and I'll bet that running a city is a more complex proposition than most software projects.I'd like to see a new federal law that says all laws, codes, and ordinances expire after a period of ten yearsYou want the local traffic laws to expire every ten years?
You want murder to become legal in ten years if the state legislature neglects to renew the homicide statutes?
You want civil rights laws to expire?
Or the Bill of Rights to lose its authority?
I'm all for simplifying the legal code.
But it's overly simpleminded to think that this can be done with some sort of universal sunset provision.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30102658</id>
	<title>Re:New form of taxes!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258207740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I got pulled over in a similar case.  I wasn't arrested.  I was a poor student and so I went to my court date and talked to the judge.  He dropped the fine.  What's different?  You were in Georgia, I was in Wisconsin.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I got pulled over in a similar case .
I was n't arrested .
I was a poor student and so I went to my court date and talked to the judge .
He dropped the fine .
What 's different ?
You were in Georgia , I was in Wisconsin .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I got pulled over in a similar case.
I wasn't arrested.
I was a poor student and so I went to my court date and talked to the judge.
He dropped the fine.
What's different?
You were in Georgia, I was in Wisconsin.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088840</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086132</id>
	<title>Re:New form of taxes!</title>
	<author>Dunbal</author>
	<datestamp>1258124760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly the point I was going to make. Besides, I think the value of properties in that town is a trade secret, but we'll declare the property to be worth $100. What percentage annual property tax were they charging again?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly the point I was going to make .
Besides , I think the value of properties in that town is a trade secret , but we 'll declare the property to be worth $ 100 .
What percentage annual property tax were they charging again ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly the point I was going to make.
Besides, I think the value of properties in that town is a trade secret, but we'll declare the property to be worth $100.
What percentage annual property tax were they charging again?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086112</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086600</id>
	<title>Re:Do people on a jury have to pay $200 as well?</title>
	<author>Maximum Prophet</author>
	<datestamp>1258126860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Do people on a jury have to pay $200 as well? As it can be real hard to be on a jury and not know the law.</p></div><p>I've been selected for Jury duty, and in the written material it said that the Judge would tell us what the law is, and that was the law, not what we knew.   It's because the Judge is supposed to interpret the law.  The jury is only supposed to determine the facts.  i.e.  The jury determines that Bob killed Joe.  It's up the the judge to say it's illegal for Bob to kill Joe and what the parameters of punishment might be.  In some states the Judge then determines the sentence, in others, the jury picks a sentence consistent with what the Judge has determined.  Ask a lawyer for clarification in your state.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do people on a jury have to pay $ 200 as well ?
As it can be real hard to be on a jury and not know the law.I 've been selected for Jury duty , and in the written material it said that the Judge would tell us what the law is , and that was the law , not what we knew .
It 's because the Judge is supposed to interpret the law .
The jury is only supposed to determine the facts .
i.e. The jury determines that Bob killed Joe .
It 's up the the judge to say it 's illegal for Bob to kill Joe and what the parameters of punishment might be .
In some states the Judge then determines the sentence , in others , the jury picks a sentence consistent with what the Judge has determined .
Ask a lawyer for clarification in your state .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do people on a jury have to pay $200 as well?
As it can be real hard to be on a jury and not know the law.I've been selected for Jury duty, and in the written material it said that the Judge would tell us what the law is, and that was the law, not what we knew.
It's because the Judge is supposed to interpret the law.
The jury is only supposed to determine the facts.
i.e.  The jury determines that Bob killed Joe.
It's up the the judge to say it's illegal for Bob to kill Joe and what the parameters of punishment might be.
In some states the Judge then determines the sentence, in others, the jury picks a sentence consistent with what the Judge has determined.
Ask a lawyer for clarification in your state.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086830</id>
	<title>Re:Schenectady is dying...</title>
	<author>Ccmods</author>
	<datestamp>1258128060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Similar situation as parent; I used to live in Rotterdam myself (around the Hamburg street area) and watched it's gradual decline. My family left just as I graduated from Mohonasen. Even after GE moved most of it's workforce out, it was a fairly nice place to start a family for quite a long time, but the writing was on the wall.</p><p>I will say, if you get a chance to drive through the area again, downtown has gotten much better. They have thrown a ridiculous amount of money into the city to try to clean up the downtown areas. It's starting to look like the bustling city (I've been told) it once was, with new businesses cropping up, while they knock down a lot of the old uninhabited buildings to build new ones. I wouldn't say that charging for this CD was a great idea, but the strides they have made recently (compared to say, 5-10 years ago) to recover from the loss of GE has been impressive. The headline on this one is pretty off the mark no matter how you look at it; there's always the library. No license required.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Similar situation as parent ; I used to live in Rotterdam myself ( around the Hamburg street area ) and watched it 's gradual decline .
My family left just as I graduated from Mohonasen .
Even after GE moved most of it 's workforce out , it was a fairly nice place to start a family for quite a long time , but the writing was on the wall.I will say , if you get a chance to drive through the area again , downtown has gotten much better .
They have thrown a ridiculous amount of money into the city to try to clean up the downtown areas .
It 's starting to look like the bustling city ( I 've been told ) it once was , with new businesses cropping up , while they knock down a lot of the old uninhabited buildings to build new ones .
I would n't say that charging for this CD was a great idea , but the strides they have made recently ( compared to say , 5-10 years ago ) to recover from the loss of GE has been impressive .
The headline on this one is pretty off the mark no matter how you look at it ; there 's always the library .
No license required .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Similar situation as parent; I used to live in Rotterdam myself (around the Hamburg street area) and watched it's gradual decline.
My family left just as I graduated from Mohonasen.
Even after GE moved most of it's workforce out, it was a fairly nice place to start a family for quite a long time, but the writing was on the wall.I will say, if you get a chance to drive through the area again, downtown has gotten much better.
They have thrown a ridiculous amount of money into the city to try to clean up the downtown areas.
It's starting to look like the bustling city (I've been told) it once was, with new businesses cropping up, while they knock down a lot of the old uninhabited buildings to build new ones.
I wouldn't say that charging for this CD was a great idea, but the strides they have made recently (compared to say, 5-10 years ago) to recover from the loss of GE has been impressive.
The headline on this one is pretty off the mark no matter how you look at it; there's always the library.
No license required.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086708</id>
	<title>Re:New form of taxes!</title>
	<author>phishtrader</author>
	<datestamp>1258127520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If that worked, everyone would be giving out the wrong address. Also, people move all the time.

It's a bigger PITA for the state to track you down than they're willing or able to deal with. Since they're the more powerful party in this case, it becomes your problem. Remember, poop rolls downhill.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If that worked , everyone would be giving out the wrong address .
Also , people move all the time .
It 's a bigger PITA for the state to track you down than they 're willing or able to deal with .
Since they 're the more powerful party in this case , it becomes your problem .
Remember , poop rolls downhill .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If that worked, everyone would be giving out the wrong address.
Also, people move all the time.
It's a bigger PITA for the state to track you down than they're willing or able to deal with.
Since they're the more powerful party in this case, it becomes your problem.
Remember, poop rolls downhill.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087962</id>
	<title>Depends on what address was used</title>
	<author>pavon</author>
	<datestamp>1258133580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I could see the judges point in buttersnout's case if the address on his driver's license and/or registration was out of date.</p><p>In my state you are required by law to inform the MVD of any changes of address. Any correspondence with the MVD is done using this address, and if you don't update it then it is your fault if you do not get mail from them, including red-light camera tickets, license suspension notices and the like. They aren't going to change that official address just because you wrote it on some random form, like a ticket payment.</p><p>If that was the case, then it was ignorance of the law that caused the problems not ignorance of fact. If his address was up-to-date, however, then I completely agree with you. His county would have to be absolutely retarded to send license suspension notices to an address scrawled down by a cop rather than the address they have on record for his license, but it's certainly possible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I could see the judges point in buttersnout 's case if the address on his driver 's license and/or registration was out of date.In my state you are required by law to inform the MVD of any changes of address .
Any correspondence with the MVD is done using this address , and if you do n't update it then it is your fault if you do not get mail from them , including red-light camera tickets , license suspension notices and the like .
They are n't going to change that official address just because you wrote it on some random form , like a ticket payment.If that was the case , then it was ignorance of the law that caused the problems not ignorance of fact .
If his address was up-to-date , however , then I completely agree with you .
His county would have to be absolutely retarded to send license suspension notices to an address scrawled down by a cop rather than the address they have on record for his license , but it 's certainly possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I could see the judges point in buttersnout's case if the address on his driver's license and/or registration was out of date.In my state you are required by law to inform the MVD of any changes of address.
Any correspondence with the MVD is done using this address, and if you don't update it then it is your fault if you do not get mail from them, including red-light camera tickets, license suspension notices and the like.
They aren't going to change that official address just because you wrote it on some random form, like a ticket payment.If that was the case, then it was ignorance of the law that caused the problems not ignorance of fact.
If his address was up-to-date, however, then I completely agree with you.
His county would have to be absolutely retarded to send license suspension notices to an address scrawled down by a cop rather than the address they have on record for his license, but it's certainly possible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086578</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086474</id>
	<title>To forestall the anti-government ranters . . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258126440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's what the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has said about Schenectady's brain-dead legal position:</p><p>"For these reasons, we reject SBCCI's deconstruction of Banks into merely utilitarian and factual issues. Instead, we read Banks, Wheaton, and related cases consistently to enunciate the principle that "the law," whether it has its source in judicial opinions or statutes, ordinances or regulations, is not subject to federal copyright law."</p><p>Veeck v. Southern Bldg. Code Congress Intern., Inc.<br>293 F.3d 791<br>C.A.5 (Tex.),2002</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's what the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has said about Schenectady 's brain-dead legal position : " For these reasons , we reject SBCCI 's deconstruction of Banks into merely utilitarian and factual issues .
Instead , we read Banks , Wheaton , and related cases consistently to enunciate the principle that " the law , " whether it has its source in judicial opinions or statutes , ordinances or regulations , is not subject to federal copyright law .
" Veeck v. Southern Bldg .
Code Congress Intern. , Inc.293 F.3d 791C.A.5 ( Tex .
) ,2002</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's what the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has said about Schenectady's brain-dead legal position:"For these reasons, we reject SBCCI's deconstruction of Banks into merely utilitarian and factual issues.
Instead, we read Banks, Wheaton, and related cases consistently to enunciate the principle that "the law," whether it has its source in judicial opinions or statutes, ordinances or regulations, is not subject to federal copyright law.
"Veeck v. Southern Bldg.
Code Congress Intern., Inc.293 F.3d 791C.A.5 (Tex.
),2002</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086670</id>
	<title>Re:Outrageous</title>
	<author>bleh-of-the-huns</author>
	<datestamp>1258127280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have you seen the building codes, hell the electrical codes from the NEC alone can fill up volumes (yes there are abbreviated hand held versions too, that fill up a paperback novel sized book), then there are the plumbing codes, and a bunch of others that make up the complete building codes.</p><p>As for the Laws, I imagine that the write up for each law probably takes a few pages.  While I agree with you, that we have way too many laws, hell there are still laws on the books from over 200 years ago in some places, and completely retarded in some cases....  But I don't think putting a 10 year expiration date on every law would work, we would have to create an entire new organization who's sole purpose would be to review and revise every law on a constant basis.  We have that sort of, the judiciary, but the work load would increase exponentially and is not really feasible, I mean come on here, murder is murder, why expire and renew it every 10 years..</p><p>Obviously the murder example is cut and dry, I would agree that maybe lesser offenses, say misdemeanor types should be reviewed more often.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you seen the building codes , hell the electrical codes from the NEC alone can fill up volumes ( yes there are abbreviated hand held versions too , that fill up a paperback novel sized book ) , then there are the plumbing codes , and a bunch of others that make up the complete building codes.As for the Laws , I imagine that the write up for each law probably takes a few pages .
While I agree with you , that we have way too many laws , hell there are still laws on the books from over 200 years ago in some places , and completely retarded in some cases.... But I do n't think putting a 10 year expiration date on every law would work , we would have to create an entire new organization who 's sole purpose would be to review and revise every law on a constant basis .
We have that sort of , the judiciary , but the work load would increase exponentially and is not really feasible , I mean come on here , murder is murder , why expire and renew it every 10 years..Obviously the murder example is cut and dry , I would agree that maybe lesser offenses , say misdemeanor types should be reviewed more often .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you seen the building codes, hell the electrical codes from the NEC alone can fill up volumes (yes there are abbreviated hand held versions too, that fill up a paperback novel sized book), then there are the plumbing codes, and a bunch of others that make up the complete building codes.As for the Laws, I imagine that the write up for each law probably takes a few pages.
While I agree with you, that we have way too many laws, hell there are still laws on the books from over 200 years ago in some places, and completely retarded in some cases....  But I don't think putting a 10 year expiration date on every law would work, we would have to create an entire new organization who's sole purpose would be to review and revise every law on a constant basis.
We have that sort of, the judiciary, but the work load would increase exponentially and is not really feasible, I mean come on here, murder is murder, why expire and renew it every 10 years..Obviously the murder example is cut and dry, I would agree that maybe lesser offenses, say misdemeanor types should be reviewed more often.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088464</id>
	<title>Actually...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258136220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In every ticket I have received (2, one for speeding, one for dog-off-leash (yes, it went to traffic court, yay California)), the issuing officer made a point to tell me that it was my responsibility to call the court at the number listed on the ticket to check the status of my case in a few days, and no later than 30days. It was also my responsibility to follow up with the court to either pay the citation fee or appear in court by the deadline or at an appointed time, and that they would mail the details to me but it was still my responsibility to take care of it regardless.<p>tm</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In every ticket I have received ( 2 , one for speeding , one for dog-off-leash ( yes , it went to traffic court , yay California ) ) , the issuing officer made a point to tell me that it was my responsibility to call the court at the number listed on the ticket to check the status of my case in a few days , and no later than 30days .
It was also my responsibility to follow up with the court to either pay the citation fee or appear in court by the deadline or at an appointed time , and that they would mail the details to me but it was still my responsibility to take care of it regardless.tm</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In every ticket I have received (2, one for speeding, one for dog-off-leash (yes, it went to traffic court, yay California)), the issuing officer made a point to tell me that it was my responsibility to call the court at the number listed on the ticket to check the status of my case in a few days, and no later than 30days.
It was also my responsibility to follow up with the court to either pay the citation fee or appear in court by the deadline or at an appointed time, and that they would mail the details to me but it was still my responsibility to take care of it regardless.tm</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086578</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087438</id>
	<title>Veeck v. SBCCI No. 99-4063</title>
	<author>Virtucon</author>
	<datestamp>1258131060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>in Veeck v. SBCCI</p><p>Although the Supreme Court hasn't ruled on the matter they declined to hear an Appeal in 2003.</p><p>In June 2003,  the Supreme Supreme Court decided not to hear an appeal of the Fifth Circuit Court June 7, 2002 decision  in Veeck vs. SBCCI (case No. 99-40632)<br>when a copyrighted standard or code is referenced into law (particularly if it thereby becomes "the law"), the developer cannot enforce its copyright against a free distribution of the standard.</p><p>Veeck had put building codes that his local municipality online.  These codes were purchased from SBCCI and when he published them they went after Veeck for copyright infringement.<br>Lower courts held that he had indeed violated copyright until it came to the Fifth Circuit.  With the the Supreme Court denying the writ of certiorari, the Fifth Circuit's ruling<br>stood in this case.</p><p>I think the premise here is that if you're expected to abide by a law, which is a fundamental premise of society, you can't put barriers around them such as copyrights.  It would<br>be interesting now to see if the Supreme Court reviewed one of these cases now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>in Veeck v. SBCCIAlthough the Supreme Court has n't ruled on the matter they declined to hear an Appeal in 2003.In June 2003 , the Supreme Supreme Court decided not to hear an appeal of the Fifth Circuit Court June 7 , 2002 decision in Veeck vs. SBCCI ( case No .
99-40632 ) when a copyrighted standard or code is referenced into law ( particularly if it thereby becomes " the law " ) , the developer can not enforce its copyright against a free distribution of the standard.Veeck had put building codes that his local municipality online .
These codes were purchased from SBCCI and when he published them they went after Veeck for copyright infringement.Lower courts held that he had indeed violated copyright until it came to the Fifth Circuit .
With the the Supreme Court denying the writ of certiorari , the Fifth Circuit 's rulingstood in this case.I think the premise here is that if you 're expected to abide by a law , which is a fundamental premise of society , you ca n't put barriers around them such as copyrights .
It wouldbe interesting now to see if the Supreme Court reviewed one of these cases now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>in Veeck v. SBCCIAlthough the Supreme Court hasn't ruled on the matter they declined to hear an Appeal in 2003.In June 2003,  the Supreme Supreme Court decided not to hear an appeal of the Fifth Circuit Court June 7, 2002 decision  in Veeck vs. SBCCI (case No.
99-40632)when a copyrighted standard or code is referenced into law (particularly if it thereby becomes "the law"), the developer cannot enforce its copyright against a free distribution of the standard.Veeck had put building codes that his local municipality online.
These codes were purchased from SBCCI and when he published them they went after Veeck for copyright infringement.Lower courts held that he had indeed violated copyright until it came to the Fifth Circuit.
With the the Supreme Court denying the writ of certiorari, the Fifth Circuit's rulingstood in this case.I think the premise here is that if you're expected to abide by a law, which is a fundamental premise of society, you can't put barriers around them such as copyrights.
It wouldbe interesting now to see if the Supreme Court reviewed one of these cases now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086428</id>
	<title>Re:New form of taxes!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258126260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is not ignorance of the law - it is ignorance of certain facts, i.e. that your license had been suspended.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is not ignorance of the law - it is ignorance of certain facts , i.e .
that your license had been suspended .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is not ignorance of the law - it is ignorance of certain facts, i.e.
that your license had been suspended.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087636</id>
	<title>That's not legal</title>
	<author>wzzzzrd</author>
	<datestamp>1258131900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>..at least in my country, which is not the USA. The citizens MUST be able to read the law WITHOUT ANY conditions, be it monetary or otherwise. Seriously, if a down-and-out comes into the public library, stating she wants to read the code of social law, she must not be hindered, regardless of the smell. They still send out books of our constitution for free here.</htmltext>
<tokenext>..at least in my country , which is not the USA .
The citizens MUST be able to read the law WITHOUT ANY conditions , be it monetary or otherwise .
Seriously , if a down-and-out comes into the public library , stating she wants to read the code of social law , she must not be hindered , regardless of the smell .
They still send out books of our constitution for free here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>..at least in my country, which is not the USA.
The citizens MUST be able to read the law WITHOUT ANY conditions, be it monetary or otherwise.
Seriously, if a down-and-out comes into the public library, stating she wants to read the code of social law, she must not be hindered, regardless of the smell.
They still send out books of our constitution for free here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086218</id>
	<title>Private Laws Cannot be Enforced Publicly</title>
	<author>Kartoffel</author>
	<datestamp>1258125240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like this particular set of laws now only applies to people who have purchased them for $200.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like this particular set of laws now only applies to people who have purchased them for $ 200 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like this particular set of laws now only applies to people who have purchased them for $200.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086350</id>
	<title>Schenectady is dying...</title>
	<author>rotide</author>
	<datestamp>1258125780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or should I say is pretty much dead.</p><p>Old resident here (I lived in Rotterdam, a town in Schenectady).</p><p>Schenectady was a booming place many years ago (~30) due to ALCO (American Locomotive) and GE (General Electric) being major companies that not only paid a lot in taxes but also brought other businesses to the area.</p><p>Downtown Schenectady, while small, was always alive with shops, stores, etc.  Heck, my favorite as a child was a small two story hardware store that had one of those old school ceiling mounted "trolly" systems for moving orders/payments around the building.  It was fun as a child to watch it zoom around.</p><p>Not anymore however.  Schenectady decided it would be a great idea to raise taxes and grab more cash.  GE and I'm assuming ALCO (can't remember when they pulled out) both decided taxes were too high and they pulled most of their operations out of Schenectady.  This has pretty much killed the local economy as all the other small businesses that relied on the employee (residents and commuters) patronage have closed up shop.  Schenectady shot itself in the foot really bad.</p><p>The article seems to state this is a temporary situation as they are paying $20k to get this on the web for everyone (assuming for free).  But at first glance it looked like a misguided cash grab.  Maybe it is, I'm not sure.  Will be interesting to see how quickly they get a free version out there, if the web version does indeed end up being free.  If not, *sigh*, Schenectady will be doing something stupid, again, to make a buck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or should I say is pretty much dead.Old resident here ( I lived in Rotterdam , a town in Schenectady ) .Schenectady was a booming place many years ago ( ~ 30 ) due to ALCO ( American Locomotive ) and GE ( General Electric ) being major companies that not only paid a lot in taxes but also brought other businesses to the area.Downtown Schenectady , while small , was always alive with shops , stores , etc .
Heck , my favorite as a child was a small two story hardware store that had one of those old school ceiling mounted " trolly " systems for moving orders/payments around the building .
It was fun as a child to watch it zoom around.Not anymore however .
Schenectady decided it would be a great idea to raise taxes and grab more cash .
GE and I 'm assuming ALCO ( ca n't remember when they pulled out ) both decided taxes were too high and they pulled most of their operations out of Schenectady .
This has pretty much killed the local economy as all the other small businesses that relied on the employee ( residents and commuters ) patronage have closed up shop .
Schenectady shot itself in the foot really bad.The article seems to state this is a temporary situation as they are paying $ 20k to get this on the web for everyone ( assuming for free ) .
But at first glance it looked like a misguided cash grab .
Maybe it is , I 'm not sure .
Will be interesting to see how quickly they get a free version out there , if the web version does indeed end up being free .
If not , * sigh * , Schenectady will be doing something stupid , again , to make a buck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or should I say is pretty much dead.Old resident here (I lived in Rotterdam, a town in Schenectady).Schenectady was a booming place many years ago (~30) due to ALCO (American Locomotive) and GE (General Electric) being major companies that not only paid a lot in taxes but also brought other businesses to the area.Downtown Schenectady, while small, was always alive with shops, stores, etc.
Heck, my favorite as a child was a small two story hardware store that had one of those old school ceiling mounted "trolly" systems for moving orders/payments around the building.
It was fun as a child to watch it zoom around.Not anymore however.
Schenectady decided it would be a great idea to raise taxes and grab more cash.
GE and I'm assuming ALCO (can't remember when they pulled out) both decided taxes were too high and they pulled most of their operations out of Schenectady.
This has pretty much killed the local economy as all the other small businesses that relied on the employee (residents and commuters) patronage have closed up shop.
Schenectady shot itself in the foot really bad.The article seems to state this is a temporary situation as they are paying $20k to get this on the web for everyone (assuming for free).
But at first glance it looked like a misguided cash grab.
Maybe it is, I'm not sure.
Will be interesting to see how quickly they get a free version out there, if the web version does indeed end up being free.
If not, *sigh*, Schenectady will be doing something stupid, again, to make a buck.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086622</id>
	<title>Misleading Headline</title>
	<author>deiol</author>
	<datestamp>1258126920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The headline states that the laws are only available via a $200 license, but that is not the case.  The laws currently exist in two forms, a paper version and an electronic version that is stored in a proprietary format.  The paper copy is held in multiple 3-ring binders and would cost $656 to reproduce, and in order to read the proprietary electronic format you would need to license the software required for $200.  No one ever said the laws themselves were copyrighted.  They are also available to view for free in multiple public locations, "White said copies of the code, with updates early this year, are on file at the Schenectady Public Library, Schenectady County Supreme Court Library, the Schenectady County Community College Library and several other locations."</p><p>So you can see that no one is preventing anyone from viewing the laws, the problem is if you want your own personal copy it just isn't financially feasible at this time.  Luckily the city realizes this and they're working to get a copy of the code online, which will be accessible for free.  It shouldn't be this difficult to view city laws electronically so searching is simpler, and this is a good example of why we shouldn't use proprietary formats.  Although your content is owned by you, you're limited to what you can do with it because of the format it's in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The headline states that the laws are only available via a $ 200 license , but that is not the case .
The laws currently exist in two forms , a paper version and an electronic version that is stored in a proprietary format .
The paper copy is held in multiple 3-ring binders and would cost $ 656 to reproduce , and in order to read the proprietary electronic format you would need to license the software required for $ 200 .
No one ever said the laws themselves were copyrighted .
They are also available to view for free in multiple public locations , " White said copies of the code , with updates early this year , are on file at the Schenectady Public Library , Schenectady County Supreme Court Library , the Schenectady County Community College Library and several other locations .
" So you can see that no one is preventing anyone from viewing the laws , the problem is if you want your own personal copy it just is n't financially feasible at this time .
Luckily the city realizes this and they 're working to get a copy of the code online , which will be accessible for free .
It should n't be this difficult to view city laws electronically so searching is simpler , and this is a good example of why we should n't use proprietary formats .
Although your content is owned by you , you 're limited to what you can do with it because of the format it 's in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The headline states that the laws are only available via a $200 license, but that is not the case.
The laws currently exist in two forms, a paper version and an electronic version that is stored in a proprietary format.
The paper copy is held in multiple 3-ring binders and would cost $656 to reproduce, and in order to read the proprietary electronic format you would need to license the software required for $200.
No one ever said the laws themselves were copyrighted.
They are also available to view for free in multiple public locations, "White said copies of the code, with updates early this year, are on file at the Schenectady Public Library, Schenectady County Supreme Court Library, the Schenectady County Community College Library and several other locations.
"So you can see that no one is preventing anyone from viewing the laws, the problem is if you want your own personal copy it just isn't financially feasible at this time.
Luckily the city realizes this and they're working to get a copy of the code online, which will be accessible for free.
It shouldn't be this difficult to view city laws electronically so searching is simpler, and this is a good example of why we shouldn't use proprietary formats.
Although your content is owned by you, you're limited to what you can do with it because of the format it's in.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088570</id>
	<title>Re:Do people on a jury have to pay $200 as well?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258136640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A member of a jury is NOT supposed to study the law or read it outside of the court context, making this a strawman.  The applicable law and legal decisions to be made are given as part of the jury instructions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A member of a jury is NOT supposed to study the law or read it outside of the court context , making this a strawman .
The applicable law and legal decisions to be made are given as part of the jury instructions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A member of a jury is NOT supposed to study the law or read it outside of the court context, making this a strawman.
The applicable law and legal decisions to be made are given as part of the jury instructions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30089668</id>
	<title>Re:Schenectady is dying...</title>
	<author>grep\_rocks</author>
	<datestamp>1258140720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>GE laid off most of the people at powersystems but not because of the taxes - they still have as much land there as they always did - thank rising productivity - you don't need 30000 people any more to make turbines... I think they are down to 6000...</htmltext>
<tokenext>GE laid off most of the people at powersystems but not because of the taxes - they still have as much land there as they always did - thank rising productivity - you do n't need 30000 people any more to make turbines... I think they are down to 6000.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GE laid off most of the people at powersystems but not because of the taxes - they still have as much land there as they always did - thank rising productivity - you don't need 30000 people any more to make turbines... I think they are down to 6000...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30089228</id>
	<title>Re:How is that the case?</title>
	<author>Bill\_the\_Engineer</author>
	<datestamp>1258139160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If I publish a book in CD form, I don't create a new, copyrightable work.</p></div></blockquote><p>Technically you did. You can copyright the composition of that work. Sheet music publishers have been doing this for years.
</p><p>Law offices usually pay for electronic versions of the law too.

</p><p>I think the facts from TFA has been presented in a way that makes the city look bad.
</p><p>I read the following from the article:
</p><p>1. Citizen was upset that his dog was found in violation of city ordinance, yet his rowdy neighbors are apparently not being cited.
</p><p>2. Citizen decides he wants to see how he can get his rowdy neighbors in trouble with the law, and wants to be able to study the law at home rather wasting time at the library.
</p><p>3. Citizen isn't willing to pay money for paper copies of the law books, and was hoping to get an electronic copy from the clerk.
</p><p>4. Citizen is upset that the clerk wouldn't give him a copy of the CD because it was copyrighted by the CD's publisher and suggested that he try purchasing a copy.
</p><p>5. Citizen is upset that he would have to either pay $200 for the CD, wait until the law is published on the web, or spend time at the library because he's too cheap to spend money to harass his neighbors.
</p><p>This is on slashdot because someone misread the article and thought it was about the city charging for access to the law rather than telling a guy if he wants an electronic version he can purchase it from General Code or wait until the web site is made.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I publish a book in CD form , I do n't create a new , copyrightable work.Technically you did .
You can copyright the composition of that work .
Sheet music publishers have been doing this for years .
Law offices usually pay for electronic versions of the law too .
I think the facts from TFA has been presented in a way that makes the city look bad .
I read the following from the article : 1 .
Citizen was upset that his dog was found in violation of city ordinance , yet his rowdy neighbors are apparently not being cited .
2. Citizen decides he wants to see how he can get his rowdy neighbors in trouble with the law , and wants to be able to study the law at home rather wasting time at the library .
3. Citizen is n't willing to pay money for paper copies of the law books , and was hoping to get an electronic copy from the clerk .
4. Citizen is upset that the clerk would n't give him a copy of the CD because it was copyrighted by the CD 's publisher and suggested that he try purchasing a copy .
5. Citizen is upset that he would have to either pay $ 200 for the CD , wait until the law is published on the web , or spend time at the library because he 's too cheap to spend money to harass his neighbors .
This is on slashdot because someone misread the article and thought it was about the city charging for access to the law rather than telling a guy if he wants an electronic version he can purchase it from General Code or wait until the web site is made .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I publish a book in CD form, I don't create a new, copyrightable work.Technically you did.
You can copyright the composition of that work.
Sheet music publishers have been doing this for years.
Law offices usually pay for electronic versions of the law too.
I think the facts from TFA has been presented in a way that makes the city look bad.
I read the following from the article:
1.
Citizen was upset that his dog was found in violation of city ordinance, yet his rowdy neighbors are apparently not being cited.
2. Citizen decides he wants to see how he can get his rowdy neighbors in trouble with the law, and wants to be able to study the law at home rather wasting time at the library.
3. Citizen isn't willing to pay money for paper copies of the law books, and was hoping to get an electronic copy from the clerk.
4. Citizen is upset that the clerk wouldn't give him a copy of the CD because it was copyrighted by the CD's publisher and suggested that he try purchasing a copy.
5. Citizen is upset that he would have to either pay $200 for the CD, wait until the law is published on the web, or spend time at the library because he's too cheap to spend money to harass his neighbors.
This is on slashdot because someone misread the article and thought it was about the city charging for access to the law rather than telling a guy if he wants an electronic version he can purchase it from General Code or wait until the web site is made.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086252</id>
	<title>Re:New form of taxes!</title>
	<author>buttersnout</author>
	<datestamp>1258125360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>In my experience the "ignorance of the law is no excuse" standpoint holds up whether or not you have a good excuse for your ignorance.  The police once copied down my address incorrectly on a ticket (they ignored my correct address on the copy of the ticket I mailed in) causing a summons to court, a notice of default judgement against me, a notice that my ticket was unpaid and a notice that my license had been suspended to be sent to the wrong address.  I was later charged with driving with a suspended license after an accident a few months later.  I discovered what had happened after some digging at the bureau of public records.  I explained what had happened to the judge and he told me the ignorance of the law is ones own fault period.  The fact that the state had tried to contact me was sufficient on their part.  It is always your responsibility to become informed of the law regardless of any difficulties you have.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In my experience the " ignorance of the law is no excuse " standpoint holds up whether or not you have a good excuse for your ignorance .
The police once copied down my address incorrectly on a ticket ( they ignored my correct address on the copy of the ticket I mailed in ) causing a summons to court , a notice of default judgement against me , a notice that my ticket was unpaid and a notice that my license had been suspended to be sent to the wrong address .
I was later charged with driving with a suspended license after an accident a few months later .
I discovered what had happened after some digging at the bureau of public records .
I explained what had happened to the judge and he told me the ignorance of the law is ones own fault period .
The fact that the state had tried to contact me was sufficient on their part .
It is always your responsibility to become informed of the law regardless of any difficulties you have .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my experience the "ignorance of the law is no excuse" standpoint holds up whether or not you have a good excuse for your ignorance.
The police once copied down my address incorrectly on a ticket (they ignored my correct address on the copy of the ticket I mailed in) causing a summons to court, a notice of default judgement against me, a notice that my ticket was unpaid and a notice that my license had been suspended to be sent to the wrong address.
I was later charged with driving with a suspended license after an accident a few months later.
I discovered what had happened after some digging at the bureau of public records.
I explained what had happened to the judge and he told me the ignorance of the law is ones own fault period.
The fact that the state had tried to contact me was sufficient on their part.
It is always your responsibility to become informed of the law regardless of any difficulties you have.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086112</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088770</id>
	<title>"It is the duty of every citizen to give us $100!!</title>
	<author>paulproteus</author>
	<datestamp>1258137360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>public.resource.org has a <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/publicresourceorg/2790563486/in/set-72157606911738805/" title="flickr.com">GREAT comic about a similar issue</a> [flickr.com]. It is a lovingly-captioned discussion between two Lego men. My favorite passage:</p><ul> <li>"Isn't it the duty of every citizen to know the law?"</li><li>"It is also the duty of every citizen to give us $100!!"</li></ul><p>public.resource.org is a project to make government information more available. They've been focusing for a while on these sorts of expensive, copyright-encumbered laws. The courts have struck down copyright interest in these laws before, but that doesn't stop the cartels and the states from trying to charge people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>public.resource.org has a GREAT comic about a similar issue [ flickr.com ] .
It is a lovingly-captioned discussion between two Lego men .
My favorite passage : " Is n't it the duty of every citizen to know the law ?
" " It is also the duty of every citizen to give us $ 100 ! !
" public.resource.org is a project to make government information more available .
They 've been focusing for a while on these sorts of expensive , copyright-encumbered laws .
The courts have struck down copyright interest in these laws before , but that does n't stop the cartels and the states from trying to charge people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>public.resource.org has a GREAT comic about a similar issue [flickr.com].
It is a lovingly-captioned discussion between two Lego men.
My favorite passage: "Isn't it the duty of every citizen to know the law?
""It is also the duty of every citizen to give us $100!!
"public.resource.org is a project to make government information more available.
They've been focusing for a while on these sorts of expensive, copyright-encumbered laws.
The courts have struck down copyright interest in these laws before, but that doesn't stop the cartels and the states from trying to charge people.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30094994</id>
	<title>In Canada...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258132620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... This exact situation is specified in the copyright law itself.</p><p>The conversion of the art into an new medium is NOT a new art.</p><p>Their software is theirs.... If they actually made it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... This exact situation is specified in the copyright law itself.The conversion of the art into an new medium is NOT a new art.Their software is theirs.... If they actually made it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... This exact situation is specified in the copyright law itself.The conversion of the art into an new medium is NOT a new art.Their software is theirs.... If they actually made it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088800</id>
	<title>Re:New form of taxes!</title>
	<author>Abreu</author>
	<datestamp>1258137540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This just proves that you should not talk to authority without the assistance of a lawyer</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This just proves that you should not talk to authority without the assistance of a lawyer</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This just proves that you should not talk to authority without the assistance of a lawyer</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086578</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087124</id>
	<title>the OPs summary is alarmist. Please RTFA</title>
	<author>ethicalBob</author>
	<datestamp>1258129560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The article clearly states that the old-school, paper version was available; just not in a convenient, searchable database (yet).
<br> <br>
He could has looked up the data at the city hall, or gone to the library and sud the paper copies (also in the article).
<br> <br>
The thing he ISN'T given access to is the proprietary software which is copyrighted by the company who is currently creating a version that will be free for all on the web.  Its understandable and reasonable that the company that is taking the time take volumes of data and convert it into a a usable database be allowed some protection to their part of the work for a reasonable period of time while it is being put into that format, perfected as a product (quality assurance), and posted to the web in a format that is easily and freely searchable.
<br> <br>
This isn't about keeping people from having access to the law, TFA states clearly that he or anyone can still access all the paper copies of the laws at the library, which is the system that has been in place for ages; now that the city is attempting to make it more easily available.
<br> <br>
All the saber-rattling about forced "ignorance of the law" etc.  would be nullified if the OP posted a balanced summary, or people actually too the time to read the whole (2 page) article.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The article clearly states that the old-school , paper version was available ; just not in a convenient , searchable database ( yet ) .
He could has looked up the data at the city hall , or gone to the library and sud the paper copies ( also in the article ) .
The thing he IS N'T given access to is the proprietary software which is copyrighted by the company who is currently creating a version that will be free for all on the web .
Its understandable and reasonable that the company that is taking the time take volumes of data and convert it into a a usable database be allowed some protection to their part of the work for a reasonable period of time while it is being put into that format , perfected as a product ( quality assurance ) , and posted to the web in a format that is easily and freely searchable .
This is n't about keeping people from having access to the law , TFA states clearly that he or anyone can still access all the paper copies of the laws at the library , which is the system that has been in place for ages ; now that the city is attempting to make it more easily available .
All the saber-rattling about forced " ignorance of the law " etc .
would be nullified if the OP posted a balanced summary , or people actually too the time to read the whole ( 2 page ) article .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article clearly states that the old-school, paper version was available; just not in a convenient, searchable database (yet).
He could has looked up the data at the city hall, or gone to the library and sud the paper copies (also in the article).
The thing he ISN'T given access to is the proprietary software which is copyrighted by the company who is currently creating a version that will be free for all on the web.
Its understandable and reasonable that the company that is taking the time take volumes of data and convert it into a a usable database be allowed some protection to their part of the work for a reasonable period of time while it is being put into that format, perfected as a product (quality assurance), and posted to the web in a format that is easily and freely searchable.
This isn't about keeping people from having access to the law, TFA states clearly that he or anyone can still access all the paper copies of the laws at the library, which is the system that has been in place for ages; now that the city is attempting to make it more easily available.
All the saber-rattling about forced "ignorance of the law" etc.
would be nullified if the OP posted a balanced summary, or people actually too the time to read the whole (2 page) article.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086570</id>
	<title>Re:Do people on a jury have to pay $200 as well?</title>
	<author>parliboy</author>
	<datestamp>1258126740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A jury's job has nothing to do with knowing the law, nullification advocacy aside.  Juries decide facts based on the testimony, evidence, and judge's instructions based on the law.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A jury 's job has nothing to do with knowing the law , nullification advocacy aside .
Juries decide facts based on the testimony , evidence , and judge 's instructions based on the law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A jury's job has nothing to do with knowing the law, nullification advocacy aside.
Juries decide facts based on the testimony, evidence, and judge's instructions based on the law.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088148</id>
	<title>It's only a matter of time...</title>
	<author>CYDVicious</author>
	<datestamp>1258134360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>before we read about someone charging the state/city $$$ to follow these laws...</htmltext>
<tokenext>before we read about someone charging the state/city $ $ $ to follow these laws.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>before we read about someone charging the state/city $$$ to follow these laws...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086550
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30089668
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30089228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086228
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087468
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087100
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088158
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086420
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086600
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30114272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30090072
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30092958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086720
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086400
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30095962
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086292
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30090616
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30102658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088840
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086462
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087962
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30092252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086604
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088464
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086528
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30089506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_1310212_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_1310212.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086238
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088506
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087100
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086598
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088134
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30090072
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088130
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086562
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086600
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087260
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088496
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_1310212.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086112
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086132
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086252
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086576
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086428
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086528
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086708
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086648
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086420
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086578
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088800
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088464
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30090616
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087962
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088840
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30102658
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086462
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_1310212.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30091740
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_1310212.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086336
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_1310212.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086214
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086706
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086670
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086426
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086406
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30088158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086550
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086456
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086814
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086604
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086516
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_1310212.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086292
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30095962
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_1310212.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086482
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_1310212.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086366
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_1310212.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086350
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086720
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30089668
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086862
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087506
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30089506
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_1310212.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086474
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087468
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30092958
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30092252
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_1310212.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30114272
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_1310212.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086228
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30089228
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_1310212.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087124
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_1310212.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086400
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086882
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_1310212.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087636
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_1310212.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086622
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_1310212.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086588
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_1310212.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30087276
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_1310212.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_1310212.30086574
</commentlist>
</conversation>
