<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_20_0018218</id>
	<title>Google Accused of Violating Copyright In China</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1258723380000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.goodgearguide.com.au/" rel="nofollow">angry tapir</a> writes <i>"The Chinese Authors Society has demanded that Google present a resolution plan by the end of the year and quickly handle compensation for Chinese authors whose books the US company has <a href="http://www.goodgearguide.com.au/article/326998">scanned without permission as part of its Book Search program</a>. A local copyright protection group, co-founded by the authors group, has said it found at least 17,000 Chinese works included in Google's scanning plan."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>angry tapir writes " The Chinese Authors Society has demanded that Google present a resolution plan by the end of the year and quickly handle compensation for Chinese authors whose books the US company has scanned without permission as part of its Book Search program .
A local copyright protection group , co-founded by the authors group , has said it found at least 17,000 Chinese works included in Google 's scanning plan .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>angry tapir writes "The Chinese Authors Society has demanded that Google present a resolution plan by the end of the year and quickly handle compensation for Chinese authors whose books the US company has scanned without permission as part of its Book Search program.
A local copyright protection group, co-founded by the authors group, has said it found at least 17,000 Chinese works included in Google's scanning plan.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167230</id>
	<title>Re:China is getting pretty uppity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258642200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Huawawa! Ching chong <i>chang</i> hwhawa ching chang <a href="http://www.resist.com/CARTOON\%20GALLERY/GOOKS/gook\_image01.jpg" title="resist.com" rel="nofollow">CHONG.</a> [resist.com] \\_/<br> <br>

Cho wong wang CHING CHANG \\_/ ting tong ping pong <a href="http://www.resist.com/CARTOON\%20GALLERY/GOOKS/gook\_image03.jpg" title="resist.com" rel="nofollow">WA!</a> [resist.com] <br> <br>

Tong tam tang <a href="http://www.asianboygay.com/uploads/106\_gay-asian-boys.jpg" title="asianboygay.com" rel="nofollow">ho hai</a> [asianboygay.com] chung chong chang wong <a href="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2127/2334934136\_07bf7a6f89.jpg" title="flickr.com" rel="nofollow">DONG!</a> [flickr.com] <br> <br>

\\_/  \\_/  \\_/ hiiiiiiiiYAAAAAAAAAH!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Huawawa !
Ching chong chang hwhawa ching chang CHONG .
[ resist.com ] \ \ _/ Cho wong wang CHING CHANG \ \ _/ ting tong ping pong WA !
[ resist.com ] Tong tam tang ho hai [ asianboygay.com ] chung chong chang wong DONG !
[ flickr.com ] \ \ _/ \ \ _/ \ \ _/ hiiiiiiiiYAAAAAAAAAH !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Huawawa!
Ching chong chang hwhawa ching chang CHONG.
[resist.com] \\_/ 

Cho wong wang CHING CHANG \\_/ ting tong ping pong WA!
[resist.com]  

Tong tam tang ho hai [asianboygay.com] chung chong chang wong DONG!
[flickr.com]  

\\_/  \\_/  \\_/ hiiiiiiiiYAAAAAAAAAH!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167064</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168036</id>
	<title>Re:It doesn't go both ways</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258651440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Using Yahoo or Bing?  Hahahahahahahahahahaha Hahahahahahaha Hahaha Ha Haaaa Hahahahahaha</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Using Yahoo or Bing ?
Hahahahahahahahahahaha Hahahahahahaha Hahaha Ha Haaaa Hahahahahaha</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Using Yahoo or Bing?
Hahahahahahahahahahaha Hahahahahahaha Hahaha Ha Haaaa Hahahahahaha</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30170332</id>
	<title>Re:In other news</title>
	<author>fulldecent</author>
	<datestamp>1258728420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>in other news, so does google:</p><p><a href="http://google.cn/mp3" title="google.cn">http://google.cn/mp3</a> [google.cn]</p><p>only accessible from certain countries' IPs</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>in other news , so does google : http : //google.cn/mp3 [ google.cn ] only accessible from certain countries ' IPs</tokentext>
<sentencetext>in other news, so does google:http://google.cn/mp3 [google.cn]only accessible from certain countries' IPs</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30187226</id>
	<title>Re:China have copyright ?</title>
	<author>lpq</author>
	<datestamp>1258794240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's obviously a political maneuver.  If they can show the big american company as being a copyright violator, then they can use that as leverage in accusations that they don't enforce american copyrights in china.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's obviously a political maneuver .
If they can show the big american company as being a copyright violator , then they can use that as leverage in accusations that they do n't enforce american copyrights in china .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's obviously a political maneuver.
If they can show the big american company as being a copyright violator, then they can use that as leverage in accusations that they don't enforce american copyrights in china.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30169370</id>
	<title>Re:Is this really about copyright?</title>
	<author>euyis</author>
	<datestamp>1258714380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's all about money. Actually most of the books involved are trash, which promote "socialist values" and have nothing to do with real life.<br> <br>
Google should simply ignore these books, since nobody reads them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's all about money .
Actually most of the books involved are trash , which promote " socialist values " and have nothing to do with real life .
Google should simply ignore these books , since nobody reads them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's all about money.
Actually most of the books involved are trash, which promote "socialist values" and have nothing to do with real life.
Google should simply ignore these books, since nobody reads them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167244</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167988</id>
	<title>Re:Copywrong.  How convenient!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258650840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You might have been able to claim a moral high ground had you chosen to observe the 1989 limit you suggest as reasonable, but by ignoring what you state is reasonable you show your true colors and they look suspiciously like a skull and crossbones.  You are a pirate; you are simply trying to justify your illegal activities.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You might have been able to claim a moral high ground had you chosen to observe the 1989 limit you suggest as reasonable , but by ignoring what you state is reasonable you show your true colors and they look suspiciously like a skull and crossbones .
You are a pirate ; you are simply trying to justify your illegal activities .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You might have been able to claim a moral high ground had you chosen to observe the 1989 limit you suggest as reasonable, but by ignoring what you state is reasonable you show your true colors and they look suspiciously like a skull and crossbones.
You are a pirate; you are simply trying to justify your illegal activities.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167610</id>
	<title>Re:In other news</title>
	<author>asamad</author>
	<datestamp>1258646580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>not news to others, but I just noticed how similar baidu.com is to google - what laugh</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>not news to others , but I just noticed how similar baidu.com is to google - what laugh</tokentext>
<sentencetext>not news to others, but I just noticed how similar baidu.com is to google - what laugh</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167570</id>
	<title>Re:Copywrong.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258646040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hope you go to prison and get aids in a jail rape.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope you go to prison and get aids in a jail rape .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope you go to prison and get aids in a jail rape.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30209248</id>
	<title>Re:Copywrong.</title>
	<author>headkase</author>
	<datestamp>1258987440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I place this firmly in the public domain. If your nation does not permit a public domain then I grant you an unlimited license to use this in any manner you see fit with or without attribution.<br>
<br>
I have an agenda. I want to improve the lot of humanity as a whole. <br>
<br>
As we enter the Information Age I am outlining a method here for harnessing our plurality, creativity, values, and intelligence to manage the issues of the day that relate to public importance. <br>
<br>
Social networks have risen in popularity in the last few years and while they are excellent methods to maintain contact with your friends and acquaintances they could be dramatically improved by adding an agenda driven, truth seeking through adversary, and hierarchical organization, where you drill down and bubble back up. Closing deeper levels of conversation with truth. You may also support your position by linking around to more comprehensive arguments. <br>
<br>
While seeking truth, bias is permitted to cover areas of opinion but prejudice is forbidden as this covers areas of fact. <br>
<br>
Anyone may start a agenda/topic/issue to be managed. Topics are tagged, You have your "watch" topics, when your interests appear you are notified and you have the opportunity to go there and be either a proponent, opponent, or authority.
<br>
<br>
When you contribute something new you have the option to link back to your agenda to support it. <br>
<br>
Some mechanics could include: <br>
At the root in a social network, general categories exist for discussion. Moderators manage here but they are not permitted to be proponents or opponents, only authorities. These authorities also may place any other authority at any sub-branch in their domain. Every reply is a branch, and drilling down, moderators get to manage branches they are responsible for. Creating a branch makes you its primary moderator and gives you the ability to add or remove others with this status. Your record of truth contributes to your rating of authority in their respective tags. <br>
<br>
As an agent everyone my attach their own opinion of reputation to any branch and these may be collated and shown for everyone. <br>
<br>
As an example, and I apologize if I turn some of you completely off while I was establishing the topic, fending off the trolls, and getting other general formalities out of the way. Read this branch: <a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1450972&amp;cid=30167330" title="slashdot.org">http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1450972&amp;cid=30167330</a> [slashdot.org] of a thread. Be sure to adjust the display slider as successive comments are continuations of the previous. Jump straight to the chase here: <a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1450972&amp;cid=30192990" title="slashdot.org">http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1450972&amp;cid=30192990</a> [slashdot.org] . This outline takes work to pull off in a traditional forum setting but if purpose-built into social networks the kludginess could be minimized while maximizing efficiency and effectiveness - it is a prototype after all. <br>
<br>
Now I do have an obligation to that thread. I didn't jerk people around, I have to spend some real time and effort there defining the finer points of why the public domain is important in an adversarial setting. I also have the commitment to do what I said and pay more attention to slashdot so that when those relevant stories appear I do go in and contribute something while linking back and rewarding the efforts of everyone who helped with the consensus. Its a social contract, I hope the social networks don't take too long to adapt to issue management. <br>
<br>
Please respond to this post by understanding the issue, adding your own ideas, contributing to the strengths, and criticizing the weakness'. <br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
If you know of anywhere that would be receptive to an opinion piece such as this PLEASE let me know by replying. <br>
<br>
It IS in the public domain so if you would like to post this anywhere PLEASE do, you don't even have to credit me!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I place this firmly in the public domain .
If your nation does not permit a public domain then I grant you an unlimited license to use this in any manner you see fit with or without attribution .
I have an agenda .
I want to improve the lot of humanity as a whole .
As we enter the Information Age I am outlining a method here for harnessing our plurality , creativity , values , and intelligence to manage the issues of the day that relate to public importance .
Social networks have risen in popularity in the last few years and while they are excellent methods to maintain contact with your friends and acquaintances they could be dramatically improved by adding an agenda driven , truth seeking through adversary , and hierarchical organization , where you drill down and bubble back up .
Closing deeper levels of conversation with truth .
You may also support your position by linking around to more comprehensive arguments .
While seeking truth , bias is permitted to cover areas of opinion but prejudice is forbidden as this covers areas of fact .
Anyone may start a agenda/topic/issue to be managed .
Topics are tagged , You have your " watch " topics , when your interests appear you are notified and you have the opportunity to go there and be either a proponent , opponent , or authority .
When you contribute something new you have the option to link back to your agenda to support it .
Some mechanics could include : At the root in a social network , general categories exist for discussion .
Moderators manage here but they are not permitted to be proponents or opponents , only authorities .
These authorities also may place any other authority at any sub-branch in their domain .
Every reply is a branch , and drilling down , moderators get to manage branches they are responsible for .
Creating a branch makes you its primary moderator and gives you the ability to add or remove others with this status .
Your record of truth contributes to your rating of authority in their respective tags .
As an agent everyone my attach their own opinion of reputation to any branch and these may be collated and shown for everyone .
As an example , and I apologize if I turn some of you completely off while I was establishing the topic , fending off the trolls , and getting other general formalities out of the way .
Read this branch : http : //slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1450972&amp;cid = 30167330 [ slashdot.org ] of a thread .
Be sure to adjust the display slider as successive comments are continuations of the previous .
Jump straight to the chase here : http : //slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1450972&amp;cid = 30192990 [ slashdot.org ] .
This outline takes work to pull off in a traditional forum setting but if purpose-built into social networks the kludginess could be minimized while maximizing efficiency and effectiveness - it is a prototype after all .
Now I do have an obligation to that thread .
I did n't jerk people around , I have to spend some real time and effort there defining the finer points of why the public domain is important in an adversarial setting .
I also have the commitment to do what I said and pay more attention to slashdot so that when those relevant stories appear I do go in and contribute something while linking back and rewarding the efforts of everyone who helped with the consensus .
Its a social contract , I hope the social networks do n't take too long to adapt to issue management .
Please respond to this post by understanding the issue , adding your own ideas , contributing to the strengths , and criticizing the weakness' .
-- If you know of anywhere that would be receptive to an opinion piece such as this PLEASE let me know by replying .
It IS in the public domain so if you would like to post this anywhere PLEASE do , you do n't even have to credit me !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I place this firmly in the public domain.
If your nation does not permit a public domain then I grant you an unlimited license to use this in any manner you see fit with or without attribution.
I have an agenda.
I want to improve the lot of humanity as a whole.
As we enter the Information Age I am outlining a method here for harnessing our plurality, creativity, values, and intelligence to manage the issues of the day that relate to public importance.
Social networks have risen in popularity in the last few years and while they are excellent methods to maintain contact with your friends and acquaintances they could be dramatically improved by adding an agenda driven, truth seeking through adversary, and hierarchical organization, where you drill down and bubble back up.
Closing deeper levels of conversation with truth.
You may also support your position by linking around to more comprehensive arguments.
While seeking truth, bias is permitted to cover areas of opinion but prejudice is forbidden as this covers areas of fact.
Anyone may start a agenda/topic/issue to be managed.
Topics are tagged, You have your "watch" topics, when your interests appear you are notified and you have the opportunity to go there and be either a proponent, opponent, or authority.
When you contribute something new you have the option to link back to your agenda to support it.
Some mechanics could include: 
At the root in a social network, general categories exist for discussion.
Moderators manage here but they are not permitted to be proponents or opponents, only authorities.
These authorities also may place any other authority at any sub-branch in their domain.
Every reply is a branch, and drilling down, moderators get to manage branches they are responsible for.
Creating a branch makes you its primary moderator and gives you the ability to add or remove others with this status.
Your record of truth contributes to your rating of authority in their respective tags.
As an agent everyone my attach their own opinion of reputation to any branch and these may be collated and shown for everyone.
As an example, and I apologize if I turn some of you completely off while I was establishing the topic, fending off the trolls, and getting other general formalities out of the way.
Read this branch: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1450972&amp;cid=30167330 [slashdot.org] of a thread.
Be sure to adjust the display slider as successive comments are continuations of the previous.
Jump straight to the chase here: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1450972&amp;cid=30192990 [slashdot.org] .
This outline takes work to pull off in a traditional forum setting but if purpose-built into social networks the kludginess could be minimized while maximizing efficiency and effectiveness - it is a prototype after all.
Now I do have an obligation to that thread.
I didn't jerk people around, I have to spend some real time and effort there defining the finer points of why the public domain is important in an adversarial setting.
I also have the commitment to do what I said and pay more attention to slashdot so that when those relevant stories appear I do go in and contribute something while linking back and rewarding the efforts of everyone who helped with the consensus.
Its a social contract, I hope the social networks don't take too long to adapt to issue management.
Please respond to this post by understanding the issue, adding your own ideas, contributing to the strengths, and criticizing the weakness'.
-- 
If you know of anywhere that would be receptive to an opinion piece such as this PLEASE let me know by replying.
It IS in the public domain so if you would like to post this anywhere PLEASE do, you don't even have to credit me!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30211316</id>
	<title>Re:Copywrong.</title>
	<author>headkase</author>
	<datestamp>1259061060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Reputation may also apply to individuals, if someone abuses, lies, vandalizes, and is pointless they can be filtered out. Being linked to your account this would sort out the majority of abuse only leaving new users to contend with.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Reputation may also apply to individuals , if someone abuses , lies , vandalizes , and is pointless they can be filtered out .
Being linked to your account this would sort out the majority of abuse only leaving new users to contend with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reputation may also apply to individuals, if someone abuses, lies, vandalizes, and is pointless they can be filtered out.
Being linked to your account this would sort out the majority of abuse only leaving new users to contend with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30209248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167104</id>
	<title>under the acta google will be down in less then 1</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258641060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>under the acta google will be down in less then 1 hour</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>under the acta google will be down in less then 1 hour</tokentext>
<sentencetext>under the acta google will be down in less then 1 hour</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30169726</id>
	<title>Re:Copywrong.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258720080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually he might have a small point somewhere in there. Content creators are standing on the shoulders of giants, using centuries worth of stories and history as inspiration, then claiming the 'idea' as their own - essentially demanding payment for re-using our culture and all the while locking it up so much that it will never enter our domain again. They are pulling up the ladder behind them, while claiming moral superiority.</p><p>They may deserve a bit of cash for their time in re-writing the story to meet modern standards - but they have no right to keep it out of our hands for centuries to come.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually he might have a small point somewhere in there .
Content creators are standing on the shoulders of giants , using centuries worth of stories and history as inspiration , then claiming the 'idea ' as their own - essentially demanding payment for re-using our culture and all the while locking it up so much that it will never enter our domain again .
They are pulling up the ladder behind them , while claiming moral superiority.They may deserve a bit of cash for their time in re-writing the story to meet modern standards - but they have no right to keep it out of our hands for centuries to come .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually he might have a small point somewhere in there.
Content creators are standing on the shoulders of giants, using centuries worth of stories and history as inspiration, then claiming the 'idea' as their own - essentially demanding payment for re-using our culture and all the while locking it up so much that it will never enter our domain again.
They are pulling up the ladder behind them, while claiming moral superiority.They may deserve a bit of cash for their time in re-writing the story to meet modern standards - but they have no right to keep it out of our hands for centuries to come.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168658</id>
	<title>Re:Copywrong.</title>
	<author>HiThere</author>
	<datestamp>1258658280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are basically right, but be sure to maintain your anonymity.</p><p>I agree with you about the copyright theft 100\%, and possibly a bit more.  My protest, however, has taken the form of refusing to purchase works supporting either the RIAA or the MPAA.  This is a legal protest, probably because it's ineffective.  Since you are Canadian, perhaps the tax of recordable media is sufficient to justify some of your actions in the eyes of the courts.  As I recall the decisions have been mixed and limited.</p><p>My objections to your actions are practical rather than moral.  I consider the illegal copying and distribution of copyrighted works much more moral than bribing legislators to extend the term of the copyright, and all those who benefit from such a crime are accessories in the crime.  But don't expect any court to support this opinion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are basically right , but be sure to maintain your anonymity.I agree with you about the copyright theft 100 \ % , and possibly a bit more .
My protest , however , has taken the form of refusing to purchase works supporting either the RIAA or the MPAA .
This is a legal protest , probably because it 's ineffective .
Since you are Canadian , perhaps the tax of recordable media is sufficient to justify some of your actions in the eyes of the courts .
As I recall the decisions have been mixed and limited.My objections to your actions are practical rather than moral .
I consider the illegal copying and distribution of copyrighted works much more moral than bribing legislators to extend the term of the copyright , and all those who benefit from such a crime are accessories in the crime .
But do n't expect any court to support this opinion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are basically right, but be sure to maintain your anonymity.I agree with you about the copyright theft 100\%, and possibly a bit more.
My protest, however, has taken the form of refusing to purchase works supporting either the RIAA or the MPAA.
This is a legal protest, probably because it's ineffective.
Since you are Canadian, perhaps the tax of recordable media is sufficient to justify some of your actions in the eyes of the courts.
As I recall the decisions have been mixed and limited.My objections to your actions are practical rather than moral.
I consider the illegal copying and distribution of copyrighted works much more moral than bribing legislators to extend the term of the copyright, and all those who benefit from such a crime are accessories in the crime.
But don't expect any court to support this opinion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30170364</id>
	<title>Re:Copywrong.</title>
	<author>fulldecent</author>
	<datestamp>1258728600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>then I recommend you sell copies of the original Mickey Mouse series in protest of the law.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>then I recommend you sell copies of the original Mickey Mouse series in protest of the law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>then I recommend you sell copies of the original Mickey Mouse series in protest of the law.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167244</id>
	<title>Is this really about copyright?</title>
	<author>a302b</author>
	<datestamp>1258642440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is this really about copyright? Or is it an excuse for the Chinese Government to have greater control over books written in Chinese (some of which may be potentially critical of the government)?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this really about copyright ?
Or is it an excuse for the Chinese Government to have greater control over books written in Chinese ( some of which may be potentially critical of the government ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this really about copyright?
Or is it an excuse for the Chinese Government to have greater control over books written in Chinese (some of which may be potentially critical of the government)?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167064</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30211622</id>
	<title>Re:Copywrong.</title>
	<author>headkase</author>
	<datestamp>1259064000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Slashdot almost gets there: some functions have no equivalents</htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot almost gets there : some functions have no equivalents</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot almost gets there: some functions have no equivalents</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30209248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167188</id>
	<title>Same treatment</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258641900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think google should address this with as much tenacity as the chinese government has in enforcing copyright of non-chinese works/programs/music.<br>One also has to wonder what China is trying to prove. First microsoft and now google</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think google should address this with as much tenacity as the chinese government has in enforcing copyright of non-chinese works/programs/music.One also has to wonder what China is trying to prove .
First microsoft and now google</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think google should address this with as much tenacity as the chinese government has in enforcing copyright of non-chinese works/programs/music.One also has to wonder what China is trying to prove.
First microsoft and now google</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167346</id>
	<title>Re:It doesn't go both ways</title>
	<author>Shikaku</author>
	<datestamp>1258643400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On one hand, lose a chance at the biggest market available?</p><p>Or the other, bend over to all of China's whims?</p><p>Such a hard decision for companies...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On one hand , lose a chance at the biggest market available ? Or the other , bend over to all of China 's whims ? Such a hard decision for companies.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On one hand, lose a chance at the biggest market available?Or the other, bend over to all of China's whims?Such a hard decision for companies...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167812</id>
	<title>Re:Copywrong.</title>
	<author>headkase</author>
	<datestamp>1258648980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Content in the figurative, represented today by the Motion Picture Association of America and the Recording Industry Association of America.  Both are pushing their agendas and manipulating discussion according to their goals.  Time to poke back just because their assholes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Content in the figurative , represented today by the Motion Picture Association of America and the Recording Industry Association of America .
Both are pushing their agendas and manipulating discussion according to their goals .
Time to poke back just because their assholes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Content in the figurative, represented today by the Motion Picture Association of America and the Recording Industry Association of America.
Both are pushing their agendas and manipulating discussion according to their goals.
Time to poke back just because their assholes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30170240</id>
	<title>Is Love Me Do Worth a Dollar.</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1258727580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The way I look at it is this.  I don't care how old the song, is, is it well, worth a dollar?  Is Sgt Peppers worth $20?  I'd say, geez, I'm going to play the CD until it breaks, and listen to it an easy 100 times, so yeah, its worth a buck.  In fact, its pretty hard to find a better deal for entertainment than a song.  You can take it with you.  You can have it on while you are doing something else.  It makes whatever you are doing better, and its only $20.  Don't get tripped up that John is dead now, or whatever.  It's what is the song worth.  That millions of people agree with that assessment means somebody is going to get rich, but what does it matter.  Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds made me happy.  It's worth a buck, and I'll pay it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The way I look at it is this .
I do n't care how old the song , is , is it well , worth a dollar ?
Is Sgt Peppers worth $ 20 ?
I 'd say , geez , I 'm going to play the CD until it breaks , and listen to it an easy 100 times , so yeah , its worth a buck .
In fact , its pretty hard to find a better deal for entertainment than a song .
You can take it with you .
You can have it on while you are doing something else .
It makes whatever you are doing better , and its only $ 20 .
Do n't get tripped up that John is dead now , or whatever .
It 's what is the song worth .
That millions of people agree with that assessment means somebody is going to get rich , but what does it matter .
Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds made me happy .
It 's worth a buck , and I 'll pay it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The way I look at it is this.
I don't care how old the song, is, is it well, worth a dollar?
Is Sgt Peppers worth $20?
I'd say, geez, I'm going to play the CD until it breaks, and listen to it an easy 100 times, so yeah, its worth a buck.
In fact, its pretty hard to find a better deal for entertainment than a song.
You can take it with you.
You can have it on while you are doing something else.
It makes whatever you are doing better, and its only $20.
Don't get tripped up that John is dead now, or whatever.
It's what is the song worth.
That millions of people agree with that assessment means somebody is going to get rich, but what does it matter.
Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds made me happy.
It's worth a buck, and I'll pay it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167938</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30210050</id>
	<title>Re:Copywrong.</title>
	<author>headkase</author>
	<datestamp>1258996200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>As an agent everyone my...</i> <b>may</b></htmltext>
<tokenext>As an agent everyone my... may</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As an agent everyone my... may</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30209248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167182</id>
	<title>In other news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258641840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In other news, Baidu implement a website to download MP3s<br><a href="http://mp3.baidu.com/" title="baidu.com" rel="nofollow">http://mp3.baidu.com/</a> [baidu.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In other news , Baidu implement a website to download MP3shttp : //mp3.baidu.com/ [ baidu.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In other news, Baidu implement a website to download MP3shttp://mp3.baidu.com/ [baidu.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167308</id>
	<title>Re:China have copyright ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258642920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do no evil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do no evil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do no evil.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167068</id>
	<title>China have copyright ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258640820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>C'mon they copy everything...</htmltext>
<tokenext>C'mon they copy everything.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>C'mon they copy everything...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30170536</id>
	<title>Re:China have copyright ?</title>
	<author>1u3hr</author>
	<datestamp>1258729620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>C'mon they copy everything...</i> <p>
"They"? This is the Chinese <b>Authors</b> Society. They're the ones who get screwed when Chinese publishers pirate their books, as happens to every popular book, CD, or movie in China.
</p><p>
So you're snarking at victims and saying that it's okay for foreigners to screw them too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>C'mon they copy everything.. . " They " ? This is the Chinese Authors Society .
They 're the ones who get screwed when Chinese publishers pirate their books , as happens to every popular book , CD , or movie in China .
So you 're snarking at victims and saying that it 's okay for foreigners to screw them too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>C'mon they copy everything... 
"They"? This is the Chinese Authors Society.
They're the ones who get screwed when Chinese publishers pirate their books, as happens to every popular book, CD, or movie in China.
So you're snarking at victims and saying that it's okay for foreigners to screw them too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167176</id>
	<title>17000 works = about 9 cents American</title>
	<author>MadRat</author>
	<datestamp>1258641780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Judging by their protection of U.S. Property I'd say pay the nine cents already and move on already.  It's only fair to pay them their fair share.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Judging by their protection of U.S. Property I 'd say pay the nine cents already and move on already .
It 's only fair to pay them their fair share .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Judging by their protection of U.S. Property I'd say pay the nine cents already and move on already.
It's only fair to pay them their fair share.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168806</id>
	<title>Re:China have copyright ?</title>
	<author>zelik</author>
	<datestamp>1258660620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Two wongs can make it white!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Two wongs can make it white !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Two wongs can make it white!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168758</id>
	<title>Re:Copywrong.</title>
	<author>Col Bat Guano</author>
	<datestamp>1258660080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i><br>The content industry plays lip-service to the issue, they insist that there is a public domain but when every work is at least life of author plus seventy-five years or so there is in reality no public domain from my life's point of view.<br></i></p><p>The answer is to instantly kill anyone who makes a really good movie, or a book, and then just patiently... wait...</p><p>On your rocking chair on the porch, with a happy, knowing smile on your face.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The content industry plays lip-service to the issue , they insist that there is a public domain but when every work is at least life of author plus seventy-five years or so there is in reality no public domain from my life 's point of view.The answer is to instantly kill anyone who makes a really good movie , or a book , and then just patiently... wait...On your rocking chair on the porch , with a happy , knowing smile on your face .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The content industry plays lip-service to the issue, they insist that there is a public domain but when every work is at least life of author plus seventy-five years or so there is in reality no public domain from my life's point of view.The answer is to instantly kill anyone who makes a really good movie, or a book, and then just patiently... wait...On your rocking chair on the porch, with a happy, knowing smile on your face.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167044</id>
	<title>anonymous coward accused of first posting</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258640580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>on slashdot.  Now eat my asshole!</htmltext>
<tokenext>on slashdot .
Now eat my asshole !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>on slashdot.
Now eat my asshole!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30211114</id>
	<title>Re:Copywrong.</title>
	<author>headkase</author>
	<datestamp>1259056860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As truth is established it moves back up the hierarchy to support or detract from those parents.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As truth is established it moves back up the hierarchy to support or detract from those parents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As truth is established it moves back up the hierarchy to support or detract from those parents.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30209248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167562</id>
	<title>I want my milk back</title>
	<author>Myrcutio</author>
	<datestamp>1258646040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I tip my hat to you sir, a fine wit.  Now give me back the milk i just snorted on the keyboard.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I tip my hat to you sir , a fine wit .
Now give me back the milk i just snorted on the keyboard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tip my hat to you sir, a fine wit.
Now give me back the milk i just snorted on the keyboard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167066</id>
	<title>Fuck China</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258640760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bunch of totalitarian worker bees out to take over the world.</p><p>Freedom is better than a tyrannical government.</p><p>Please take note, Republitards. China is what a totalitarian government. You know, like Republicans try to push every time they are in power.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bunch of totalitarian worker bees out to take over the world.Freedom is better than a tyrannical government.Please take note , Republitards .
China is what a totalitarian government .
You know , like Republicans try to push every time they are in power .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bunch of totalitarian worker bees out to take over the world.Freedom is better than a tyrannical government.Please take note, Republitards.
China is what a totalitarian government.
You know, like Republicans try to push every time they are in power.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168800</id>
	<title>Re:Copywrong.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258660560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Any idea, once published by the author, belongs to society at large. Our founding fathers fully understood this tenet, which is so basic and fundamental, that they would no more mention it than proclaiming that the sky is blue and grass is green.</p><p>This fundamental concept appears directly in the Constitution of the United States. Congress has the explicit power "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;"</p><p>Why would Congress be granted such power if authors had the natural right to their own ideas? This is because <i>authors have no natural right to their published ideas.</i> Once you, the reader, share the fruits of your intellect, such ideas no longer belong to you exclusively; they belong to us: society at large. If you doubt this, consider the alternate hypothesis: that you own, in entirety, your ideas, fully and completely, indefinitely beyond publication. If this hypothesis were true, Congress would have no legal right to expire a patent or copyright. Doing so would be like expiring your rights to the shirt on your back. Such a concept is explicitly contrary to the Constitution, specifically the Fourth Amendment, and as such, the hypothesis is false.</p><p>The Founding fathers understood this to be such a base and fundamental tenet; there was no need to waste vellum expounding upon it.</p><p>We pay authors to publish ideas by granting them exclusive license for a limited time to the use of those ideas. This payment occurs immediately in full upon publication. Any author that submits intellectual property for publication submits to and accepts this payment. To extend and existing copyright is to grant a second payment in addition to the original contract. There is a reason Congress is not allowed to increase their own salary for the current term: that is robbery from the public. Extension of existing copyrights is the same robbery. The author agreed to the contractual terms upon publication. The Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act is the equivalent of paying the descendants of Thomas Jefferson a bonus for the use of Arlington National Cemetery simply because they control powerful lobbyists that promise high paying jobs to members of Congress.</p><p>When Walt Disney created Mickey Mouse, the deal was 28 years of exclusive rights in exchange of publicizing his idea. Disney accepted his end of the deal, and we paid our side of the bargain. For inane reasons, Congress has decided to keep paying for Mickey Mouse, using society's money, indefinitely. If you think your house painter did a nice job, would you keep mailing him a cheque every year? Would you keep mailing his beneficiaries a cheque every year because it was such a nice job? Of course you would not; payment was made in full on delivery. Why do you let Congress keep paying your house painter with your money? Every time Congress extends copyrights, each voting member is taking something <i>you own</i> and giving it to a private party for lobbyist bribes and by party politics.</p><p><i>We</i> should own the rights to Mickey Mouse. These rights, these very rights that have quantifiable, monetizable value, have been stolen from us repeatedly. <i>We</i> allow this to happen be continuing to vote for the same members of Congress that perpetuate this theft.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Any idea , once published by the author , belongs to society at large .
Our founding fathers fully understood this tenet , which is so basic and fundamental , that they would no more mention it than proclaiming that the sky is blue and grass is green.This fundamental concept appears directly in the Constitution of the United States .
Congress has the explicit power " To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts , by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries ; " Why would Congress be granted such power if authors had the natural right to their own ideas ?
This is because authors have no natural right to their published ideas .
Once you , the reader , share the fruits of your intellect , such ideas no longer belong to you exclusively ; they belong to us : society at large .
If you doubt this , consider the alternate hypothesis : that you own , in entirety , your ideas , fully and completely , indefinitely beyond publication .
If this hypothesis were true , Congress would have no legal right to expire a patent or copyright .
Doing so would be like expiring your rights to the shirt on your back .
Such a concept is explicitly contrary to the Constitution , specifically the Fourth Amendment , and as such , the hypothesis is false.The Founding fathers understood this to be such a base and fundamental tenet ; there was no need to waste vellum expounding upon it.We pay authors to publish ideas by granting them exclusive license for a limited time to the use of those ideas .
This payment occurs immediately in full upon publication .
Any author that submits intellectual property for publication submits to and accepts this payment .
To extend and existing copyright is to grant a second payment in addition to the original contract .
There is a reason Congress is not allowed to increase their own salary for the current term : that is robbery from the public .
Extension of existing copyrights is the same robbery .
The author agreed to the contractual terms upon publication .
The Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act is the equivalent of paying the descendants of Thomas Jefferson a bonus for the use of Arlington National Cemetery simply because they control powerful lobbyists that promise high paying jobs to members of Congress.When Walt Disney created Mickey Mouse , the deal was 28 years of exclusive rights in exchange of publicizing his idea .
Disney accepted his end of the deal , and we paid our side of the bargain .
For inane reasons , Congress has decided to keep paying for Mickey Mouse , using society 's money , indefinitely .
If you think your house painter did a nice job , would you keep mailing him a cheque every year ?
Would you keep mailing his beneficiaries a cheque every year because it was such a nice job ?
Of course you would not ; payment was made in full on delivery .
Why do you let Congress keep paying your house painter with your money ?
Every time Congress extends copyrights , each voting member is taking something you own and giving it to a private party for lobbyist bribes and by party politics.We should own the rights to Mickey Mouse .
These rights , these very rights that have quantifiable , monetizable value , have been stolen from us repeatedly .
We allow this to happen be continuing to vote for the same members of Congress that perpetuate this theft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any idea, once published by the author, belongs to society at large.
Our founding fathers fully understood this tenet, which is so basic and fundamental, that they would no more mention it than proclaiming that the sky is blue and grass is green.This fundamental concept appears directly in the Constitution of the United States.
Congress has the explicit power "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;"Why would Congress be granted such power if authors had the natural right to their own ideas?
This is because authors have no natural right to their published ideas.
Once you, the reader, share the fruits of your intellect, such ideas no longer belong to you exclusively; they belong to us: society at large.
If you doubt this, consider the alternate hypothesis: that you own, in entirety, your ideas, fully and completely, indefinitely beyond publication.
If this hypothesis were true, Congress would have no legal right to expire a patent or copyright.
Doing so would be like expiring your rights to the shirt on your back.
Such a concept is explicitly contrary to the Constitution, specifically the Fourth Amendment, and as such, the hypothesis is false.The Founding fathers understood this to be such a base and fundamental tenet; there was no need to waste vellum expounding upon it.We pay authors to publish ideas by granting them exclusive license for a limited time to the use of those ideas.
This payment occurs immediately in full upon publication.
Any author that submits intellectual property for publication submits to and accepts this payment.
To extend and existing copyright is to grant a second payment in addition to the original contract.
There is a reason Congress is not allowed to increase their own salary for the current term: that is robbery from the public.
Extension of existing copyrights is the same robbery.
The author agreed to the contractual terms upon publication.
The Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act is the equivalent of paying the descendants of Thomas Jefferson a bonus for the use of Arlington National Cemetery simply because they control powerful lobbyists that promise high paying jobs to members of Congress.When Walt Disney created Mickey Mouse, the deal was 28 years of exclusive rights in exchange of publicizing his idea.
Disney accepted his end of the deal, and we paid our side of the bargain.
For inane reasons, Congress has decided to keep paying for Mickey Mouse, using society's money, indefinitely.
If you think your house painter did a nice job, would you keep mailing him a cheque every year?
Would you keep mailing his beneficiaries a cheque every year because it was such a nice job?
Of course you would not; payment was made in full on delivery.
Why do you let Congress keep paying your house painter with your money?
Every time Congress extends copyrights, each voting member is taking something you own and giving it to a private party for lobbyist bribes and by party politics.We should own the rights to Mickey Mouse.
These rights, these very rights that have quantifiable, monetizable value, have been stolen from us repeatedly.
We allow this to happen be continuing to vote for the same members of Congress that perpetuate this theft.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30173578</id>
	<title>Re:Is Love Me Do Worth a Dollar.</title>
	<author>pwfffff</author>
	<datestamp>1258742340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So then you'd have no problems just handing that money to me and pirating it? It would accomplish the same damn thing. The people who are getting the money for that music now sure as hell didn't make it in the first place, so why do they deserve your money more than me?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So then you 'd have no problems just handing that money to me and pirating it ?
It would accomplish the same damn thing .
The people who are getting the money for that music now sure as hell did n't make it in the first place , so why do they deserve your money more than me ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So then you'd have no problems just handing that money to me and pirating it?
It would accomplish the same damn thing.
The people who are getting the money for that music now sure as hell didn't make it in the first place, so why do they deserve your money more than me?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30170240</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30183112</id>
	<title>Re:China have copyright ?</title>
	<author>youn</author>
	<datestamp>1258802160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>that's because in some contexts, sometimes [being] too right does make it wrong [in other people's eyes]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>that 's because in some contexts , sometimes [ being ] too right does make it wrong [ in other people 's eyes ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that's because in some contexts, sometimes [being] too right does make it wrong [in other people's eyes]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167332</id>
	<title>Re:China have copyright ?</title>
	<author>lostmongoose</author>
	<datestamp>1258643280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Two wongs don't make a right....</p></div><p>but they're guaranteed to get the stains out.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Two wongs do n't make a right....but they 're guaranteed to get the stains out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Two wongs don't make a right....but they're guaranteed to get the stains out.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30171424</id>
	<title>Re:China is getting pretty uppity</title>
	<author>vishbar</author>
	<datestamp>1258734240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Reminds me of that Apocalypse Now quote...</p><blockquote><div><p>How much software had I already pirated? There was those six that I know about for sure. Close enough to find their CD keys on Pirate Bay. But this time it was an American and a corporation. That wasn't supposed to make any difference to me, but it did. Shit  charging a man with copyright violations in this place was like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500.</p></div> </blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Reminds me of that Apocalypse Now quote...How much software had I already pirated ?
There was those six that I know about for sure .
Close enough to find their CD keys on Pirate Bay .
But this time it was an American and a corporation .
That was n't supposed to make any difference to me , but it did .
Shit charging a man with copyright violations in this place was like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reminds me of that Apocalypse Now quote...How much software had I already pirated?
There was those six that I know about for sure.
Close enough to find their CD keys on Pirate Bay.
But this time it was an American and a corporation.
That wasn't supposed to make any difference to me, but it did.
Shit  charging a man with copyright violations in this place was like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500. 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167064</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30169048</id>
	<title>Re:Copywrong.</title>
	<author>symbolset</author>
	<datestamp>1258710540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Amen, brother!  I've said here many times that eternal copyright is theft of our cultural heritage.  Until they're ready to deal square, let's have no deal at all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Amen , brother !
I 've said here many times that eternal copyright is theft of our cultural heritage .
Until they 're ready to deal square , let 's have no deal at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amen, brother!
I've said here many times that eternal copyright is theft of our cultural heritage.
Until they're ready to deal square, let's have no deal at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168176</id>
	<title>Re:China have copyright ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258652820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah but do they make a white?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah but do they make a white ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah but do they make a white?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168406</id>
	<title>Re:China have copyright ?</title>
	<author>BluBrick</author>
	<datestamp>1258655340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Two wongs don't make a right....</p></div><p>But occasionally, two Wongs make a white.<br>You know what they say...<br>Occidents will happen!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Two wongs do n't make a right....But occasionally , two Wongs make a white.You know what they say...Occidents will happen !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Two wongs don't make a right....But occasionally, two Wongs make a white.You know what they say...Occidents will happen!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167234</id>
	<title>It doesn't go both ways</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258642380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>For all the rampant piracy the chinese government ignores, google can't just ignore their IP rights - china will end up blocking them and they'll all start using yahoo or bing. Would be nice if they could stick it to them and say that the copyright doesn't apply in the US or something but really, you just can't with these people.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For all the rampant piracy the chinese government ignores , google ca n't just ignore their IP rights - china will end up blocking them and they 'll all start using yahoo or bing .
Would be nice if they could stick it to them and say that the copyright does n't apply in the US or something but really , you just ca n't with these people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For all the rampant piracy the chinese government ignores, google can't just ignore their IP rights - china will end up blocking them and they'll all start using yahoo or bing.
Would be nice if they could stick it to them and say that the copyright doesn't apply in the US or something but really, you just can't with these people.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167706</id>
	<title>Re:Copywrong.</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1258647720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Bite me content you're a parasite and you are stealing from me directly</i></p><p>How is content stealing from you? It's not taking anything away from you.  It's never been easier to get your own content out there, and that is what is actually happening.  The idea of deriving corporate power from copyright is going to be silly because, yeah, the Alien movie with guys in a spaceship fighting an alien may never be public domain, but who fricking cares because there's 100 movies and video games out there aliens in spaceships and every day that passes, they are going to get cheaper and cheaper and cheaper to make.   You are all caught up having the Nostromo?  So what? Make up your own ship, the Slashdoto, and have it get infested with fricking monster.  Big deal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bite me content you 're a parasite and you are stealing from me directlyHow is content stealing from you ?
It 's not taking anything away from you .
It 's never been easier to get your own content out there , and that is what is actually happening .
The idea of deriving corporate power from copyright is going to be silly because , yeah , the Alien movie with guys in a spaceship fighting an alien may never be public domain , but who fricking cares because there 's 100 movies and video games out there aliens in spaceships and every day that passes , they are going to get cheaper and cheaper and cheaper to make .
You are all caught up having the Nostromo ?
So what ?
Make up your own ship , the Slashdoto , and have it get infested with fricking monster .
Big deal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bite me content you're a parasite and you are stealing from me directlyHow is content stealing from you?
It's not taking anything away from you.
It's never been easier to get your own content out there, and that is what is actually happening.
The idea of deriving corporate power from copyright is going to be silly because, yeah, the Alien movie with guys in a spaceship fighting an alien may never be public domain, but who fricking cares because there's 100 movies and video games out there aliens in spaceships and every day that passes, they are going to get cheaper and cheaper and cheaper to make.
You are all caught up having the Nostromo?
So what?
Make up your own ship, the Slashdoto, and have it get infested with fricking monster.
Big deal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167064</id>
	<title>China is getting pretty uppity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258640760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For being nothing more than thieves they have a lot of nerve.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For being nothing more than thieves they have a lot of nerve .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For being nothing more than thieves they have a lot of nerve.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168698</id>
	<title>Re:*Whoosh!* They ARE stealing from you.</title>
	<author>HiThere</author>
	<datestamp>1258658940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not overgenerous to artists at all.  The artists get very little of that money.</p><p>If the artists DID get the money, then I'd agree that it was not only overgenerous, but ridiculously absurdly overgenerous.  There are only a small finite number of musical measures.  (In this context, musical further constrains the set of sounds to those that people can learn to enjoy reasonably easily.)  I can't put an exact number on it, and it probably varies through the population anyway.  I don't know what the number is, but a random number generator and a computer could probably plow through them in less than five years.  So just generate every possible musical measure and publish them all on the web.  Register the ones that people download more than once.</p><p>You now own the copyright to every possible measure.  (Some of them will be invalid, as someone else has previously registered them.)  The Supreme Court has held (in a case, I believe, against the Beatles) that as little as one measure in a song is enough to determine a copyright violation.</p><p>THIS IS ABSURD!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not overgenerous to artists at all .
The artists get very little of that money.If the artists DID get the money , then I 'd agree that it was not only overgenerous , but ridiculously absurdly overgenerous .
There are only a small finite number of musical measures .
( In this context , musical further constrains the set of sounds to those that people can learn to enjoy reasonably easily .
) I ca n't put an exact number on it , and it probably varies through the population anyway .
I do n't know what the number is , but a random number generator and a computer could probably plow through them in less than five years .
So just generate every possible musical measure and publish them all on the web .
Register the ones that people download more than once.You now own the copyright to every possible measure .
( Some of them will be invalid , as someone else has previously registered them .
) The Supreme Court has held ( in a case , I believe , against the Beatles ) that as little as one measure in a song is enough to determine a copyright violation.THIS IS ABSURD ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not overgenerous to artists at all.
The artists get very little of that money.If the artists DID get the money, then I'd agree that it was not only overgenerous, but ridiculously absurdly overgenerous.
There are only a small finite number of musical measures.
(In this context, musical further constrains the set of sounds to those that people can learn to enjoy reasonably easily.
)  I can't put an exact number on it, and it probably varies through the population anyway.
I don't know what the number is, but a random number generator and a computer could probably plow through them in less than five years.
So just generate every possible musical measure and publish them all on the web.
Register the ones that people download more than once.You now own the copyright to every possible measure.
(Some of them will be invalid, as someone else has previously registered them.
)  The Supreme Court has held (in a case, I believe, against the Beatles) that as little as one measure in a song is enough to determine a copyright violation.THIS IS ABSURD!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167938</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330</id>
	<title>Copywrong.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258643280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'll tell you what I think and it is in the public domain for anyone to use. If your nation is too backwards to allow a public domain then I grant you an unlimited license to use in any manner you see fit with or without attribution.<br>
<br>
I'm a privateer. I decided to become one recently. What sparked this decision is the fact that content industries are stealing from me. When copyright was first introduced it was for a period of fourteen years which allowed the creator time to make a profit off of their work even with primitive dissemination systems of the time. After that period it expired and entered the public domain where it would join other works in a rich mosaic for future works to draw from. This is dead. Over the years copyright terms have been extended to the point where there effectively is no public domain anymore. The content industry plays lip-service to the issue, they insist that there is a public domain but when every work is at least life of author plus seventy-five years or so there is in reality no public domain from my life's point of view. I will never see Alien (1979) enter the public domain. I will never see a new original movie based off that setting and characters. I will never see the iron grip of control loosened and in fact I'm sure content is planning more extensions to the terms. Government is complicit in this, politicians have accepted bribes, er.. campaign donations, in exchange for listening to these idiotic and greedy lobbies and passing the appropriate legislation right on cue like their training taught them. Even if magically there are no more extensions to copyright by the time current terms expire the works in question will be irrelevant. No one will be interested in them any more as their times have passed. This gutting of the copyright agreement between publishers and citizens has resulted in copyright not being copyright anymore: it is now a form of property and you will pay for every single last use. In response to this wholesale theft from me I have decided to liberate what I see fit. Go to hell content. I will take whatever I like as you are raping and pillaging through my cultural tapestry. The day I stop will be the day there is an actual agreement restored. I would be willing to settle for twenty years for a copyright term which is even more generous than the original fourteen. With a twenty year period I would also like to see as a punishment for twisting our heritage that only copyrights younger than ten years would be protected from the start. In another ten you'd be up to your twenty. Bite me content you're a parasite and you are stealing from me directly. Anything 1989 and older is a moral right to me and until you stop reneging on the social contract everything newer is as well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll tell you what I think and it is in the public domain for anyone to use .
If your nation is too backwards to allow a public domain then I grant you an unlimited license to use in any manner you see fit with or without attribution .
I 'm a privateer .
I decided to become one recently .
What sparked this decision is the fact that content industries are stealing from me .
When copyright was first introduced it was for a period of fourteen years which allowed the creator time to make a profit off of their work even with primitive dissemination systems of the time .
After that period it expired and entered the public domain where it would join other works in a rich mosaic for future works to draw from .
This is dead .
Over the years copyright terms have been extended to the point where there effectively is no public domain anymore .
The content industry plays lip-service to the issue , they insist that there is a public domain but when every work is at least life of author plus seventy-five years or so there is in reality no public domain from my life 's point of view .
I will never see Alien ( 1979 ) enter the public domain .
I will never see a new original movie based off that setting and characters .
I will never see the iron grip of control loosened and in fact I 'm sure content is planning more extensions to the terms .
Government is complicit in this , politicians have accepted bribes , er.. campaign donations , in exchange for listening to these idiotic and greedy lobbies and passing the appropriate legislation right on cue like their training taught them .
Even if magically there are no more extensions to copyright by the time current terms expire the works in question will be irrelevant .
No one will be interested in them any more as their times have passed .
This gutting of the copyright agreement between publishers and citizens has resulted in copyright not being copyright anymore : it is now a form of property and you will pay for every single last use .
In response to this wholesale theft from me I have decided to liberate what I see fit .
Go to hell content .
I will take whatever I like as you are raping and pillaging through my cultural tapestry .
The day I stop will be the day there is an actual agreement restored .
I would be willing to settle for twenty years for a copyright term which is even more generous than the original fourteen .
With a twenty year period I would also like to see as a punishment for twisting our heritage that only copyrights younger than ten years would be protected from the start .
In another ten you 'd be up to your twenty .
Bite me content you 're a parasite and you are stealing from me directly .
Anything 1989 and older is a moral right to me and until you stop reneging on the social contract everything newer is as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll tell you what I think and it is in the public domain for anyone to use.
If your nation is too backwards to allow a public domain then I grant you an unlimited license to use in any manner you see fit with or without attribution.
I'm a privateer.
I decided to become one recently.
What sparked this decision is the fact that content industries are stealing from me.
When copyright was first introduced it was for a period of fourteen years which allowed the creator time to make a profit off of their work even with primitive dissemination systems of the time.
After that period it expired and entered the public domain where it would join other works in a rich mosaic for future works to draw from.
This is dead.
Over the years copyright terms have been extended to the point where there effectively is no public domain anymore.
The content industry plays lip-service to the issue, they insist that there is a public domain but when every work is at least life of author plus seventy-five years or so there is in reality no public domain from my life's point of view.
I will never see Alien (1979) enter the public domain.
I will never see a new original movie based off that setting and characters.
I will never see the iron grip of control loosened and in fact I'm sure content is planning more extensions to the terms.
Government is complicit in this, politicians have accepted bribes, er.. campaign donations, in exchange for listening to these idiotic and greedy lobbies and passing the appropriate legislation right on cue like their training taught them.
Even if magically there are no more extensions to copyright by the time current terms expire the works in question will be irrelevant.
No one will be interested in them any more as their times have passed.
This gutting of the copyright agreement between publishers and citizens has resulted in copyright not being copyright anymore: it is now a form of property and you will pay for every single last use.
In response to this wholesale theft from me I have decided to liberate what I see fit.
Go to hell content.
I will take whatever I like as you are raping and pillaging through my cultural tapestry.
The day I stop will be the day there is an actual agreement restored.
I would be willing to settle for twenty years for a copyright term which is even more generous than the original fourteen.
With a twenty year period I would also like to see as a punishment for twisting our heritage that only copyrights younger than ten years would be protected from the start.
In another ten you'd be up to your twenty.
Bite me content you're a parasite and you are stealing from me directly.
Anything 1989 and older is a moral right to me and until you stop reneging on the social contract everything newer is as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30210800</id>
	<title>Re:Copywrong.</title>
	<author>headkase</author>
	<datestamp>1259094060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>adversary should read adversity.</htmltext>
<tokenext>adversary should read adversity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>adversary should read adversity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30209248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167092</id>
	<title>Re:China have copyright ?</title>
	<author>Techman83</author>
	<datestamp>1258641000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Two wongs don't make a right....</htmltext>
<tokenext>Two wongs do n't make a right... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Two wongs don't make a right....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167938</id>
	<title>*Whoosh!*  They ARE stealing from you.</title>
	<author>KingSkippus</author>
	<datestamp>1258650300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>*Whoosh!*  There goes the point right over your head.  Big content <i>is</i> stealing from you.</p><p>They're taking your history and your heritage.  Imagine a ludicrous extreme, such as the hospital you were born in saying that you can no longer use the name that you were given at birth unless you pay for it because it happened on their premises, therefore they own the rights to it.  Or if you are in immigrant, imagine someone telling you that you can no longer describe where you're from, because that information is "owned" by the country from which you came.  (God forbid you draw a map!)</p><p>Similarly, the music that was on the radio when I was a child?  I'm prohibited by law from sharing that with my friends.  Movies that have become so deeply ingrained in our culture that we constantly refer to them...  "May the force be with you."  "I've a feeling we're not in Kansas any more."  "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn."  "Take your stinking paws off me, you damned dirty ape!"  Yeah, in spite of them being part of the very fabric of our culture, you're legally prohibited from sharing them with your kids without paying your pound of flesh to people who did something great decades ago (or in some cases, to estates of long dead people).</p><p>Look, I'm all for compensating artists justly for what they do.  In 1962, Paul McCartney, John Lennon, George Harrison, and Ringo Starr released a clever little song called <i>Love Me Do</i>.  It was a bona fide hit, and they made a lot of money off of it.  So be it, they deserve it.  But now it's 47 years later.  Do you really contend that the song was so unbelievably great, so untouchably amazing, that Paul, Ringo, and the estates of George and John should STILL be making money when a radio plays it?</p><p>Or let's look at it another way.  Don't you think that's being way too overgenerous to artists?  I mean, these past few years, I've been doing some of the greatest work in my professional life in a computer datacenter.  I've gotten consistently great reviews, and I feel like I've made a real positive difference for the company where I'm employed.  They've paid me well, I'm not complaining.  But if I walked out tomorrow, wouldn't you agree that it's kind of silly to expect them to STILL keep paying me because they're enjoying the fruits of my labor while I worked there?  50 years after I'm dead, should they STILL be paying my estate because my contributions in the first decade of the 2000's contributed to the history of the company being great?</p><p>When I retire, I'm going to be living off of money I've saved up during my lifetime specifically because I don't expect my former employers to still be paying for my work 70 years after I die.  Why is it that an artist who writes a hit song, a writer who writes a best-seller, an actor who turns in an Oscar-winning performance, gets that luxury?  My opinion is that if you want to continue making money off of your work, get out there and <i>work</i> like the rest of us do.  No one should get a lifetime + 70 years of resting on their laurels because they did something great.  Like the rest of us, if they want to retire in comfort, they should set aside some of the money they make during the height of their popularity so they'll have it after the <a href="http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A1Sec8" title="usconstitution.net">limited time</a> [usconstitution.net] that copyright <i>is supposed</i> to be valid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>* Whoosh !
* There goes the point right over your head .
Big content is stealing from you.They 're taking your history and your heritage .
Imagine a ludicrous extreme , such as the hospital you were born in saying that you can no longer use the name that you were given at birth unless you pay for it because it happened on their premises , therefore they own the rights to it .
Or if you are in immigrant , imagine someone telling you that you can no longer describe where you 're from , because that information is " owned " by the country from which you came .
( God forbid you draw a map !
) Similarly , the music that was on the radio when I was a child ?
I 'm prohibited by law from sharing that with my friends .
Movies that have become so deeply ingrained in our culture that we constantly refer to them... " May the force be with you .
" " I 've a feeling we 're not in Kansas any more .
" " Frankly , my dear , I do n't give a damn .
" " Take your stinking paws off me , you damned dirty ape !
" Yeah , in spite of them being part of the very fabric of our culture , you 're legally prohibited from sharing them with your kids without paying your pound of flesh to people who did something great decades ago ( or in some cases , to estates of long dead people ) .Look , I 'm all for compensating artists justly for what they do .
In 1962 , Paul McCartney , John Lennon , George Harrison , and Ringo Starr released a clever little song called Love Me Do .
It was a bona fide hit , and they made a lot of money off of it .
So be it , they deserve it .
But now it 's 47 years later .
Do you really contend that the song was so unbelievably great , so untouchably amazing , that Paul , Ringo , and the estates of George and John should STILL be making money when a radio plays it ? Or let 's look at it another way .
Do n't you think that 's being way too overgenerous to artists ?
I mean , these past few years , I 've been doing some of the greatest work in my professional life in a computer datacenter .
I 've gotten consistently great reviews , and I feel like I 've made a real positive difference for the company where I 'm employed .
They 've paid me well , I 'm not complaining .
But if I walked out tomorrow , would n't you agree that it 's kind of silly to expect them to STILL keep paying me because they 're enjoying the fruits of my labor while I worked there ?
50 years after I 'm dead , should they STILL be paying my estate because my contributions in the first decade of the 2000 's contributed to the history of the company being great ? When I retire , I 'm going to be living off of money I 've saved up during my lifetime specifically because I do n't expect my former employers to still be paying for my work 70 years after I die .
Why is it that an artist who writes a hit song , a writer who writes a best-seller , an actor who turns in an Oscar-winning performance , gets that luxury ?
My opinion is that if you want to continue making money off of your work , get out there and work like the rest of us do .
No one should get a lifetime + 70 years of resting on their laurels because they did something great .
Like the rest of us , if they want to retire in comfort , they should set aside some of the money they make during the height of their popularity so they 'll have it after the limited time [ usconstitution.net ] that copyright is supposed to be valid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*Whoosh!
*  There goes the point right over your head.
Big content is stealing from you.They're taking your history and your heritage.
Imagine a ludicrous extreme, such as the hospital you were born in saying that you can no longer use the name that you were given at birth unless you pay for it because it happened on their premises, therefore they own the rights to it.
Or if you are in immigrant, imagine someone telling you that you can no longer describe where you're from, because that information is "owned" by the country from which you came.
(God forbid you draw a map!
)Similarly, the music that was on the radio when I was a child?
I'm prohibited by law from sharing that with my friends.
Movies that have become so deeply ingrained in our culture that we constantly refer to them...  "May the force be with you.
"  "I've a feeling we're not in Kansas any more.
"  "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn.
"  "Take your stinking paws off me, you damned dirty ape!
"  Yeah, in spite of them being part of the very fabric of our culture, you're legally prohibited from sharing them with your kids without paying your pound of flesh to people who did something great decades ago (or in some cases, to estates of long dead people).Look, I'm all for compensating artists justly for what they do.
In 1962, Paul McCartney, John Lennon, George Harrison, and Ringo Starr released a clever little song called Love Me Do.
It was a bona fide hit, and they made a lot of money off of it.
So be it, they deserve it.
But now it's 47 years later.
Do you really contend that the song was so unbelievably great, so untouchably amazing, that Paul, Ringo, and the estates of George and John should STILL be making money when a radio plays it?Or let's look at it another way.
Don't you think that's being way too overgenerous to artists?
I mean, these past few years, I've been doing some of the greatest work in my professional life in a computer datacenter.
I've gotten consistently great reviews, and I feel like I've made a real positive difference for the company where I'm employed.
They've paid me well, I'm not complaining.
But if I walked out tomorrow, wouldn't you agree that it's kind of silly to expect them to STILL keep paying me because they're enjoying the fruits of my labor while I worked there?
50 years after I'm dead, should they STILL be paying my estate because my contributions in the first decade of the 2000's contributed to the history of the company being great?When I retire, I'm going to be living off of money I've saved up during my lifetime specifically because I don't expect my former employers to still be paying for my work 70 years after I die.
Why is it that an artist who writes a hit song, a writer who writes a best-seller, an actor who turns in an Oscar-winning performance, gets that luxury?
My opinion is that if you want to continue making money off of your work, get out there and work like the rest of us do.
No one should get a lifetime + 70 years of resting on their laurels because they did something great.
Like the rest of us, if they want to retire in comfort, they should set aside some of the money they make during the height of their popularity so they'll have it after the limited time [usconstitution.net] that copyright is supposed to be valid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167672</id>
	<title>Re:Copywrong.</title>
	<author>novalis112</author>
	<datestamp>1258647240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>While I question your grounds for claiming a "moral right" to anything created before 1989, and your assertion that anything at all has been *stolen* from you, I do find your observation about the fact that you will never see any content created in your life time enter the public domain (if they are true, I know almost nothing about current copyright law, so I assume you are correct) to be a very interesting way of assessing the impact of the current copyright system.  Personally, I haven't spent enough time considering the topic to be certain whether I am even in favor of a copyright system at all, but if you take it for granted that the essential concept is a good one, I think this is a very perceptive observation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While I question your grounds for claiming a " moral right " to anything created before 1989 , and your assertion that anything at all has been * stolen * from you , I do find your observation about the fact that you will never see any content created in your life time enter the public domain ( if they are true , I know almost nothing about current copyright law , so I assume you are correct ) to be a very interesting way of assessing the impact of the current copyright system .
Personally , I have n't spent enough time considering the topic to be certain whether I am even in favor of a copyright system at all , but if you take it for granted that the essential concept is a good one , I think this is a very perceptive observation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I question your grounds for claiming a "moral right" to anything created before 1989, and your assertion that anything at all has been *stolen* from you, I do find your observation about the fact that you will never see any content created in your life time enter the public domain (if they are true, I know almost nothing about current copyright law, so I assume you are correct) to be a very interesting way of assessing the impact of the current copyright system.
Personally, I haven't spent enough time considering the topic to be certain whether I am even in favor of a copyright system at all, but if you take it for granted that the essential concept is a good one, I think this is a very perceptive observation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30170554</id>
	<title>Re:China have copyright ?</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1258729740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's like Dillinger suing the banks for bank robbery, isn't it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's like Dillinger suing the banks for bank robbery , is n't it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's like Dillinger suing the banks for bank robbery, isn't it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167362</id>
	<title>Re:China have copyright ?</title>
	<author>atheistmonk</author>
	<datestamp>1258643580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Of course! Copyright! -Their- right to copy<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course !
Copyright ! -Their- right to copy : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course!
Copyright! -Their- right to copy :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30169994</id>
	<title>Re:Copywrong.</title>
	<author>headkase</author>
	<datestamp>1258724700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If anyone is interested, I've seeded this idea on the: <a href="http://isohunt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=330553" title="isohunt.com">isoHunt Forums</a> [isohunt.com] as well.  It got off to a rocky start there but it is a specialized community well suited to developing this stance.<br>
<br>
Also, the very first place I posted this stance began in this: <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/11/queen-we-sank-the-armada-we-can-sink-some-p2p-pirates.ars" title="arstechnica.com">This</a> [arstechnica.com] article over on ArsTechnica.  I've also sent emails to The Pirate Bay and TorrentFreak to continue to sow the seeds of discontent.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If anyone is interested , I 've seeded this idea on the : isoHunt Forums [ isohunt.com ] as well .
It got off to a rocky start there but it is a specialized community well suited to developing this stance .
Also , the very first place I posted this stance began in this : This [ arstechnica.com ] article over on ArsTechnica .
I 've also sent emails to The Pirate Bay and TorrentFreak to continue to sow the seeds of discontent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If anyone is interested, I've seeded this idea on the: isoHunt Forums [isohunt.com] as well.
It got off to a rocky start there but it is a specialized community well suited to developing this stance.
Also, the very first place I posted this stance began in this: This [arstechnica.com] article over on ArsTechnica.
I've also sent emails to The Pirate Bay and TorrentFreak to continue to sow the seeds of discontent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30178804</id>
	<title>Re:It doesn't go both ways</title>
	<author>Coren22</author>
	<datestamp>1258717140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Frankly I think being forced to use Yahoo or Bing would be a appropriate punishment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Frankly I think being forced to use Yahoo or Bing would be a appropriate punishment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Frankly I think being forced to use Yahoo or Bing would be a appropriate punishment.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167234</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168758
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30169048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30173578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30170240
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167938
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167064
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167182
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30183112
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30211114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30209248
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168698
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167938
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167812
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30178804
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30211622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30209248
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30169726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30170364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30171424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167064
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30211316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30209248
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30169994
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30170536
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30170554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30187226
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30170332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167182
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30210050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30209248
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30169370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167244
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167064
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_20_0018218_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30210800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30209248
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_0018218.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167188
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_0018218.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167068
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167092
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167562
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168806
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167308
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167332
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168176
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30183112
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168406
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30187226
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167362
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30170554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30170536
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_0018218.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167066
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_0018218.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167176
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_0018218.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167330
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168758
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168800
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167706
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30169726
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167938
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30170240
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30173578
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168698
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167812
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30170364
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30169048
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30169994
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167672
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30209248
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30211622
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30211114
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30210050
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30211316
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30210800
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168658
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_0018218.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167064
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167230
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30171424
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167244
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30169370
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_0018218.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167182
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30170332
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167610
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_0018218.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167104
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_20_0018218.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167234
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30167346
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30178804
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_20_0018218.30168036
</commentlist>
</conversation>
