<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_26_151243</id>
	<title>Mininova Removes All Copyright-Infringing Torrents</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1259252340000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Pabugs writes with news that popular torrent site Mininova has abandoned their <a href="https://news.slashdot.org/story/09/05/08/0512246/Mininova-Starts-Filtering-Torrents">attempts at filtering</a> and simply <a href="http://torrentfreak.com/mininova-deletes-all-infringing-torrents-and-goes-legal-091126/">deleted all torrents other than the legal ones</a> they facilitate through their Content Distribution service. According to their blog post, they were left "<a href="http://mnstat.com/images/blog/index.html">no other option than to take [their] platform offline</a>" after a court ruling from August. "The judge ruled that Mininova is not directly responsible for any copyright infringements, but ordered it to remove all torrents linking to copyrighted material within three months, or face a penalty of up to 5 million euros."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pabugs writes with news that popular torrent site Mininova has abandoned their attempts at filtering and simply deleted all torrents other than the legal ones they facilitate through their Content Distribution service .
According to their blog post , they were left " no other option than to take [ their ] platform offline " after a court ruling from August .
" The judge ruled that Mininova is not directly responsible for any copyright infringements , but ordered it to remove all torrents linking to copyrighted material within three months , or face a penalty of up to 5 million euros .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pabugs writes with news that popular torrent site Mininova has abandoned their attempts at filtering and simply deleted all torrents other than the legal ones they facilitate through their Content Distribution service.
According to their blog post, they were left "no other option than to take [their] platform offline" after a court ruling from August.
"The judge ruled that Mininova is not directly responsible for any copyright infringements, but ordered it to remove all torrents linking to copyrighted material within three months, or face a penalty of up to 5 million euros.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30245094</id>
	<title>Did I miss something?</title>
	<author>firesyde424</author>
	<datestamp>1259334420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the judge has ruled that Mininova did not violate any laws, how does he have the legal foundation to order them to enforce a law that they have not broken?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the judge has ruled that Mininova did not violate any laws , how does he have the legal foundation to order them to enforce a law that they have not broken ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the judge has ruled that Mininova did not violate any laws, how does he have the legal foundation to order them to enforce a law that they have not broken?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30243614</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no! What will I do?</title>
	<author>Slashed Dot</author>
	<datestamp>1259314140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>actually, eztv was down as of a week ago. seems it's been down a fair bit now, too. unsure of the reasons.</htmltext>
<tokenext>actually , eztv was down as of a week ago .
seems it 's been down a fair bit now , too .
unsure of the reasons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>actually, eztv was down as of a week ago.
seems it's been down a fair bit now, too.
unsure of the reasons.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30240778</id>
	<title>Re:And thus dies Mininova.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259239380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>GPL also works through Copyright law. I guess you must be a huge advocate of infringing the copyright on GPL code too?</p><p>Fuck all the pirates. I hope they all get sued till they're bankrupt.</p><p>I'm going to donate $50 to MPAA/RIAA now. Yay !<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>GPL also works through Copyright law .
I guess you must be a huge advocate of infringing the copyright on GPL code too ? Fuck all the pirates .
I hope they all get sued till they 're bankrupt.I 'm going to donate $ 50 to MPAA/RIAA now .
Yay !
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GPL also works through Copyright law.
I guess you must be a huge advocate of infringing the copyright on GPL code too?Fuck all the pirates.
I hope they all get sued till they're bankrupt.I'm going to donate $50 to MPAA/RIAA now.
Yay !
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237618</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238632</id>
	<title>3 month limit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259263920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So why don't they just auto-prune torrents older than 3 months from their index? One of the benefits of being a part of the Content Distribution service could be unlimited time in the index. Problem solved, at least for now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So why do n't they just auto-prune torrents older than 3 months from their index ?
One of the benefits of being a part of the Content Distribution service could be unlimited time in the index .
Problem solved , at least for now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So why don't they just auto-prune torrents older than 3 months from their index?
One of the benefits of being a part of the Content Distribution service could be unlimited time in the index.
Problem solved, at least for now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30243852</id>
	<title>I prefer legal torrents anyway.</title>
	<author>pinkushun</author>
	<datestamp>1259317320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>GPL (and all related FOSS licenses) is the best shit in the world. For everything else I'll pay the artist their dues. Simple. Don't be a Cheap-skate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>GPL ( and all related FOSS licenses ) is the best shit in the world .
For everything else I 'll pay the artist their dues .
Simple. Do n't be a Cheap-skate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GPL (and all related FOSS licenses) is the best shit in the world.
For everything else I'll pay the artist their dues.
Simple. Don't be a Cheap-skate.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237816</id>
	<title>Re:Debate!</title>
	<author>srussia</author>
	<datestamp>1259257440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>There is obviously an issue with regards to copyright in our society. <i> Millions and more are sharing all the time.</i>  This points the finger at the issue being systemic.  We need to educate people to enable a wider debate.  That is the only thing that will lead to fair change.  <i>Piracy is not the answer. </i></p> </div><p>You're not giving people enough credit. Sharing is the answer, and the're doing it. Copyright is going the way of "droit de seigneur" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droit\_de\_seigneur). Come to think of it, "copyright" in French is "droit d'auteur". Kinda makes the analogy a lot clearer.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is obviously an issue with regards to copyright in our society .
Millions and more are sharing all the time .
This points the finger at the issue being systemic .
We need to educate people to enable a wider debate .
That is the only thing that will lead to fair change .
Piracy is not the answer .
You 're not giving people enough credit .
Sharing is the answer , and the 're doing it .
Copyright is going the way of " droit de seigneur " ( http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droit \ _de \ _seigneur ) .
Come to think of it , " copyright " in French is " droit d'auteur " .
Kinda makes the analogy a lot clearer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is obviously an issue with regards to copyright in our society.
Millions and more are sharing all the time.
This points the finger at the issue being systemic.
We need to educate people to enable a wider debate.
That is the only thing that will lead to fair change.
Piracy is not the answer.
You're not giving people enough credit.
Sharing is the answer, and the're doing it.
Copyright is going the way of "droit de seigneur" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droit\_de\_seigneur).
Come to think of it, "copyright" in French is "droit d'auteur".
Kinda makes the analogy a lot clearer.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238742</id>
	<title>B&amp;W Tiles</title>
	<author>pinery</author>
	<datestamp>1259264640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><ul> <li> If I have two headphone audio jacks coming out of my MP3 player.. should I pay double for the download?   How about if I charge for use of the extra jack?</li><li> If my brother lends me his blu-ray scifi disc for Friday night.. should I be fined $10,000?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..how about if I charge people to watch it in my clandestine home theatre?</li></ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I have two headphone audio jacks coming out of my MP3 player.. should I pay double for the download ?
How about if I charge for use of the extra jack ?
If my brother lends me his blu-ray scifi disc for Friday night.. should I be fined $ 10,000 ?
..how about if I charge people to watch it in my clandestine home theatre ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>  If I have two headphone audio jacks coming out of my MP3 player.. should I pay double for the download?
How about if I charge for use of the extra jack?
If my brother lends me his blu-ray scifi disc for Friday night.. should I be fined $10,000?
..how about if I charge people to watch it in my clandestine home theatre?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30242156</id>
	<title>Re:and as usual...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259252580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sorry if doubly posted.  Damn third world ISPs.

Ever been to the Netherlands?  It's not the United States, believe it or not. Their judicial history and mindset is different than yours, or more accurately, what you perceive those of your country to be (I'm assuming from your solipsism that you're American).  They don't consider the American '"separation of powers" thing' so pesky as it doesn't apply to them.

And if you think judges don't make new law in the U.S.A. and neither are they supposed to, you are sorrily mistaken, young v1.  They are not supposed to use their powers of compulsion to harass people whose behavior they abhor into acquiescing to non-existent laws, but that's a very different thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry if doubly posted .
Damn third world ISPs .
Ever been to the Netherlands ?
It 's not the United States , believe it or not .
Their judicial history and mindset is different than yours , or more accurately , what you perceive those of your country to be ( I 'm assuming from your solipsism that you 're American ) .
They do n't consider the American ' " separation of powers " thing ' so pesky as it does n't apply to them .
And if you think judges do n't make new law in the U.S.A. and neither are they supposed to , you are sorrily mistaken , young v1 .
They are not supposed to use their powers of compulsion to harass people whose behavior they abhor into acquiescing to non-existent laws , but that 's a very different thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry if doubly posted.
Damn third world ISPs.
Ever been to the Netherlands?
It's not the United States, believe it or not.
Their judicial history and mindset is different than yours, or more accurately, what you perceive those of your country to be (I'm assuming from your solipsism that you're American).
They don't consider the American '"separation of powers" thing' so pesky as it doesn't apply to them.
And if you think judges don't make new law in the U.S.A. and neither are they supposed to, you are sorrily mistaken, young v1.
They are not supposed to use their powers of compulsion to harass people whose behavior they abhor into acquiescing to non-existent laws, but that's a very different thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237618</id>
	<title>And thus dies Mininova.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259256120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Farewell.</p><p>And a huge FUCK YOU to the MPAA/RIAA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Farewell.And a huge FUCK YOU to the MPAA/RIAA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Farewell.And a huge FUCK YOU to the MPAA/RIAA.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237762</id>
	<title>Re:Debate!</title>
	<author>Krneki</author>
	<datestamp>1259257140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Pandora box was open a long time ago and since then the piracy has become more and more mainstream. Since the dawn of the net it has never, ever had a setback longer then a week, hell will freeze over before the piracy will see a decline.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Pandora box was open a long time ago and since then the piracy has become more and more mainstream .
Since the dawn of the net it has never , ever had a setback longer then a week , hell will freeze over before the piracy will see a decline .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Pandora box was open a long time ago and since then the piracy has become more and more mainstream.
Since the dawn of the net it has never, ever had a setback longer then a week, hell will freeze over before the piracy will see a decline.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238434</id>
	<title>Websense</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259262420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>LOL websense is filtering slashdot now!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>LOL websense is filtering slashdot now !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LOL websense is filtering slashdot now!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238012</id>
	<title>Re:Debate!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259258940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Some copyright is quite reasonable. What we need is a legalization of noncommercial copyright infringement. Leave the rest of copyright law perfectly as it is. I should be able to share all the files I want, but as soon as I start trying to make money doing that, that's when it should become illegal (as it is today).</p></div><p>I don't think there should be a distinction between commercial and non-commercial, there should be a distinction depending on the amount of damages, and obviously commercial copying would give more evidence of damages. <br> <br>
But consider what could happen if non-commercial infringement wasn't punished: Let's say Steve Jobs has an argument with someone who happens to be the boss of a record company. So Steve Jobs buys two dozen XServes, goes to a record store and buys all CDs made by that record company, plus orders all their back catalogue, hires someone to load these CDs onto the computers, then makes them available to the whole world, without asking for a penny. For a million dollars, he could drive that record company into bankruptcy. Completely non-commercial.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some copyright is quite reasonable .
What we need is a legalization of noncommercial copyright infringement .
Leave the rest of copyright law perfectly as it is .
I should be able to share all the files I want , but as soon as I start trying to make money doing that , that 's when it should become illegal ( as it is today ) .I do n't think there should be a distinction between commercial and non-commercial , there should be a distinction depending on the amount of damages , and obviously commercial copying would give more evidence of damages .
But consider what could happen if non-commercial infringement was n't punished : Let 's say Steve Jobs has an argument with someone who happens to be the boss of a record company .
So Steve Jobs buys two dozen XServes , goes to a record store and buys all CDs made by that record company , plus orders all their back catalogue , hires someone to load these CDs onto the computers , then makes them available to the whole world , without asking for a penny .
For a million dollars , he could drive that record company into bankruptcy .
Completely non-commercial .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some copyright is quite reasonable.
What we need is a legalization of noncommercial copyright infringement.
Leave the rest of copyright law perfectly as it is.
I should be able to share all the files I want, but as soon as I start trying to make money doing that, that's when it should become illegal (as it is today).I don't think there should be a distinction between commercial and non-commercial, there should be a distinction depending on the amount of damages, and obviously commercial copying would give more evidence of damages.
But consider what could happen if non-commercial infringement wasn't punished: Let's say Steve Jobs has an argument with someone who happens to be the boss of a record company.
So Steve Jobs buys two dozen XServes, goes to a record store and buys all CDs made by that record company, plus orders all their back catalogue, hires someone to load these CDs onto the computers, then makes them available to the whole world, without asking for a penny.
For a million dollars, he could drive that record company into bankruptcy.
Completely non-commercial.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238384</id>
	<title>Re:Debate!</title>
	<author>mpe</author>
	<datestamp>1259261940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>The exclusive distribution rights granted by copyright were meant to give you an exclusive right to profit from your work. Copyright law when originally drafted could not anticipate a scenario where copying cost nothing, so they simply assumed that any copy must have a profit motive which as of the advent of consumer electronics is no longer necessarily the case.</i> <br> <br>Note also that the concept of copyright originates with a machine which could make cheap copies if you wanted many copies of the same thing. Being able to separate "content" from "media" means that the cost of copying is trivial and having a global telecommunications network means that distance isn't a significent issue. The latter being something which movie companies and broadcasters appear to be unable to get a handle on. Except when it comes to broadcasting news and sporting events. Where innovative use of communications technology has long been the norm.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The exclusive distribution rights granted by copyright were meant to give you an exclusive right to profit from your work .
Copyright law when originally drafted could not anticipate a scenario where copying cost nothing , so they simply assumed that any copy must have a profit motive which as of the advent of consumer electronics is no longer necessarily the case .
Note also that the concept of copyright originates with a machine which could make cheap copies if you wanted many copies of the same thing .
Being able to separate " content " from " media " means that the cost of copying is trivial and having a global telecommunications network means that distance is n't a significent issue .
The latter being something which movie companies and broadcasters appear to be unable to get a handle on .
Except when it comes to broadcasting news and sporting events .
Where innovative use of communications technology has long been the norm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The exclusive distribution rights granted by copyright were meant to give you an exclusive right to profit from your work.
Copyright law when originally drafted could not anticipate a scenario where copying cost nothing, so they simply assumed that any copy must have a profit motive which as of the advent of consumer electronics is no longer necessarily the case.
Note also that the concept of copyright originates with a machine which could make cheap copies if you wanted many copies of the same thing.
Being able to separate "content" from "media" means that the cost of copying is trivial and having a global telecommunications network means that distance isn't a significent issue.
The latter being something which movie companies and broadcasters appear to be unable to get a handle on.
Except when it comes to broadcasting news and sporting events.
Where innovative use of communications technology has long been the norm.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239510</id>
	<title>Anonymous Pirate</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259228640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Noooo! I had like 2TB of media I wanted to download off Mininova! The world as we know it is coming to an end!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Noooo !
I had like 2TB of media I wanted to download off Mininova !
The world as we know it is coming to an end !
: (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Noooo!
I had like 2TB of media I wanted to download off Mininova!
The world as we know it is coming to an end!
:(</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238138</id>
	<title>I'm curious...</title>
	<author>naasking</author>
	<datestamp>1259259780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...how can Mininova not be liable for any copyright infringing links, but still be ordered to remove the links? If they're not liable for that content, then they shouldn't have to remove anything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...how can Mininova not be liable for any copyright infringing links , but still be ordered to remove the links ?
If they 're not liable for that content , then they should n't have to remove anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...how can Mininova not be liable for any copyright infringing links, but still be ordered to remove the links?
If they're not liable for that content, then they shouldn't have to remove anything.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237698</id>
	<title>Re:i wonder...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259256660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They're working with an axe. There are 8857 torrents left. Does anyone have a cache version to compare how much got taken down?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're working with an axe .
There are 8857 torrents left .
Does anyone have a cache version to compare how much got taken down ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're working with an axe.
There are 8857 torrents left.
Does anyone have a cache version to compare how much got taken down?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237620</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238360</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no! What will I do?</title>
	<author>Pteraspidomorphi</author>
	<datestamp>1259261700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>box is now called bakabt. animesuki is only a meta-index, but look into scarywater or nyaatorrents.

I hope that helps with your survival<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>box is now called bakabt .
animesuki is only a meta-index , but look into scarywater or nyaatorrents .
I hope that helps with your survival ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>box is now called bakabt.
animesuki is only a meta-index, but look into scarywater or nyaatorrents.
I hope that helps with your survival ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30242978</id>
	<title>Re:Debate!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259262000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>HDCP is broken, you can buy HDCP stripping devices</p><p>Blu-ray: The big publishers' want to stop unauthorized copying. If titles keep getting cracked, how does this show that pirates are losing?</p><p>PS3: Hack proof, or just a relative lack of effort at hacking it (blu-ray blanks are still quite expensive, game images are very large, need a blu-ray writer, is pirating worth it?)</p><p>360: Doesn't seem like any change from the status quo, I think people should be used to not having fully functional online features with cracked software by now. Banned 360s can still continue to play games, just not online, so this isn't really a loss for piracy either.</p><p>Yeah, there are a lot of "torrent" sites that just contain malware and scams, but that seems to have always been the case. This should make copyright holders quite happy, assured product integrity could be a nice selling point for legit software/media. Also, the existence of scams and malware disguised as torrent sites suggests to me that piracy is becoming more mainstream, not less.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>HDCP is broken , you can buy HDCP stripping devicesBlu-ray : The big publishers ' want to stop unauthorized copying .
If titles keep getting cracked , how does this show that pirates are losing ? PS3 : Hack proof , or just a relative lack of effort at hacking it ( blu-ray blanks are still quite expensive , game images are very large , need a blu-ray writer , is pirating worth it ?
) 360 : Does n't seem like any change from the status quo , I think people should be used to not having fully functional online features with cracked software by now .
Banned 360s can still continue to play games , just not online , so this is n't really a loss for piracy either.Yeah , there are a lot of " torrent " sites that just contain malware and scams , but that seems to have always been the case .
This should make copyright holders quite happy , assured product integrity could be a nice selling point for legit software/media .
Also , the existence of scams and malware disguised as torrent sites suggests to me that piracy is becoming more mainstream , not less .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HDCP is broken, you can buy HDCP stripping devicesBlu-ray: The big publishers' want to stop unauthorized copying.
If titles keep getting cracked, how does this show that pirates are losing?PS3: Hack proof, or just a relative lack of effort at hacking it (blu-ray blanks are still quite expensive, game images are very large, need a blu-ray writer, is pirating worth it?
)360: Doesn't seem like any change from the status quo, I think people should be used to not having fully functional online features with cracked software by now.
Banned 360s can still continue to play games, just not online, so this isn't really a loss for piracy either.Yeah, there are a lot of "torrent" sites that just contain malware and scams, but that seems to have always been the case.
This should make copyright holders quite happy, assured product integrity could be a nice selling point for legit software/media.
Also, the existence of scams and malware disguised as torrent sites suggests to me that piracy is becoming more mainstream, not less.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30241026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238268</id>
	<title>Black Thursday!</title>
	<author>Tumbleweed</author>
	<datestamp>1259260920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Alas, poor MiniNova, I knew him well...</p><p>Oh well, that's life in the big city. *shrug*</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Alas , poor MiniNova , I knew him well...Oh well , that 's life in the big city .
* shrug *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Alas, poor MiniNova, I knew him well...Oh well, that's life in the big city.
*shrug*</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239486</id>
	<title>Re:And thus dies Mininova.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259228340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hear, hear.<br>Just checked Mininova. There is now NOTHING of value there, it's all crap that you'd find on YouTube, or worse.<br>If you fucking bastards all over the world trying to squeeze every last penny you can out of everyone are listening, then hear this: You won't get ONE PENNY MORE out of me than you would have before "victories" like this. I'll either pass completely on your "content", or I'll wait for it to be on TV and watch it for FREE anyway. Also, FUCK YOU.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hear , hear.Just checked Mininova .
There is now NOTHING of value there , it 's all crap that you 'd find on YouTube , or worse.If you fucking bastards all over the world trying to squeeze every last penny you can out of everyone are listening , then hear this : You wo n't get ONE PENNY MORE out of me than you would have before " victories " like this .
I 'll either pass completely on your " content " , or I 'll wait for it to be on TV and watch it for FREE anyway .
Also , FUCK YOU .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hear, hear.Just checked Mininova.
There is now NOTHING of value there, it's all crap that you'd find on YouTube, or worse.If you fucking bastards all over the world trying to squeeze every last penny you can out of everyone are listening, then hear this: You won't get ONE PENNY MORE out of me than you would have before "victories" like this.
I'll either pass completely on your "content", or I'll wait for it to be on TV and watch it for FREE anyway.
Also, FUCK YOU.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237618</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30241034</id>
	<title>I can just see it now.</title>
	<author>Rod Beauvex</author>
	<datestamp>1259241240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Their ad revenue drops to near zero, and they go dark in a month or two. They had better have a good back-up business plan.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Their ad revenue drops to near zero , and they go dark in a month or two .
They had better have a good back-up business plan .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Their ad revenue drops to near zero, and they go dark in a month or two.
They had better have a good back-up business plan.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239752</id>
	<title>Re:Debate!</title>
	<author>PeterBrett</author>
	<datestamp>1259230800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But there are already laws against <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious\_interference" title="wikipedia.org">tortuous interference</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But there are already laws against tortuous interference [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But there are already laws against tortuous interference [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238258</id>
	<title>Not all bad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259260860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now, I didn't really know Mininova before this. I had heard of it, but that's about it.</p><p>I did visit the site just now, and I saw lots of items about music that I'd never heard of.</p><p>Maybe it can become a good site to find new music from non-RIAA signed artists, who generally don't have much of a marketing/distribution platform? RIAA, meet foot, gun.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now , I did n't really know Mininova before this .
I had heard of it , but that 's about it.I did visit the site just now , and I saw lots of items about music that I 'd never heard of.Maybe it can become a good site to find new music from non-RIAA signed artists , who generally do n't have much of a marketing/distribution platform ?
RIAA , meet foot , gun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now, I didn't really know Mininova before this.
I had heard of it, but that's about it.I did visit the site just now, and I saw lots of items about music that I'd never heard of.Maybe it can become a good site to find new music from non-RIAA signed artists, who generally don't have much of a marketing/distribution platform?
RIAA, meet foot, gun.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238614</id>
	<title>Re:Well, dang.</title>
	<author>Khyber</author>
	<datestamp>1259263740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>animefreak.tv, DUH.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>animefreak.tv , DUH .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>animefreak.tv, DUH.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237628</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239308</id>
	<title>Hard to find good music</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259226540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem here is not piracy but that most of the music that is easy to buy is worthless drivel.  I have to pirate in order to know what is good before I order it.  I listen to mainly soundtracks, heavy metal, and Japanese Pop.  Now the problem is that most good heavy metal is NOT originally from the US (few exceptions like Fool's Game and Future's End but they are the minority).  Imports for game soundtracks are usually at least $30 and up to $50 after the conversion from Yen to Dollars.  This isn't so bad because most $40 soundtracks from Japanese games are also 2-4 discs and each disc is actually a full 80 minutes unlike US releases with 40 minute discs.


Anime soundtracks though are usually $25-30 and are single disc releases.  Thus because of the price of buying this stuff I have to know for sure this is something good before I buy it.  The only way to do that is to either pirate everything first and buy the good stuff or to buy everything and find out that half of it sucks and I doubt very many people have the money to do that.  It is somewhat easier when you are aware of the good composers out there because then you can be a little more sure that the album you order is good but that isn't very reliable either.


This leaves me with a choice between buying nothing and having nothing to listen to or pirating everything and buying something.  I would think the businesses would rather get my money after I have educated myself the only way I can than not get my money at all.  Sure I could play every single game, watch every single movie, and watch every single series of anime in existence to determine the quality of a soundtrack but that is completely impractical and often times the soundtracks that are the best are also for movies/anime/games that are not so good.  Until there is a change in the way things work I don't see how I have any other option here.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem here is not piracy but that most of the music that is easy to buy is worthless drivel .
I have to pirate in order to know what is good before I order it .
I listen to mainly soundtracks , heavy metal , and Japanese Pop .
Now the problem is that most good heavy metal is NOT originally from the US ( few exceptions like Fool 's Game and Future 's End but they are the minority ) .
Imports for game soundtracks are usually at least $ 30 and up to $ 50 after the conversion from Yen to Dollars .
This is n't so bad because most $ 40 soundtracks from Japanese games are also 2-4 discs and each disc is actually a full 80 minutes unlike US releases with 40 minute discs .
Anime soundtracks though are usually $ 25-30 and are single disc releases .
Thus because of the price of buying this stuff I have to know for sure this is something good before I buy it .
The only way to do that is to either pirate everything first and buy the good stuff or to buy everything and find out that half of it sucks and I doubt very many people have the money to do that .
It is somewhat easier when you are aware of the good composers out there because then you can be a little more sure that the album you order is good but that is n't very reliable either .
This leaves me with a choice between buying nothing and having nothing to listen to or pirating everything and buying something .
I would think the businesses would rather get my money after I have educated myself the only way I can than not get my money at all .
Sure I could play every single game , watch every single movie , and watch every single series of anime in existence to determine the quality of a soundtrack but that is completely impractical and often times the soundtracks that are the best are also for movies/anime/games that are not so good .
Until there is a change in the way things work I do n't see how I have any other option here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem here is not piracy but that most of the music that is easy to buy is worthless drivel.
I have to pirate in order to know what is good before I order it.
I listen to mainly soundtracks, heavy metal, and Japanese Pop.
Now the problem is that most good heavy metal is NOT originally from the US (few exceptions like Fool's Game and Future's End but they are the minority).
Imports for game soundtracks are usually at least $30 and up to $50 after the conversion from Yen to Dollars.
This isn't so bad because most $40 soundtracks from Japanese games are also 2-4 discs and each disc is actually a full 80 minutes unlike US releases with 40 minute discs.
Anime soundtracks though are usually $25-30 and are single disc releases.
Thus because of the price of buying this stuff I have to know for sure this is something good before I buy it.
The only way to do that is to either pirate everything first and buy the good stuff or to buy everything and find out that half of it sucks and I doubt very many people have the money to do that.
It is somewhat easier when you are aware of the good composers out there because then you can be a little more sure that the album you order is good but that isn't very reliable either.
This leaves me with a choice between buying nothing and having nothing to listen to or pirating everything and buying something.
I would think the businesses would rather get my money after I have educated myself the only way I can than not get my money at all.
Sure I could play every single game, watch every single movie, and watch every single series of anime in existence to determine the quality of a soundtrack but that is completely impractical and often times the soundtracks that are the best are also for movies/anime/games that are not so good.
Until there is a change in the way things work I don't see how I have any other option here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30240878</id>
	<title>In Soviet Russia...</title>
	<author>nicospoul</author>
	<datestamp>1259240100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Mininova removes YOU</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mininova removes YOU</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mininova removes YOU</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239294</id>
	<title>Re:I'm curious...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259226480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When reading a sentence you need to read <i>all</i> the words, not just the ones you like.</p><p>"The judge ruled that Mininova is not <i>directly</i> responsible for any copyright infringements [...]" (*)</p><p>Hint: indirect responsibility. As in contributory infringement. As in aiding and abetting in the commission of a crime. Sometimes things that are legal on the surface are not. Such as only distributing a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.torrent file, or only driving the getaway car in a bank heist.</p><p>(*) Yeah, I know I told you to read the entire sentence and then truncated with [...] myself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When reading a sentence you need to read all the words , not just the ones you like .
" The judge ruled that Mininova is not directly responsible for any copyright infringements [ ... ] " ( * ) Hint : indirect responsibility .
As in contributory infringement .
As in aiding and abetting in the commission of a crime .
Sometimes things that are legal on the surface are not .
Such as only distributing a .torrent file , or only driving the getaway car in a bank heist .
( * ) Yeah , I know I told you to read the entire sentence and then truncated with [ ... ] myself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When reading a sentence you need to read all the words, not just the ones you like.
"The judge ruled that Mininova is not directly responsible for any copyright infringements [...]" (*)Hint: indirect responsibility.
As in contributory infringement.
As in aiding and abetting in the commission of a crime.
Sometimes things that are legal on the surface are not.
Such as only distributing a .torrent file, or only driving the getaway car in a bank heist.
(*) Yeah, I know I told you to read the entire sentence and then truncated with [...] myself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30251514</id>
	<title>The legacy of file sharing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259331480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The sort of services that orgs like the RIAA provided were useful in an era where piracy was for profit and centralized.  Today this sort of piracy is itself threatened by file sharing, which is not piracy.  It's copyright infringement but it's not piracy.  Pirates don't give things away for free.</p><p>The RIAA's business model is obsolete.  The terminology they employ is wrong and the laws they're forced to ask for are insane, as they must be given the obsolescence and futility of controlling contemporary distribution channels.</p><p>Eventually, no matter what happens to the file sharing movement, the RIAA and et al will still go away.  Their actual competitor in the market are the content producers, and this has always been the case.  Piracy was just how they engendered fear of the open market and created a business for themselves.</p><p>As the actual content producers slowly but steadily wriggle free from the RIAA, MPAA and their counterparts they will find more money waiting out of their shadow through digital distribution then they ever knew under it.  The RIAA is losing money for it's artists, and more and more are grasping that.</p><p>The legacy of the file sharing movement will not be that places like mininova replace central distribution with open and transparent peer networks. Who knows if that will ever happen in the mainstream.  It's that we have set a bar for low cost, open access and free use of content at the user end point.  That is the genie that has escaped, not the technology, it's the expectations of what is possible.  How that is done, through bittorent, usenet, hulu or new technologies, will change but the expectations for whatever method is current, that is our victory.  And we did it with out the corporations and for the most part, in spite of them. Mininova was part of this, as were and are all the past and present file sharing sites.</p><p>There will always be money in the production of new content.  Right now we're simply in the middle of the change.  We have a lot of past era content but new content will have to, more and more, adapt to new distribution methods and expectations.  Expectations thankfully higher because of what file sharing as proven to be possible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The sort of services that orgs like the RIAA provided were useful in an era where piracy was for profit and centralized .
Today this sort of piracy is itself threatened by file sharing , which is not piracy .
It 's copyright infringement but it 's not piracy .
Pirates do n't give things away for free.The RIAA 's business model is obsolete .
The terminology they employ is wrong and the laws they 're forced to ask for are insane , as they must be given the obsolescence and futility of controlling contemporary distribution channels.Eventually , no matter what happens to the file sharing movement , the RIAA and et al will still go away .
Their actual competitor in the market are the content producers , and this has always been the case .
Piracy was just how they engendered fear of the open market and created a business for themselves.As the actual content producers slowly but steadily wriggle free from the RIAA , MPAA and their counterparts they will find more money waiting out of their shadow through digital distribution then they ever knew under it .
The RIAA is losing money for it 's artists , and more and more are grasping that.The legacy of the file sharing movement will not be that places like mininova replace central distribution with open and transparent peer networks .
Who knows if that will ever happen in the mainstream .
It 's that we have set a bar for low cost , open access and free use of content at the user end point .
That is the genie that has escaped , not the technology , it 's the expectations of what is possible .
How that is done , through bittorent , usenet , hulu or new technologies , will change but the expectations for whatever method is current , that is our victory .
And we did it with out the corporations and for the most part , in spite of them .
Mininova was part of this , as were and are all the past and present file sharing sites.There will always be money in the production of new content .
Right now we 're simply in the middle of the change .
We have a lot of past era content but new content will have to , more and more , adapt to new distribution methods and expectations .
Expectations thankfully higher because of what file sharing as proven to be possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The sort of services that orgs like the RIAA provided were useful in an era where piracy was for profit and centralized.
Today this sort of piracy is itself threatened by file sharing, which is not piracy.
It's copyright infringement but it's not piracy.
Pirates don't give things away for free.The RIAA's business model is obsolete.
The terminology they employ is wrong and the laws they're forced to ask for are insane, as they must be given the obsolescence and futility of controlling contemporary distribution channels.Eventually, no matter what happens to the file sharing movement, the RIAA and et al will still go away.
Their actual competitor in the market are the content producers, and this has always been the case.
Piracy was just how they engendered fear of the open market and created a business for themselves.As the actual content producers slowly but steadily wriggle free from the RIAA, MPAA and their counterparts they will find more money waiting out of their shadow through digital distribution then they ever knew under it.
The RIAA is losing money for it's artists, and more and more are grasping that.The legacy of the file sharing movement will not be that places like mininova replace central distribution with open and transparent peer networks.
Who knows if that will ever happen in the mainstream.
It's that we have set a bar for low cost, open access and free use of content at the user end point.
That is the genie that has escaped, not the technology, it's the expectations of what is possible.
How that is done, through bittorent, usenet, hulu or new technologies, will change but the expectations for whatever method is current, that is our victory.
And we did it with out the corporations and for the most part, in spite of them.
Mininova was part of this, as were and are all the past and present file sharing sites.There will always be money in the production of new content.
Right now we're simply in the middle of the change.
We have a lot of past era content but new content will have to, more and more, adapt to new distribution methods and expectations.
Expectations thankfully higher because of what file sharing as proven to be possible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30250150</id>
	<title>Whups, Got a Little Delete-Happy</title>
	<author>Ranger Rick</author>
	<datestamp>1259322660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In your haste to sell out, you also removed <a href="http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/4371957/Raccoon\_Fink\_-\_Finally\_(Creative\_Commons)" title="thepiratebay.org">my copyrighted material</a> [thepiratebay.org] that I posted myself.  Thanks for "helping" an aspiring independent artist like me!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In your haste to sell out , you also removed my copyrighted material [ thepiratebay.org ] that I posted myself .
Thanks for " helping " an aspiring independent artist like me !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In your haste to sell out, you also removed my copyrighted material [thepiratebay.org] that I posted myself.
Thanks for "helping" an aspiring independent artist like me!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30240840</id>
	<title>NO!</title>
	<author>incognito84</author>
	<datestamp>1259239800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Demonoid, tick.<br>
The Pirate Bay, tick.<br>
Mininova, tick.<br>
<br>
RIP.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Demonoid , tick .
The Pirate Bay , tick .
Mininova , tick .
RIP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Demonoid, tick.
The Pirate Bay, tick.
Mininova, tick.
RIP.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239658</id>
	<title>Re:I'm curious...</title>
	<author>Kjella</author>
	<datestamp>1259230020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pardon me if this post contains legal reality and not how it should be. Copyright infringement under US law is a strict liability offense, that means that even if you can prove you had no idea you were violating copyright you are still liable at a minimum of 200$/work and up to 30000$/work. However, ISPs are covered by some common carrier-like protections - the legal term has a specific meaning and ISPs are not common carriers - that grant them relief from liability if they meet certain conditions. Without going into much detail, one of these conditions is to respond to DMCA takedown requests. If they do not comply with that requirement they will default back to standard copyright law, which says they are liable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pardon me if this post contains legal reality and not how it should be .
Copyright infringement under US law is a strict liability offense , that means that even if you can prove you had no idea you were violating copyright you are still liable at a minimum of 200 $ /work and up to 30000 $ /work .
However , ISPs are covered by some common carrier-like protections - the legal term has a specific meaning and ISPs are not common carriers - that grant them relief from liability if they meet certain conditions .
Without going into much detail , one of these conditions is to respond to DMCA takedown requests .
If they do not comply with that requirement they will default back to standard copyright law , which says they are liable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pardon me if this post contains legal reality and not how it should be.
Copyright infringement under US law is a strict liability offense, that means that even if you can prove you had no idea you were violating copyright you are still liable at a minimum of 200$/work and up to 30000$/work.
However, ISPs are covered by some common carrier-like protections - the legal term has a specific meaning and ISPs are not common carriers - that grant them relief from liability if they meet certain conditions.
Without going into much detail, one of these conditions is to respond to DMCA takedown requests.
If they do not comply with that requirement they will default back to standard copyright law, which says they are liable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238866</id>
	<title>Time to move to Freenet...</title>
	<author>FreenetFan</author>
	<datestamp>1259265720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Freenet is where the next generation of filesharing will happen. It's working very well at the moment, Speeds are pretty good and there is a lot of content. Files of 1GB can be easily downloaded in a day, just queue them up. And of course there is a lot of chat on the forums, just like Usenet used to be.</p><p>It is a lot more user friendly than it used to be, although the Slashdot crowd are the kind of people who will be the early adopters.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Freenet is where the next generation of filesharing will happen .
It 's working very well at the moment , Speeds are pretty good and there is a lot of content .
Files of 1GB can be easily downloaded in a day , just queue them up .
And of course there is a lot of chat on the forums , just like Usenet used to be.It is a lot more user friendly than it used to be , although the Slashdot crowd are the kind of people who will be the early adopters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Freenet is where the next generation of filesharing will happen.
It's working very well at the moment, Speeds are pretty good and there is a lot of content.
Files of 1GB can be easily downloaded in a day, just queue them up.
And of course there is a lot of chat on the forums, just like Usenet used to be.It is a lot more user friendly than it used to be, although the Slashdot crowd are the kind of people who will be the early adopters.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238660</id>
	<title>Re:i wonder...</title>
	<author>click2005</author>
	<datestamp>1259264100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1,320,433 according to Google's cache.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1,320,433 according to Google 's cache .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1,320,433 according to Google's cache.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237698</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30241986</id>
	<title>The mediaz are still there. Make a DNS over DHT</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259250060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just not their tracker indexing it.</p><p>The problem is how for people to find the Next Tracker Site. Google or other search engines would do it for now.</p><p>What should be created is a floating DNS run over a DHT type scheme so that it is possible to find an IP, or search for a file, and if desired both at the same time, from within popular browsers. Create a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.dyn dynamic tld and create a crypto enabled way to keep people from hijacking domains<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I would say the hell with domains just make a domain query the result of a search including a reserved keyword like "domain", but that might be too slow unless you create a large local cache (not hard though, just use bittorrent to download updates - anyone can make a "dot in dot com").</p><p>If enough traffic is generated or it can be used to solve media distribution issues in general, like a soft-coded multicasting infrastructure, it may be possible to get ISPs to pick it up and for mainstream browsers to introduce it. Then there would be no difference between dynamic and old tlds except better throughput for<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.dyn ones.</p><p>There are already problems with titles disappearing after a short period of interest, we need an alternative floating, dynamically self configuring infrastructure that will also be supported by high bandwidth data centers.</p><p>Unless even more money is spent on infrastructure, frankly this is the only way to keep the net from exploding due to high bandwidth demand. Copyright issues are secondary and can be resolved via sanity. More distribution will be via the net, and new models will make it easier to find titles reliably and yes even bill for them. I myself would pay $1000 / yr for unlimited media at high speed with no hassles and freedom to fully leverage technology. I'd contribute another $1000 to making this happen with software or business development services.</p><p>IndexMe</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just not their tracker indexing it.The problem is how for people to find the Next Tracker Site .
Google or other search engines would do it for now.What should be created is a floating DNS run over a DHT type scheme so that it is possible to find an IP , or search for a file , and if desired both at the same time , from within popular browsers .
Create a .dyn dynamic tld and create a crypto enabled way to keep people from hijacking domains ... I would say the hell with domains just make a domain query the result of a search including a reserved keyword like " domain " , but that might be too slow unless you create a large local cache ( not hard though , just use bittorrent to download updates - anyone can make a " dot in dot com " ) .If enough traffic is generated or it can be used to solve media distribution issues in general , like a soft-coded multicasting infrastructure , it may be possible to get ISPs to pick it up and for mainstream browsers to introduce it .
Then there would be no difference between dynamic and old tlds except better throughput for .dyn ones.There are already problems with titles disappearing after a short period of interest , we need an alternative floating , dynamically self configuring infrastructure that will also be supported by high bandwidth data centers.Unless even more money is spent on infrastructure , frankly this is the only way to keep the net from exploding due to high bandwidth demand .
Copyright issues are secondary and can be resolved via sanity .
More distribution will be via the net , and new models will make it easier to find titles reliably and yes even bill for them .
I myself would pay $ 1000 / yr for unlimited media at high speed with no hassles and freedom to fully leverage technology .
I 'd contribute another $ 1000 to making this happen with software or business development services.IndexMe</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just not their tracker indexing it.The problem is how for people to find the Next Tracker Site.
Google or other search engines would do it for now.What should be created is a floating DNS run over a DHT type scheme so that it is possible to find an IP, or search for a file, and if desired both at the same time, from within popular browsers.
Create a .dyn dynamic tld and create a crypto enabled way to keep people from hijacking domains ... I would say the hell with domains just make a domain query the result of a search including a reserved keyword like "domain", but that might be too slow unless you create a large local cache (not hard though, just use bittorrent to download updates - anyone can make a "dot in dot com").If enough traffic is generated or it can be used to solve media distribution issues in general, like a soft-coded multicasting infrastructure, it may be possible to get ISPs to pick it up and for mainstream browsers to introduce it.
Then there would be no difference between dynamic and old tlds except better throughput for .dyn ones.There are already problems with titles disappearing after a short period of interest, we need an alternative floating, dynamically self configuring infrastructure that will also be supported by high bandwidth data centers.Unless even more money is spent on infrastructure, frankly this is the only way to keep the net from exploding due to high bandwidth demand.
Copyright issues are secondary and can be resolved via sanity.
More distribution will be via the net, and new models will make it easier to find titles reliably and yes even bill for them.
I myself would pay $1000 / yr for unlimited media at high speed with no hassles and freedom to fully leverage technology.
I'd contribute another $1000 to making this happen with software or business development services.IndexMe</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238418</id>
	<title>Mininova Removes All Copyright-Infringing Torrents</title>
	<author>uvajed\_ekil</author>
	<datestamp>1259262300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...and bittorrent users remove all bookmarks to mininova. NEXT!</htmltext>
<tokenext>...and bittorrent users remove all bookmarks to mininova .
NEXT !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and bittorrent users remove all bookmarks to mininova.
NEXT!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239008</id>
	<title>Re:I'm curious...</title>
	<author>Zoxed</author>
	<datestamp>1259266920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...how can Mininova not be liable for any copyright infringing links, but still be ordered to remove the links?</p><p>A few guesses: because they do not have the money/lawyers/energy to continue the fight, or they do not want the personal risk of being hit by a massive fine or because they have had a good run and know that alternatives will popup anyway<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; ...how can Mininova not be liable for any copyright infringing links , but still be ordered to remove the links ? A few guesses : because they do not have the money/lawyers/energy to continue the fight , or they do not want the personal risk of being hit by a massive fine or because they have had a good run and know that alternatives will popup anyway .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; ...how can Mininova not be liable for any copyright infringing links, but still be ordered to remove the links?A few guesses: because they do not have the money/lawyers/energy to continue the fight, or they do not want the personal risk of being hit by a massive fine or because they have had a good run and know that alternatives will popup anyway ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237628</id>
	<title>Well, dang.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259256120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where do those of us looking for not-legally avaliable stuff, like dubbed anime go now?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where do those of us looking for not-legally avaliable stuff , like dubbed anime go now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where do those of us looking for not-legally avaliable stuff, like dubbed anime go now?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239142</id>
	<title>Re:Debate!</title>
	<author>TubeSteak</author>
	<datestamp>1259268180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But consider what could happen if non-commercial infringement wasn't punished: Let's say Steve Jobs has an argument with someone who happens to be the boss of a record company. So Steve Jobs buys two dozen XServes, goes to a record store and buys all CDs made by that record company, plus orders all their back catalogue, hires someone to load these CDs onto the computers, then makes them available to the whole world, without asking for a penny. For a million dollars, he could drive that record company into bankruptcy. Completely non-commercial.</p></div><p>And that's why the law has a threshold beyond which civil infringement becomes a criminal matter.<br>IIRC, it's $1,000 (retail) of content distributed during a 180 day period.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But consider what could happen if non-commercial infringement was n't punished : Let 's say Steve Jobs has an argument with someone who happens to be the boss of a record company .
So Steve Jobs buys two dozen XServes , goes to a record store and buys all CDs made by that record company , plus orders all their back catalogue , hires someone to load these CDs onto the computers , then makes them available to the whole world , without asking for a penny .
For a million dollars , he could drive that record company into bankruptcy .
Completely non-commercial.And that 's why the law has a threshold beyond which civil infringement becomes a criminal matter.IIRC , it 's $ 1,000 ( retail ) of content distributed during a 180 day period .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But consider what could happen if non-commercial infringement wasn't punished: Let's say Steve Jobs has an argument with someone who happens to be the boss of a record company.
So Steve Jobs buys two dozen XServes, goes to a record store and buys all CDs made by that record company, plus orders all their back catalogue, hires someone to load these CDs onto the computers, then makes them available to the whole world, without asking for a penny.
For a million dollars, he could drive that record company into bankruptcy.
Completely non-commercial.And that's why the law has a threshold beyond which civil infringement becomes a criminal matter.IIRC, it's $1,000 (retail) of content distributed during a 180 day period.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238710</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no! What will I do?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259264460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And soon all these will be replaced by PEX</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And soon all these will be replaced by PEX</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And soon all these will be replaced by PEX</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238098</id>
	<title>Typo in summary</title>
	<author>dvh.tosomja</author>
	<datestamp>1259259480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Mininova Removes All Copyright-Infringing Torrents</p><p>Mininova Removes All Torrents<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...Here, fixed that for ya</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Mininova Removes All Copyright-Infringing TorrentsMininova Removes All Torrents ...Here , fixed that for ya</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Mininova Removes All Copyright-Infringing TorrentsMininova Removes All Torrents ...Here, fixed that for ya</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239896</id>
	<title>Re:Debate!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259232420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm sorry, but if anyone gives a shit about these CDs, they're already available for the whole world to download regardless of Jobs's argument with the aforementioned boss. The premise that having some content available in the internet for free automatically bankrupts the content provider is simply false. Movies are doing quite ok, despite piracy, and video games as well.  Some of the content available would be bought if it couldn't be downloaded for free - but just a small percentage, since it costs money when it is not pirated. Thus the notion of billionary losses from piracy is simply a lie. If people who pirate content today couldn't do it, they simply wouldn't buy it, mostly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sorry , but if anyone gives a shit about these CDs , they 're already available for the whole world to download regardless of Jobs 's argument with the aforementioned boss .
The premise that having some content available in the internet for free automatically bankrupts the content provider is simply false .
Movies are doing quite ok , despite piracy , and video games as well .
Some of the content available would be bought if it could n't be downloaded for free - but just a small percentage , since it costs money when it is not pirated .
Thus the notion of billionary losses from piracy is simply a lie .
If people who pirate content today could n't do it , they simply would n't buy it , mostly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sorry, but if anyone gives a shit about these CDs, they're already available for the whole world to download regardless of Jobs's argument with the aforementioned boss.
The premise that having some content available in the internet for free automatically bankrupts the content provider is simply false.
Movies are doing quite ok, despite piracy, and video games as well.
Some of the content available would be bought if it couldn't be downloaded for free - but just a small percentage, since it costs money when it is not pirated.
Thus the notion of billionary losses from piracy is simply a lie.
If people who pirate content today couldn't do it, they simply wouldn't buy it, mostly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238100</id>
	<title>Penalizing legal uses?</title>
	<author>Oshawapilot</author>
	<datestamp>1259259480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here in Canada we pay a huge levy on blank CD media, MP3 players, and virtually any other media capable of holding music.  This "goes into a fund to pay musicians and songwriters for revenues lost from consumers' personal copying. ", as per the Cnet article here <a href="http://news.cnet.com/2100-1025\_3-5121479.html" title="cnet.com" rel="nofollow">http://news.cnet.com/2100-1025\_3-5121479.html</a> [cnet.com]</p><p>Therefore, this shutdown is infringing on my legal right to download music.</p><p>Meh, there's always ISOhunt, or like everyone else has already said, plenty of other choices.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here in Canada we pay a huge levy on blank CD media , MP3 players , and virtually any other media capable of holding music .
This " goes into a fund to pay musicians and songwriters for revenues lost from consumers ' personal copying .
" , as per the Cnet article here http : //news.cnet.com/2100-1025 \ _3-5121479.html [ cnet.com ] Therefore , this shutdown is infringing on my legal right to download music.Meh , there 's always ISOhunt , or like everyone else has already said , plenty of other choices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here in Canada we pay a huge levy on blank CD media, MP3 players, and virtually any other media capable of holding music.
This "goes into a fund to pay musicians and songwriters for revenues lost from consumers' personal copying.
", as per the Cnet article here http://news.cnet.com/2100-1025\_3-5121479.html [cnet.com]Therefore, this shutdown is infringing on my legal right to download music.Meh, there's always ISOhunt, or like everyone else has already said, plenty of other choices.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237632</id>
	<title>Debate!</title>
	<author>headkase</author>
	<datestamp>1259256240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is obviously an issue with regards to copyright in our society.  Millions and more are sharing all the time.  This points the finger at the issue being systemic.  We need to educate people to enable a wider debate.  That is the only thing that will lead to fair change.  Piracy is not the answer.  There is a place for copyright that is not todays distorted parameters.  Boycotting in the mean time is the answer, however, unless boycotting is whipped into shape it is also not the answer.  Debate!  Educate your friends and family it is a small start but it is the only way.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is obviously an issue with regards to copyright in our society .
Millions and more are sharing all the time .
This points the finger at the issue being systemic .
We need to educate people to enable a wider debate .
That is the only thing that will lead to fair change .
Piracy is not the answer .
There is a place for copyright that is not todays distorted parameters .
Boycotting in the mean time is the answer , however , unless boycotting is whipped into shape it is also not the answer .
Debate ! Educate your friends and family it is a small start but it is the only way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is obviously an issue with regards to copyright in our society.
Millions and more are sharing all the time.
This points the finger at the issue being systemic.
We need to educate people to enable a wider debate.
That is the only thing that will lead to fair change.
Piracy is not the answer.
There is a place for copyright that is not todays distorted parameters.
Boycotting in the mean time is the answer, however, unless boycotting is whipped into shape it is also not the answer.
Debate!  Educate your friends and family it is a small start but it is the only way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238176</id>
	<title>Re:Debate!</title>
	<author>icebraining</author>
	<datestamp>1259260200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And stop with the stupid after copyright. It's not like Miles Davis can benefit from any copy of Kind of Blue sold today. The purpose of copyright is to provide a source of revenue for the creator, so more people will create stuff, not for some label can profit more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And stop with the stupid after copyright .
It 's not like Miles Davis can benefit from any copy of Kind of Blue sold today .
The purpose of copyright is to provide a source of revenue for the creator , so more people will create stuff , not for some label can profit more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And stop with the stupid after copyright.
It's not like Miles Davis can benefit from any copy of Kind of Blue sold today.
The purpose of copyright is to provide a source of revenue for the creator, so more people will create stuff, not for some label can profit more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237622</id>
	<title>Ah shit, not again....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259256120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Damn it.... Oh well, first post.</p><p>-CVroyovXO</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Damn it.... Oh well , first post.-CVroyovXO</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Damn it.... Oh well, first post.-CVroyovXO</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237748</id>
	<title>Re:Debate!</title>
	<author>gowen</author>
	<datestamp>1259257020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're trying to start an intelligent and informed debate on copyright?  Based on the premise that some copyright is quite reasonable?</p><p>On Slashdot?</p><p>Good luck with that...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're trying to start an intelligent and informed debate on copyright ?
Based on the premise that some copyright is quite reasonable ? On Slashdot ? Good luck with that.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're trying to start an intelligent and informed debate on copyright?
Based on the premise that some copyright is quite reasonable?On Slashdot?Good luck with that...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239104</id>
	<title>Re:Well, dang.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259267820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use a combination of <a href="http://isohunt.com/" title="isohunt.com" rel="nofollow">http://isohunt.com/</a> [isohunt.com] and <a href="http://www.nyaatorrents.org/" title="nyaatorrents.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.nyaatorrents.org/</a> [nyaatorrents.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use a combination of http : //isohunt.com/ [ isohunt.com ] and http : //www.nyaatorrents.org/ [ nyaatorrents.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use a combination of http://isohunt.com/ [isohunt.com] and http://www.nyaatorrents.org/ [nyaatorrents.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237628</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238564</id>
	<title>They were lucky</title>
	<author>FlyingGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1259263440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Quoted from the TorrentFreak website..</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Mininova was founded in early 2005 by five Dutch students, just a month after Suprnova closed its doors. The site started out as a hobby project created by tech-savvy teenagers, but in the years that followed the site&rsquo;s founders managed to turn it into a successful business that generated millions of dollars in revenue.</p></div><p>This is what got them into trouble, besides, "Aiding and Abetting", <i>(spare me the jurisdictional nonsense please)</i> since even companies that don't seriously object to their software ending up on torrent sites start looking at the bottom line and looking at all the money someone else is making from their product and they are not getting a cut of it.</p><p>Greed on <b>all of the parties</b> sides is the problem.  If the torrent sites, pointers, indices's, maps, sources, call them what you will because the notion of a site pointing to the place to get illegal copies of software and the actual place the binary resides is a very very blurry legal line indeed, would start cutting checks to the people who actively sell their software which cost them real money to produce, this then might be something that simply goes on with no one complaining.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Quoted from the TorrentFreak website..Mininova was founded in early 2005 by five Dutch students , just a month after Suprnova closed its doors .
The site started out as a hobby project created by tech-savvy teenagers , but in the years that followed the site    s founders managed to turn it into a successful business that generated millions of dollars in revenue.This is what got them into trouble , besides , " Aiding and Abetting " , ( spare me the jurisdictional nonsense please ) since even companies that do n't seriously object to their software ending up on torrent sites start looking at the bottom line and looking at all the money someone else is making from their product and they are not getting a cut of it.Greed on all of the parties sides is the problem .
If the torrent sites , pointers , indices 's , maps , sources , call them what you will because the notion of a site pointing to the place to get illegal copies of software and the actual place the binary resides is a very very blurry legal line indeed , would start cutting checks to the people who actively sell their software which cost them real money to produce , this then might be something that simply goes on with no one complaining .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quoted from the TorrentFreak website..Mininova was founded in early 2005 by five Dutch students, just a month after Suprnova closed its doors.
The site started out as a hobby project created by tech-savvy teenagers, but in the years that followed the site’s founders managed to turn it into a successful business that generated millions of dollars in revenue.This is what got them into trouble, besides, "Aiding and Abetting", (spare me the jurisdictional nonsense please) since even companies that don't seriously object to their software ending up on torrent sites start looking at the bottom line and looking at all the money someone else is making from their product and they are not getting a cut of it.Greed on all of the parties sides is the problem.
If the torrent sites, pointers, indices's, maps, sources, call them what you will because the notion of a site pointing to the place to get illegal copies of software and the actual place the binary resides is a very very blurry legal line indeed, would start cutting checks to the people who actively sell their software which cost them real money to produce, this then might be something that simply goes on with no one complaining.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237832</id>
	<title>Re:Debate!</title>
	<author>Kethinov</author>
	<datestamp>1259257620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>You're trying to start an intelligent and informed debate on copyright? Based on the premise that some copyright is quite reasonable?</p><p>On Slashdot?</p><p>Good luck with that...</p></div></blockquote><p>Some copyright is quite reasonable. What we need is a legalization of noncommercial copyright infringement. Leave the rest of copyright law perfectly as it is. I should be able to share all the files I want, but as soon as I start trying to make money doing that, that's when it should become illegal (as it is today).</p><p>The exclusive distribution rights granted by copyright were meant to give you an exclusive right to profit from your work. Copyright law when originally drafted could not anticipate a scenario where copying cost nothing, so they simply assumed that any copy must have a profit motive which as of the advent of consumer electronics is no longer necessarily the case.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're trying to start an intelligent and informed debate on copyright ?
Based on the premise that some copyright is quite reasonable ? On Slashdot ? Good luck with that...Some copyright is quite reasonable .
What we need is a legalization of noncommercial copyright infringement .
Leave the rest of copyright law perfectly as it is .
I should be able to share all the files I want , but as soon as I start trying to make money doing that , that 's when it should become illegal ( as it is today ) .The exclusive distribution rights granted by copyright were meant to give you an exclusive right to profit from your work .
Copyright law when originally drafted could not anticipate a scenario where copying cost nothing , so they simply assumed that any copy must have a profit motive which as of the advent of consumer electronics is no longer necessarily the case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're trying to start an intelligent and informed debate on copyright?
Based on the premise that some copyright is quite reasonable?On Slashdot?Good luck with that...Some copyright is quite reasonable.
What we need is a legalization of noncommercial copyright infringement.
Leave the rest of copyright law perfectly as it is.
I should be able to share all the files I want, but as soon as I start trying to make money doing that, that's when it should become illegal (as it is today).The exclusive distribution rights granted by copyright were meant to give you an exclusive right to profit from your work.
Copyright law when originally drafted could not anticipate a scenario where copying cost nothing, so they simply assumed that any copy must have a profit motive which as of the advent of consumer electronics is no longer necessarily the case.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237748</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238132</id>
	<title>R.I.P. Old friends</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259259720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's have a moment of silence, or as it goes on the internet a sad smiley, for all our old friends lost to MPAA, and alike, lawsuits all the way from Napster to this.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's have a moment of silence , or as it goes on the internet a sad smiley , for all our old friends lost to MPAA , and alike , lawsuits all the way from Napster to this .
: (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's have a moment of silence, or as it goes on the internet a sad smiley, for all our old friends lost to MPAA, and alike, lawsuits all the way from Napster to this.
:(</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30241026</id>
	<title>Re:Debate!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259241180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sure a multipronged effort forcing ISPs to log packets and rat out people going to certain sites, chips on computers to force "trusted computing" down everyone's throats, prison terms that are longer than violent crimes for noncommercial infringement, more DMCA restrictions to clamp down on cracks, and more Draconian DRM would put a stop to piracy.</p><p>Gee, isn't all this in the leaked ACTA law?</p><p>As of now, piracy may be an issue on PCs, but remember:  The pirates are losing.  HD satellite has yet to be cracked.  Same with HDCP.  Blu-Ray is an arms race between Slysoft, cracking title by title, and the CSS wonks.  The PS3 is has shown to be hackproof going on three years.  The XBox 360 might have been cracked, but cracked boxes get tossed off of XBL fast.  Even on the PC, StarForce games have yet to be cracked.  Splinter Cell made almost 4 years ago still requires you to physically yank out IDE controller cables in order to get the "patch" to run.</p><p>Even with torrents, there are very few solid sites to go and find clean torrents, unless you are lucky enough to be in the zero day scene already and have private tracker access.  A number of "torrent" sites just point you to some site that asks for your name and credit card, just like the old days of "Insta-DDL here" where the only thing available by "DDL" was drive-by malware.</p><p>It may not be tomorrow that it will only be a select few (the same people who would have +o on a constant basis #warez on efnet in bygone times) that have the ability to use a pirated version of the next Adobe CS15 suite, but that day is coming up.  Of course, once piracy is pushed to the fringes, don't expect price drops anytime soon.  I'm sure Microsoft Office will go back to the pricing levels it was at in the early versions ($2000 a copy).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure a multipronged effort forcing ISPs to log packets and rat out people going to certain sites , chips on computers to force " trusted computing " down everyone 's throats , prison terms that are longer than violent crimes for noncommercial infringement , more DMCA restrictions to clamp down on cracks , and more Draconian DRM would put a stop to piracy.Gee , is n't all this in the leaked ACTA law ? As of now , piracy may be an issue on PCs , but remember : The pirates are losing .
HD satellite has yet to be cracked .
Same with HDCP .
Blu-Ray is an arms race between Slysoft , cracking title by title , and the CSS wonks .
The PS3 is has shown to be hackproof going on three years .
The XBox 360 might have been cracked , but cracked boxes get tossed off of XBL fast .
Even on the PC , StarForce games have yet to be cracked .
Splinter Cell made almost 4 years ago still requires you to physically yank out IDE controller cables in order to get the " patch " to run.Even with torrents , there are very few solid sites to go and find clean torrents , unless you are lucky enough to be in the zero day scene already and have private tracker access .
A number of " torrent " sites just point you to some site that asks for your name and credit card , just like the old days of " Insta-DDL here " where the only thing available by " DDL " was drive-by malware.It may not be tomorrow that it will only be a select few ( the same people who would have + o on a constant basis # warez on efnet in bygone times ) that have the ability to use a pirated version of the next Adobe CS15 suite , but that day is coming up .
Of course , once piracy is pushed to the fringes , do n't expect price drops anytime soon .
I 'm sure Microsoft Office will go back to the pricing levels it was at in the early versions ( $ 2000 a copy ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure a multipronged effort forcing ISPs to log packets and rat out people going to certain sites, chips on computers to force "trusted computing" down everyone's throats, prison terms that are longer than violent crimes for noncommercial infringement, more DMCA restrictions to clamp down on cracks, and more Draconian DRM would put a stop to piracy.Gee, isn't all this in the leaked ACTA law?As of now, piracy may be an issue on PCs, but remember:  The pirates are losing.
HD satellite has yet to be cracked.
Same with HDCP.
Blu-Ray is an arms race between Slysoft, cracking title by title, and the CSS wonks.
The PS3 is has shown to be hackproof going on three years.
The XBox 360 might have been cracked, but cracked boxes get tossed off of XBL fast.
Even on the PC, StarForce games have yet to be cracked.
Splinter Cell made almost 4 years ago still requires you to physically yank out IDE controller cables in order to get the "patch" to run.Even with torrents, there are very few solid sites to go and find clean torrents, unless you are lucky enough to be in the zero day scene already and have private tracker access.
A number of "torrent" sites just point you to some site that asks for your name and credit card, just like the old days of "Insta-DDL here" where the only thing available by "DDL" was drive-by malware.It may not be tomorrow that it will only be a select few (the same people who would have +o on a constant basis #warez on efnet in bygone times) that have the ability to use a pirated version of the next Adobe CS15 suite, but that day is coming up.
Of course, once piracy is pushed to the fringes, don't expect price drops anytime soon.
I'm sure Microsoft Office will go back to the pricing levels it was at in the early versions ($2000 a copy).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237762</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237990</id>
	<title>Oh no! What will I do?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259258820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mininova is gone!</p><p>If only there'd be some kind of alternative! I guess I'll just have to rely on sumotorrent, btjunkie, eztv, fenopy, isohunt, seedpeer, torrentz, torrentbox, torrentdownloads.net, torrent portal, torrentreactor.net, torrentreactor.to, alivetorrents, demonoid, boxtorrent, animelab, animesuki, kickasstorrents, torrentplaza, movietorrents, torrentomega, flixflux, overget, superfundo and all the other sites I can easily find on google by doing a simple search.</p><p>I hope I'll be able to survive!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mininova is gone ! If only there 'd be some kind of alternative !
I guess I 'll just have to rely on sumotorrent , btjunkie , eztv , fenopy , isohunt , seedpeer , torrentz , torrentbox , torrentdownloads.net , torrent portal , torrentreactor.net , torrentreactor.to , alivetorrents , demonoid , boxtorrent , animelab , animesuki , kickasstorrents , torrentplaza , movietorrents , torrentomega , flixflux , overget , superfundo and all the other sites I can easily find on google by doing a simple search.I hope I 'll be able to survive !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mininova is gone!If only there'd be some kind of alternative!
I guess I'll just have to rely on sumotorrent, btjunkie, eztv, fenopy, isohunt, seedpeer, torrentz, torrentbox, torrentdownloads.net, torrent portal, torrentreactor.net, torrentreactor.to, alivetorrents, demonoid, boxtorrent, animelab, animesuki, kickasstorrents, torrentplaza, movietorrents, torrentomega, flixflux, overget, superfundo and all the other sites I can easily find on google by doing a simple search.I hope I'll be able to survive!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238096</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no! What will I do?</title>
	<author>Krneki</author>
	<datestamp>1259259420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>You forgot Google with file:torrent.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You forgot Google with file : torrent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You forgot Google with file:torrent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238272</id>
	<title>strange</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259260980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That no-one even started talking about tor or even freenet..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That no-one even started talking about tor or even freenet. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That no-one even started talking about tor or even freenet..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239248</id>
	<title>Re:Debate!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259226060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You understand that you are legislating everything effectively be subject to the GPL?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You understand that you are legislating everything effectively be subject to the GPL ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You understand that you are legislating everything effectively be subject to the GPL?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239210</id>
	<title>Nanonova</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259268780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I will wait for nanonova now<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I will wait for nanonova now : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I will wait for nanonova now :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237620</id>
	<title>i wonder...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259256120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...if they're working with a white or black list?</htmltext>
<tokenext>...if they 're working with a white or black list ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...if they're working with a white or black list?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238140</id>
	<title>and as usual...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259259840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And as happens so often, a judge basically says "Well, technically what you're doing <b>isn't illegal</b>, but I still don't like what you're doing, and people are breathing down my neck to do something about you, so stoppit or we're going to bring the legal system down on you anyway.  We may not be able to make it <i>stick</i>, but we certainly can <b>make your life hell</b> in the attempt."  Surrender your rights and we'll leave you alone - persist and we'll make you regret it.  Wonderful legal system we have here.</p><p>Judges that make rulings like that need to either be re-educated, or removed.  Their job isn't to make the law, but to <i>judge</i> whether or not you've broken a law. (except in trial by jury, and then they don't even get that)  Whether or not they like what you're doing, or whether or not they think what you did <i>should be illegal</i> isn't supposed to have anything to do with it.  If they're more interested in writing the law, they need to give up their bench and run for senator.</p><p>Senators make laws and place restrictions on police and judges.  Citizens break laws.  Police arrest citizens that appear to have broken laws.  Juries (/judges) interpret law and decide if citizens have broken a law.  Judges insure a fair trial.  Problem here is everyone wants a piece of everyone else's action.  Oh if it only weren't for that pesky "separation of powers" thing...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And as happens so often , a judge basically says " Well , technically what you 're doing is n't illegal , but I still do n't like what you 're doing , and people are breathing down my neck to do something about you , so stoppit or we 're going to bring the legal system down on you anyway .
We may not be able to make it stick , but we certainly can make your life hell in the attempt .
" Surrender your rights and we 'll leave you alone - persist and we 'll make you regret it .
Wonderful legal system we have here.Judges that make rulings like that need to either be re-educated , or removed .
Their job is n't to make the law , but to judge whether or not you 've broken a law .
( except in trial by jury , and then they do n't even get that ) Whether or not they like what you 're doing , or whether or not they think what you did should be illegal is n't supposed to have anything to do with it .
If they 're more interested in writing the law , they need to give up their bench and run for senator.Senators make laws and place restrictions on police and judges .
Citizens break laws .
Police arrest citizens that appear to have broken laws .
Juries ( /judges ) interpret law and decide if citizens have broken a law .
Judges insure a fair trial .
Problem here is everyone wants a piece of everyone else 's action .
Oh if it only were n't for that pesky " separation of powers " thing.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And as happens so often, a judge basically says "Well, technically what you're doing isn't illegal, but I still don't like what you're doing, and people are breathing down my neck to do something about you, so stoppit or we're going to bring the legal system down on you anyway.
We may not be able to make it stick, but we certainly can make your life hell in the attempt.
"  Surrender your rights and we'll leave you alone - persist and we'll make you regret it.
Wonderful legal system we have here.Judges that make rulings like that need to either be re-educated, or removed.
Their job isn't to make the law, but to judge whether or not you've broken a law.
(except in trial by jury, and then they don't even get that)  Whether or not they like what you're doing, or whether or not they think what you did should be illegal isn't supposed to have anything to do with it.
If they're more interested in writing the law, they need to give up their bench and run for senator.Senators make laws and place restrictions on police and judges.
Citizens break laws.
Police arrest citizens that appear to have broken laws.
Juries (/judges) interpret law and decide if citizens have broken a law.
Judges insure a fair trial.
Problem here is everyone wants a piece of everyone else's action.
Oh if it only weren't for that pesky "separation of powers" thing...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238290</id>
	<title>Re:Debate!</title>
	<author>Plekto</author>
	<datestamp>1259261220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><b>Some copyright is quite reasonable. What we need is a legalization of noncommercial copyright infringement. Leave the rest of copyright law perfectly as it is. I should be able to share all the files I want, but as soon as I start trying to make money doing that, that's when it should become illegal (as it is today).</b></p><p>The interesting part here is that the person in question wouldn't have paid for the product anyways, unless it was something that was critical to their work or life(ie - physical item like a light bulb).  And entertainment isn't.  People will just go elsewhere if the price is too high. For instance, I could have seen my favorite band in concert, but at $140 a ticket, it was too expensive.  Since there was no "free" option either, I simply opted out.  I heard that they only sold about 2/3 of the total tickets as well.  I didn't cost the promoter a sale.  There were no damages.  I just went elsewhere.</p><p>This is a critical point for the producers to understand.  Copying isn't a lost sale.  I never would have been a sale at all anyways.</p><p>So what's the upside?  How many of us have bought something after playing a demo or listening to a sample of the music online?  Getting exposure for your product means a lot lately, and that means you have to give it away to attract new listeners or viewers.  Attempting to squash it will just end up making people spend their money elsewhere.  And in this economic climate, you'd think that the major studios and recording companies would figure this out.  If they thought it was bad before, with these continuing tactics, they're in for a rude awakening.</p><p>My son doesn't even care about watching TV much any more or music on the radio.  He watches YouTube for entertainment because it's free.  I doubt if he'll even bother to download music at this rate or buy a single CD before he's 18.  They just simply put, lost a future customer because there are better free alternatives out there without the idiocy and rules to deal with.  He gets $5 a week and that's like gold to him.  Spending it on music is the last thing he wants to do at this point. So it goes to his guitar or his bike or video games... all physical things, since YouTube and other similar sites(he likes those free Java-driven game sites for instance) offer him an enormous number of ways to waste time for free.</p><p>Even I have never downloaded a single music or movie file.  Because there's an almost unlimited amount of better stuff out there for free.  I pay a lot of money per month for a fast connection and to be honest, I'd rather watch some crazy video on YouTube (was watching old Battlebots segments for instance last night with my son(who now wants to build a Battlebot - heh)) than more of the boring drek that Hollywood puts out.  And I'd rather go out to one of the local bars around town to hear some *live* music than waste it on a CD.</p><p>I've seen only three movies in a theater this last year.  With online content and 80+ channels of Cable TV, I just don't need music or movies in my life at this point.</p><p>Note - since I do live in a major urban area, yes, it is simply a matter of going down the street to find entertainment, so I admit that that's a factor in my favor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some copyright is quite reasonable .
What we need is a legalization of noncommercial copyright infringement .
Leave the rest of copyright law perfectly as it is .
I should be able to share all the files I want , but as soon as I start trying to make money doing that , that 's when it should become illegal ( as it is today ) .The interesting part here is that the person in question would n't have paid for the product anyways , unless it was something that was critical to their work or life ( ie - physical item like a light bulb ) .
And entertainment is n't .
People will just go elsewhere if the price is too high .
For instance , I could have seen my favorite band in concert , but at $ 140 a ticket , it was too expensive .
Since there was no " free " option either , I simply opted out .
I heard that they only sold about 2/3 of the total tickets as well .
I did n't cost the promoter a sale .
There were no damages .
I just went elsewhere.This is a critical point for the producers to understand .
Copying is n't a lost sale .
I never would have been a sale at all anyways.So what 's the upside ?
How many of us have bought something after playing a demo or listening to a sample of the music online ?
Getting exposure for your product means a lot lately , and that means you have to give it away to attract new listeners or viewers .
Attempting to squash it will just end up making people spend their money elsewhere .
And in this economic climate , you 'd think that the major studios and recording companies would figure this out .
If they thought it was bad before , with these continuing tactics , they 're in for a rude awakening.My son does n't even care about watching TV much any more or music on the radio .
He watches YouTube for entertainment because it 's free .
I doubt if he 'll even bother to download music at this rate or buy a single CD before he 's 18 .
They just simply put , lost a future customer because there are better free alternatives out there without the idiocy and rules to deal with .
He gets $ 5 a week and that 's like gold to him .
Spending it on music is the last thing he wants to do at this point .
So it goes to his guitar or his bike or video games... all physical things , since YouTube and other similar sites ( he likes those free Java-driven game sites for instance ) offer him an enormous number of ways to waste time for free.Even I have never downloaded a single music or movie file .
Because there 's an almost unlimited amount of better stuff out there for free .
I pay a lot of money per month for a fast connection and to be honest , I 'd rather watch some crazy video on YouTube ( was watching old Battlebots segments for instance last night with my son ( who now wants to build a Battlebot - heh ) ) than more of the boring drek that Hollywood puts out .
And I 'd rather go out to one of the local bars around town to hear some * live * music than waste it on a CD.I 've seen only three movies in a theater this last year .
With online content and 80 + channels of Cable TV , I just do n't need music or movies in my life at this point.Note - since I do live in a major urban area , yes , it is simply a matter of going down the street to find entertainment , so I admit that that 's a factor in my favor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some copyright is quite reasonable.
What we need is a legalization of noncommercial copyright infringement.
Leave the rest of copyright law perfectly as it is.
I should be able to share all the files I want, but as soon as I start trying to make money doing that, that's when it should become illegal (as it is today).The interesting part here is that the person in question wouldn't have paid for the product anyways, unless it was something that was critical to their work or life(ie - physical item like a light bulb).
And entertainment isn't.
People will just go elsewhere if the price is too high.
For instance, I could have seen my favorite band in concert, but at $140 a ticket, it was too expensive.
Since there was no "free" option either, I simply opted out.
I heard that they only sold about 2/3 of the total tickets as well.
I didn't cost the promoter a sale.
There were no damages.
I just went elsewhere.This is a critical point for the producers to understand.
Copying isn't a lost sale.
I never would have been a sale at all anyways.So what's the upside?
How many of us have bought something after playing a demo or listening to a sample of the music online?
Getting exposure for your product means a lot lately, and that means you have to give it away to attract new listeners or viewers.
Attempting to squash it will just end up making people spend their money elsewhere.
And in this economic climate, you'd think that the major studios and recording companies would figure this out.
If they thought it was bad before, with these continuing tactics, they're in for a rude awakening.My son doesn't even care about watching TV much any more or music on the radio.
He watches YouTube for entertainment because it's free.
I doubt if he'll even bother to download music at this rate or buy a single CD before he's 18.
They just simply put, lost a future customer because there are better free alternatives out there without the idiocy and rules to deal with.
He gets $5 a week and that's like gold to him.
Spending it on music is the last thing he wants to do at this point.
So it goes to his guitar or his bike or video games... all physical things, since YouTube and other similar sites(he likes those free Java-driven game sites for instance) offer him an enormous number of ways to waste time for free.Even I have never downloaded a single music or movie file.
Because there's an almost unlimited amount of better stuff out there for free.
I pay a lot of money per month for a fast connection and to be honest, I'd rather watch some crazy video on YouTube (was watching old Battlebots segments for instance last night with my son(who now wants to build a Battlebot - heh)) than more of the boring drek that Hollywood puts out.
And I'd rather go out to one of the local bars around town to hear some *live* music than waste it on a CD.I've seen only three movies in a theater this last year.
With online content and 80+ channels of Cable TV, I just don't need music or movies in my life at this point.Note - since I do live in a major urban area, yes, it is simply a matter of going down the street to find entertainment, so I admit that that's a factor in my favor.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30242524</id>
	<title>Re:and as usual...</title>
	<author>mister\_playboy</author>
	<datestamp>1259256060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Citizens break laws.</p></div><p>Your matter-of-fact statement is utterly chilling.  Yet this is exactly the mindset many governments and corporations (are they really still separate entities?) have adopted.</p><p>What a unjust world...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Citizens break laws.Your matter-of-fact statement is utterly chilling .
Yet this is exactly the mindset many governments and corporations ( are they really still separate entities ?
) have adopted.What a unjust world.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Citizens break laws.Your matter-of-fact statement is utterly chilling.
Yet this is exactly the mindset many governments and corporations (are they really still separate entities?
) have adopted.What a unjust world...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238140</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30240778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237748
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237632
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239248
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237748
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237632
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238290
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237748
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237632
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238384
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237748
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237632
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30243614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30242978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30241026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237762
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237632
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237748
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237632
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238660
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237698
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237620
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238096
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237748
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237632
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238360
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30242524
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237632
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239008
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237628
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237628
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239752
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237748
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237632
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30242156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_151243_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_151243.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238258
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_151243.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238140
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30242156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30242524
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_151243.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238100
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_151243.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239308
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_151243.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238098
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_151243.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237620
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237698
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238660
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_151243.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237618
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239486
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30240778
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_151243.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237632
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237816
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237748
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237832
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238012
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239896
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239752
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239142
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238290
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238384
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239248
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238176
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237762
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30241026
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30242978
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_151243.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238742
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_151243.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237628
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238614
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239104
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_151243.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238866
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_151243.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30241034
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_151243.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238138
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239008
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30239294
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_151243.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30237990
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238360
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238096
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30238710
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_151243.30243614
</commentlist>
</conversation>
