<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_27_077245</id>
	<title>30,000 UK ISP Users Face Threat Letters For Suspected Illegal File Sharing</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1259326980000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Mark.JUK writes with this excerpt from ISP Review: <i>"Solicitors at <a href="http://acs-law.org.uk/">ACS:Law</a> have been granted approval by the Royal Courts of Justice in London to <a href="http://www.ispreview.co.uk/story/2009/11/26/30000-uk-broadband-isp-customers-hit-by-illegal-file-sharing-threat-letters.html">demand the private personal details of some 30,000 customers</a> suspected of involvement with illegal file sharing from UK broadband ISPs. The customers concerned are 'suspected' of illegally file sharing (P2P) approximately 291 movie titles, they now face threatening demands for money (settlement) or risk the prospect of court action. It's noted that 25,000 of the IP addresses that have been collected belong to BT users."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mark.JUK writes with this excerpt from ISP Review : " Solicitors at ACS : Law have been granted approval by the Royal Courts of Justice in London to demand the private personal details of some 30,000 customers suspected of involvement with illegal file sharing from UK broadband ISPs .
The customers concerned are 'suspected ' of illegally file sharing ( P2P ) approximately 291 movie titles , they now face threatening demands for money ( settlement ) or risk the prospect of court action .
It 's noted that 25,000 of the IP addresses that have been collected belong to BT users .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mark.JUK writes with this excerpt from ISP Review: "Solicitors at ACS:Law have been granted approval by the Royal Courts of Justice in London to demand the private personal details of some 30,000 customers suspected of involvement with illegal file sharing from UK broadband ISPs.
The customers concerned are 'suspected' of illegally file sharing (P2P) approximately 291 movie titles, they now face threatening demands for money (settlement) or risk the prospect of court action.
It's noted that 25,000 of the IP addresses that have been collected belong to BT users.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245034</id>
	<title>Re:Flamebait</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259333760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Is it 1984 on that motherfucking island of yours yet?</p></div><p>Actually I think that in almost every country, some company is harvesting IP addresses on the P2P networks. Just in case this stuff gets valuable.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it 1984 on that motherfucking island of yours yet ? Actually I think that in almost every country , some company is harvesting IP addresses on the P2P networks .
Just in case this stuff gets valuable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it 1984 on that motherfucking island of yours yet?Actually I think that in almost every country, some company is harvesting IP addresses on the P2P networks.
Just in case this stuff gets valuable.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246994</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder how they found the 25000 BT users...</title>
	<author>JasterBobaMereel</author>
	<datestamp>1259347560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>..simple Most people are BT Customers, or Customer of BT Wholesale via a third party</p><p>BT is the Commercial version of the old Government run monopoly that existed before it was sold off<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...So naturally most people stayed with them, and since BT Wholesale is by far the largest Broadband provider (for the same reasons) they supply broadband to most of the resellers</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>..simple Most people are BT Customers , or Customer of BT Wholesale via a third partyBT is the Commercial version of the old Government run monopoly that existed before it was sold off ...So naturally most people stayed with them , and since BT Wholesale is by far the largest Broadband provider ( for the same reasons ) they supply broadband to most of the resellers</tokentext>
<sentencetext>..simple Most people are BT Customers, or Customer of BT Wholesale via a third partyBT is the Commercial version of the old Government run monopoly that existed before it was sold off ...So naturally most people stayed with them, and since BT Wholesale is by far the largest Broadband provider (for the same reasons) they supply broadband to most of the resellers</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246934</id>
	<title>Re:Narrow Definition of Infringement?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259347140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's because that's all that's illegal in the UK - you can read the act..</p><p>http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?LegType=All+Legislation&amp;searchEnacted=0&amp;extentMatchOnly=0&amp;confersPower=0&amp;blanketAmendment=0&amp;sortAlpha=0&amp;PageNumber=0&amp;NavFrom=0&amp;parentActiveTextDocId=0&amp;activetextdocid=2250425&amp;versionNumber=3</p><p>Downloading for private use is legal.</p><p>Uploading to people (especially outside the country)</p><p>It's something that they keep very, very quiet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's because that 's all that 's illegal in the UK - you can read the act..http : //www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx ? LegType = All + Legislation&amp;searchEnacted = 0&amp;extentMatchOnly = 0&amp;confersPower = 0&amp;blanketAmendment = 0&amp;sortAlpha = 0&amp;PageNumber = 0&amp;NavFrom = 0&amp;parentActiveTextDocId = 0&amp;activetextdocid = 2250425&amp;versionNumber = 3Downloading for private use is legal.Uploading to people ( especially outside the country ) It 's something that they keep very , very quiet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's because that's all that's illegal in the UK - you can read the act..http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?LegType=All+Legislation&amp;searchEnacted=0&amp;extentMatchOnly=0&amp;confersPower=0&amp;blanketAmendment=0&amp;sortAlpha=0&amp;PageNumber=0&amp;NavFrom=0&amp;parentActiveTextDocId=0&amp;activetextdocid=2250425&amp;versionNumber=3Downloading for private use is legal.Uploading to people (especially outside the country)It's something that they keep very, very quiet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245238</id>
	<title>Gives me an idea...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259335800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>My NEW Business Model...
<p>
Send out massive bulk snail mail (widely dispersed across the country as possible) claiming some copyright infringement (being really vague about the infringement on some copyright your bogus company actually does own)...
 </p><p>
The letter would say something like:
It has come to our attention that you have infringed upon our Copyright..
We "can" pursue charges OR we "can" settle out of court.
 </p><p>
Now request a small amount (less than $500).  The fear implied that they will face full legal action potentially costing thousands of dollars will be enough to scare most people.
 </p><p>
If anyone really contests it then drop them... claim it was your mistake and apologize for the error (hell even you even offer $5-$10 gift certificate for your error if your getting lost of people to pay up).
Most people have infringed on some copyright so some people will pay (easy to determine the threshold limit by average household income in a given postal code).
 </p><p>
If you mail drop to 1 million homes (say at the outrageous cost of $1 million to generate the letters and pay for postage). Asking for an average of $200. Then you just need 0.5\% to pay up to break even. In reality you will most likely get 10-20\% pay up. At 10\% you net $20,000,000.
 </p><p>
See the problem with allowing fishing expeditions... very easy for a company to claim an error and never actually pursue legal action. The current system is in favor of the company.
 </p><p>
BTW: I am patenting this business model as I write this and will happily licences it for a 10\% of your gross for implementing it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My NEW Business Model.. . Send out massive bulk snail mail ( widely dispersed across the country as possible ) claiming some copyright infringement ( being really vague about the infringement on some copyright your bogus company actually does own ) .. . The letter would say something like : It has come to our attention that you have infringed upon our Copyright. . We " can " pursue charges OR we " can " settle out of court .
Now request a small amount ( less than $ 500 ) .
The fear implied that they will face full legal action potentially costing thousands of dollars will be enough to scare most people .
If anyone really contests it then drop them... claim it was your mistake and apologize for the error ( hell even you even offer $ 5- $ 10 gift certificate for your error if your getting lost of people to pay up ) .
Most people have infringed on some copyright so some people will pay ( easy to determine the threshold limit by average household income in a given postal code ) .
If you mail drop to 1 million homes ( say at the outrageous cost of $ 1 million to generate the letters and pay for postage ) .
Asking for an average of $ 200 .
Then you just need 0.5 \ % to pay up to break even .
In reality you will most likely get 10-20 \ % pay up .
At 10 \ % you net $ 20,000,000 .
See the problem with allowing fishing expeditions... very easy for a company to claim an error and never actually pursue legal action .
The current system is in favor of the company .
BTW : I am patenting this business model as I write this and will happily licences it for a 10 \ % of your gross for implementing it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My NEW Business Model...

Send out massive bulk snail mail (widely dispersed across the country as possible) claiming some copyright infringement (being really vague about the infringement on some copyright your bogus company actually does own)...
 
The letter would say something like:
It has come to our attention that you have infringed upon our Copyright..
We "can" pursue charges OR we "can" settle out of court.
Now request a small amount (less than $500).
The fear implied that they will face full legal action potentially costing thousands of dollars will be enough to scare most people.
If anyone really contests it then drop them... claim it was your mistake and apologize for the error (hell even you even offer $5-$10 gift certificate for your error if your getting lost of people to pay up).
Most people have infringed on some copyright so some people will pay (easy to determine the threshold limit by average household income in a given postal code).
If you mail drop to 1 million homes (say at the outrageous cost of $1 million to generate the letters and pay for postage).
Asking for an average of $200.
Then you just need 0.5\% to pay up to break even.
In reality you will most likely get 10-20\% pay up.
At 10\% you net $20,000,000.
See the problem with allowing fishing expeditions... very easy for a company to claim an error and never actually pursue legal action.
The current system is in favor of the company.
BTW: I am patenting this business model as I write this and will happily licences it for a 10\% of your gross for implementing it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245150</id>
	<title>Re:Time to get a Relakks account</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1259335020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've found exactly the same as this. I've not bought or downloaded any new movies songs, or consumed any media from Big4 or Hollywood in a long time. No doubt that's because I'm a scurvy sea-dog, though.<br> <br>Oh, wait... I haven't downloaded anything either. Guess that means that all of the new stuff sucks. Who would have thought it could get so bad that people didn't want it <i>for free</i>?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've found exactly the same as this .
I 've not bought or downloaded any new movies songs , or consumed any media from Big4 or Hollywood in a long time .
No doubt that 's because I 'm a scurvy sea-dog , though .
Oh , wait... I have n't downloaded anything either .
Guess that means that all of the new stuff sucks .
Who would have thought it could get so bad that people did n't want it for free ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've found exactly the same as this.
I've not bought or downloaded any new movies songs, or consumed any media from Big4 or Hollywood in a long time.
No doubt that's because I'm a scurvy sea-dog, though.
Oh, wait... I haven't downloaded anything either.
Guess that means that all of the new stuff sucks.
Who would have thought it could get so bad that people didn't want it for free?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244838</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245860</id>
	<title>Insurance.</title>
	<author>Pig Hogger</author>
	<datestamp>1259339880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Insurance is the key.</p><p>There is no way those 30,000 people can be all sued; if those pool, say 10&pound; each, that&rsquo;s 300,000&pound; available to pay for sollicitors to defend those who are sued.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Insurance is the key.There is no way those 30,000 people can be all sued ; if those pool , say 10   each , that    s 300,000   available to pay for sollicitors to defend those who are sued .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Insurance is the key.There is no way those 30,000 people can be all sued; if those pool, say 10£ each, that’s 300,000£ available to pay for sollicitors to defend those who are sued.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244934</id>
	<title>BT's Statement</title>
	<author>bencoder</author>
	<datestamp>1259332680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am very impressed by the statement from BT:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>A BT Spokesperson told ISPreview in September:</p><p>"BT and other ISPs agreed to send 1,000 notifications alleging copyright infringement a week for a 12-week trial period, with BT picking up the bill for this activity for our own customers as an act of goodwill. However, it was understood that at the end of this period, we would need to take stock and have further discussions with the rights holders about costs etc.</p><p>During this period, the BPI sent us around 21,000 alleged cases, but less than two-thirds proved to be properly matched to an IP address of a BT customer and not a duplicate, so this could indicate that the true extent of this activity is much lower than the 100,000 number the BPI claim since February. In addition since none of the customers we wrote to during the trial were subsequently taken to court by the BPI, we don't know whether they were actually guilty of infringement."</p></div><p>I never knew BT could actually sound reasonable. What a shame governments are still left trailing behind on common sense and decency.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am very impressed by the statement from BT : A BT Spokesperson told ISPreview in September : " BT and other ISPs agreed to send 1,000 notifications alleging copyright infringement a week for a 12-week trial period , with BT picking up the bill for this activity for our own customers as an act of goodwill .
However , it was understood that at the end of this period , we would need to take stock and have further discussions with the rights holders about costs etc.During this period , the BPI sent us around 21,000 alleged cases , but less than two-thirds proved to be properly matched to an IP address of a BT customer and not a duplicate , so this could indicate that the true extent of this activity is much lower than the 100,000 number the BPI claim since February .
In addition since none of the customers we wrote to during the trial were subsequently taken to court by the BPI , we do n't know whether they were actually guilty of infringement .
" I never knew BT could actually sound reasonable .
What a shame governments are still left trailing behind on common sense and decency .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am very impressed by the statement from BT:A BT Spokesperson told ISPreview in September:"BT and other ISPs agreed to send 1,000 notifications alleging copyright infringement a week for a 12-week trial period, with BT picking up the bill for this activity for our own customers as an act of goodwill.
However, it was understood that at the end of this period, we would need to take stock and have further discussions with the rights holders about costs etc.During this period, the BPI sent us around 21,000 alleged cases, but less than two-thirds proved to be properly matched to an IP address of a BT customer and not a duplicate, so this could indicate that the true extent of this activity is much lower than the 100,000 number the BPI claim since February.
In addition since none of the customers we wrote to during the trial were subsequently taken to court by the BPI, we don't know whether they were actually guilty of infringement.
"I never knew BT could actually sound reasonable.
What a shame governments are still left trailing behind on common sense and decency.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244782</id>
	<title>Flamebait</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259331120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is it 1984 on that motherfucking island of yours yet?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it 1984 on that motherfucking island of yours yet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it 1984 on that motherfucking island of yours yet?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245724</id>
	<title>Re:Thank gawd I use FTP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259339100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>SFTP or FTPS is where it's at<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) or private BT trackers and the likes, all those are safe as long as no rats get access to it.

I used to have a fair few pirated movies hosted at <a href="gopher://86.43.88.90" title="86.43.88.90" rel="nofollow">gopher://86.43.88.90</a> [86.43.88.90] and I might return them, just imagine the headlines "MPAA sues obscure "gopher protocol" server operator"</htmltext>
<tokenext>SFTP or FTPS is where it 's at : ) or private BT trackers and the likes , all those are safe as long as no rats get access to it .
I used to have a fair few pirated movies hosted at gopher : //86.43.88.90 [ 86.43.88.90 ] and I might return them , just imagine the headlines " MPAA sues obscure " gopher protocol " server operator "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SFTP or FTPS is where it's at :) or private BT trackers and the likes, all those are safe as long as no rats get access to it.
I used to have a fair few pirated movies hosted at gopher://86.43.88.90 [86.43.88.90] and I might return them, just imagine the headlines "MPAA sues obscure "gopher protocol" server operator"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244808</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244836</id>
	<title>I wonder how they found the 25000 BT users...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259331720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder how they found the 25000 BT users - it seems odd that 25,000 out of 30,000 come from one ISP if they found them by any public means (i.e by joining swarms on public trackers and seeing which IPs are also operating in the swarm).</p><p>My guess is that while they were testing Phorm's targeted-advertising-based-on-snooping technology they were also did something very similar to what Virgin are planning (from the earlier story today "<i>CView's deep packet inspection is the same technology that powered Phorm's advertising system</i>" - CView being what Virgin plan to use to inspect P2P traffic).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder how they found the 25000 BT users - it seems odd that 25,000 out of 30,000 come from one ISP if they found them by any public means ( i.e by joining swarms on public trackers and seeing which IPs are also operating in the swarm ) .My guess is that while they were testing Phorm 's targeted-advertising-based-on-snooping technology they were also did something very similar to what Virgin are planning ( from the earlier story today " CView 's deep packet inspection is the same technology that powered Phorm 's advertising system " - CView being what Virgin plan to use to inspect P2P traffic ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder how they found the 25000 BT users - it seems odd that 25,000 out of 30,000 come from one ISP if they found them by any public means (i.e by joining swarms on public trackers and seeing which IPs are also operating in the swarm).My guess is that while they were testing Phorm's targeted-advertising-based-on-snooping technology they were also did something very similar to what Virgin are planning (from the earlier story today "CView's deep packet inspection is the same technology that powered Phorm's advertising system" - CView being what Virgin plan to use to inspect P2P traffic).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245118</id>
	<title>Re:It will never end</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259334720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We'll build a decentralized network before we allow you to dictate which information we may copy. We have the technology, we have the know how and you're giving us the motivation.</p></div><p>Actually it will end. When films become unprofitable to make then there won't be anything to pirate. Can't happen? Who makes films and who funds them. As everyone has noticed the businessmen have taken over so artists aren't doing it out of love. Also what are the big films everyone wants to see? 2012 and Avatar? They cost 250 to 350 million to make. Even the Twilight films cost a lot. Yes there will always be movies but one day the only Star Trek feature being made may be by a fan in his garage. I've heard people boast that fan films are superior but virtually all of them are knock offs of studio films or TV shows and few approach professional quality and the acting is uniformly bad. Theaters are struggling, that's why popcorn is $5+. Network TV is dying fast. Cable is mostly jam packed with commercials just trying to stay above water. Hey advertising will bring on a golden age where everything is free. Well back in the day we called that TV and it's dying. So far the ad based web content has faired poorly at being profitable and doesn't come close to covering the cost of even cheap productions. "But they'll find a way or they'll do it for free". So far no one has come up with an alternate way to fund movies, theatrical and DVD still cover all production costs and people like to eat so working for free isn't an option. Older viewers still mostly pay but Gen X'ers don't like to pay and Tweens feel they shouldn't have to pay. Gradually the older crowd dies off and what you are left with are a bunch of people demanding content but refuse to pay. Already average studio film budgets are 20X what they were 30 years ago and it keeps getting worse. I've been on the ground with it and theatrical releases of any size cost 15 to 25 million, hard numbers not creative accounting. That's prints and advertising. Even electronic distribution cost money. Hey just web release films? How do you return even the investment on a 250 million dollar film through web streaming? And I know everyone says "to hell with them for expecting profits" but who is going to put up 100 to 250 million without any profit? It's easy to say if we stick together we can win this one but what do you win if you kill off the very thing you are fighting over? I used to see 1 to 3 films every week in a theater. Now I've seen less than a dozen all year, probably far less. The drop in quality is partly caused by the drop in profitability of films. They are less likely to take a risk so now you get remakes of remakes and few original films. Most of the quasi original films are effects epics with little story. And television, name three good TV shows? I can't. I like one US TV show and watch a handful out of morbid curiousity but they just aren't getting any better. Piracy will end when there just isn't anything worth pirating. Who wins then?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We 'll build a decentralized network before we allow you to dictate which information we may copy .
We have the technology , we have the know how and you 're giving us the motivation.Actually it will end .
When films become unprofitable to make then there wo n't be anything to pirate .
Ca n't happen ?
Who makes films and who funds them .
As everyone has noticed the businessmen have taken over so artists are n't doing it out of love .
Also what are the big films everyone wants to see ?
2012 and Avatar ?
They cost 250 to 350 million to make .
Even the Twilight films cost a lot .
Yes there will always be movies but one day the only Star Trek feature being made may be by a fan in his garage .
I 've heard people boast that fan films are superior but virtually all of them are knock offs of studio films or TV shows and few approach professional quality and the acting is uniformly bad .
Theaters are struggling , that 's why popcorn is $ 5 + .
Network TV is dying fast .
Cable is mostly jam packed with commercials just trying to stay above water .
Hey advertising will bring on a golden age where everything is free .
Well back in the day we called that TV and it 's dying .
So far the ad based web content has faired poorly at being profitable and does n't come close to covering the cost of even cheap productions .
" But they 'll find a way or they 'll do it for free " .
So far no one has come up with an alternate way to fund movies , theatrical and DVD still cover all production costs and people like to eat so working for free is n't an option .
Older viewers still mostly pay but Gen X'ers do n't like to pay and Tweens feel they should n't have to pay .
Gradually the older crowd dies off and what you are left with are a bunch of people demanding content but refuse to pay .
Already average studio film budgets are 20X what they were 30 years ago and it keeps getting worse .
I 've been on the ground with it and theatrical releases of any size cost 15 to 25 million , hard numbers not creative accounting .
That 's prints and advertising .
Even electronic distribution cost money .
Hey just web release films ?
How do you return even the investment on a 250 million dollar film through web streaming ?
And I know everyone says " to hell with them for expecting profits " but who is going to put up 100 to 250 million without any profit ?
It 's easy to say if we stick together we can win this one but what do you win if you kill off the very thing you are fighting over ?
I used to see 1 to 3 films every week in a theater .
Now I 've seen less than a dozen all year , probably far less .
The drop in quality is partly caused by the drop in profitability of films .
They are less likely to take a risk so now you get remakes of remakes and few original films .
Most of the quasi original films are effects epics with little story .
And television , name three good TV shows ?
I ca n't .
I like one US TV show and watch a handful out of morbid curiousity but they just are n't getting any better .
Piracy will end when there just is n't anything worth pirating .
Who wins then ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We'll build a decentralized network before we allow you to dictate which information we may copy.
We have the technology, we have the know how and you're giving us the motivation.Actually it will end.
When films become unprofitable to make then there won't be anything to pirate.
Can't happen?
Who makes films and who funds them.
As everyone has noticed the businessmen have taken over so artists aren't doing it out of love.
Also what are the big films everyone wants to see?
2012 and Avatar?
They cost 250 to 350 million to make.
Even the Twilight films cost a lot.
Yes there will always be movies but one day the only Star Trek feature being made may be by a fan in his garage.
I've heard people boast that fan films are superior but virtually all of them are knock offs of studio films or TV shows and few approach professional quality and the acting is uniformly bad.
Theaters are struggling, that's why popcorn is $5+.
Network TV is dying fast.
Cable is mostly jam packed with commercials just trying to stay above water.
Hey advertising will bring on a golden age where everything is free.
Well back in the day we called that TV and it's dying.
So far the ad based web content has faired poorly at being profitable and doesn't come close to covering the cost of even cheap productions.
"But they'll find a way or they'll do it for free".
So far no one has come up with an alternate way to fund movies, theatrical and DVD still cover all production costs and people like to eat so working for free isn't an option.
Older viewers still mostly pay but Gen X'ers don't like to pay and Tweens feel they shouldn't have to pay.
Gradually the older crowd dies off and what you are left with are a bunch of people demanding content but refuse to pay.
Already average studio film budgets are 20X what they were 30 years ago and it keeps getting worse.
I've been on the ground with it and theatrical releases of any size cost 15 to 25 million, hard numbers not creative accounting.
That's prints and advertising.
Even electronic distribution cost money.
Hey just web release films?
How do you return even the investment on a 250 million dollar film through web streaming?
And I know everyone says "to hell with them for expecting profits" but who is going to put up 100 to 250 million without any profit?
It's easy to say if we stick together we can win this one but what do you win if you kill off the very thing you are fighting over?
I used to see 1 to 3 films every week in a theater.
Now I've seen less than a dozen all year, probably far less.
The drop in quality is partly caused by the drop in profitability of films.
They are less likely to take a risk so now you get remakes of remakes and few original films.
Most of the quasi original films are effects epics with little story.
And television, name three good TV shows?
I can't.
I like one US TV show and watch a handful out of morbid curiousity but they just aren't getting any better.
Piracy will end when there just isn't anything worth pirating.
Who wins then?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244786</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244858</id>
	<title>BT / Virgin Media / etc</title>
	<author>coofercat</author>
	<datestamp>1259331900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the summary, one might draw the conclusion that "be a BT customer, and you're more of a target", but I seem to remember BT being the biggest ISP in the UK by quite a big margin*. Virgin Media (aka. NTL / Telewest) are the second largest*, and so it goes on. So I suppose it's reasonable that BT would account for the majority of the infractions. Conversely, BT have amongst the shittiest networks of all, so you'd imagine that the file sharers weren't actually sharing that much after all. But I suppose that would mean BT won't mind 25,000 people getting cut off, because it'll save them having to upgrade their network (like they say they're doing on the TV ads they're running at the moment).</p><p>So the real take-away here is that if you're at a small ISP, you're less likely to be targeted (at least until the big ones tumble). Meanwhile, the utter incompetence of the BPI and their friends should keep this from being anything more than an annoyance for 30,000 people. If even 5000 of them follow up and challenge their accusers, it'll tie the whole system up for months, if not years.</p><p>The BPI, Mandleson, and their ilk have an idealised view that file sharing should be super-illegal and so almost entirely eradicated. The problem is, best estimates suggest 7 million people in the UK share files*, so even if half give up from fear of prosecution, that's still 3.5 million people they've got to prosecute. I don't imagine there's a lawyer in the UK who's capable of executing that many cases in a decade, let alone simultaneously.</p><p>(* No, I can't substantiate this with a link right now - you know how to use a search engine though, right?)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From the summary , one might draw the conclusion that " be a BT customer , and you 're more of a target " , but I seem to remember BT being the biggest ISP in the UK by quite a big margin * .
Virgin Media ( aka .
NTL / Telewest ) are the second largest * , and so it goes on .
So I suppose it 's reasonable that BT would account for the majority of the infractions .
Conversely , BT have amongst the shittiest networks of all , so you 'd imagine that the file sharers were n't actually sharing that much after all .
But I suppose that would mean BT wo n't mind 25,000 people getting cut off , because it 'll save them having to upgrade their network ( like they say they 're doing on the TV ads they 're running at the moment ) .So the real take-away here is that if you 're at a small ISP , you 're less likely to be targeted ( at least until the big ones tumble ) .
Meanwhile , the utter incompetence of the BPI and their friends should keep this from being anything more than an annoyance for 30,000 people .
If even 5000 of them follow up and challenge their accusers , it 'll tie the whole system up for months , if not years.The BPI , Mandleson , and their ilk have an idealised view that file sharing should be super-illegal and so almost entirely eradicated .
The problem is , best estimates suggest 7 million people in the UK share files * , so even if half give up from fear of prosecution , that 's still 3.5 million people they 've got to prosecute .
I do n't imagine there 's a lawyer in the UK who 's capable of executing that many cases in a decade , let alone simultaneously .
( * No , I ca n't substantiate this with a link right now - you know how to use a search engine though , right ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the summary, one might draw the conclusion that "be a BT customer, and you're more of a target", but I seem to remember BT being the biggest ISP in the UK by quite a big margin*.
Virgin Media (aka.
NTL / Telewest) are the second largest*, and so it goes on.
So I suppose it's reasonable that BT would account for the majority of the infractions.
Conversely, BT have amongst the shittiest networks of all, so you'd imagine that the file sharers weren't actually sharing that much after all.
But I suppose that would mean BT won't mind 25,000 people getting cut off, because it'll save them having to upgrade their network (like they say they're doing on the TV ads they're running at the moment).So the real take-away here is that if you're at a small ISP, you're less likely to be targeted (at least until the big ones tumble).
Meanwhile, the utter incompetence of the BPI and their friends should keep this from being anything more than an annoyance for 30,000 people.
If even 5000 of them follow up and challenge their accusers, it'll tie the whole system up for months, if not years.The BPI, Mandleson, and their ilk have an idealised view that file sharing should be super-illegal and so almost entirely eradicated.
The problem is, best estimates suggest 7 million people in the UK share files*, so even if half give up from fear of prosecution, that's still 3.5 million people they've got to prosecute.
I don't imagine there's a lawyer in the UK who's capable of executing that many cases in a decade, let alone simultaneously.
(* No, I can't substantiate this with a link right now - you know how to use a search engine though, right?
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245654</id>
	<title>Re:Flamebait</title>
	<author>realityimpaired</author>
	<datestamp>1259338800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most people posting about 1984 and making "Orwellian" references are talking about the Ingsoc nanny state. It doesn't matter that the book isn't actually about about that nanny state, or that it's just a plot device for the story/message that Orwell was trying to convey: what matters is that people understand what you're talking about when you make the reference. Specifically, a totalitarian society that constantly monitors its people, that assumes that everybody outside of the Party is a criminal, and that is trying to dumb down the populace in order to prevent them from thinking for themselves.</p><p>Considering the number of CCTV cameras in the UK, and the level of personal privacy that exists in the country, the suggestion that people on the Internet are being assumed to be criminals, and are being handed over to the media companies without the chance to defend themselves, really does conjure up images of Oceania, don't you think?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most people posting about 1984 and making " Orwellian " references are talking about the Ingsoc nanny state .
It does n't matter that the book is n't actually about about that nanny state , or that it 's just a plot device for the story/message that Orwell was trying to convey : what matters is that people understand what you 're talking about when you make the reference .
Specifically , a totalitarian society that constantly monitors its people , that assumes that everybody outside of the Party is a criminal , and that is trying to dumb down the populace in order to prevent them from thinking for themselves.Considering the number of CCTV cameras in the UK , and the level of personal privacy that exists in the country , the suggestion that people on the Internet are being assumed to be criminals , and are being handed over to the media companies without the chance to defend themselves , really does conjure up images of Oceania , do n't you think ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most people posting about 1984 and making "Orwellian" references are talking about the Ingsoc nanny state.
It doesn't matter that the book isn't actually about about that nanny state, or that it's just a plot device for the story/message that Orwell was trying to convey: what matters is that people understand what you're talking about when you make the reference.
Specifically, a totalitarian society that constantly monitors its people, that assumes that everybody outside of the Party is a criminal, and that is trying to dumb down the populace in order to prevent them from thinking for themselves.Considering the number of CCTV cameras in the UK, and the level of personal privacy that exists in the country, the suggestion that people on the Internet are being assumed to be criminals, and are being handed over to the media companies without the chance to defend themselves, really does conjure up images of Oceania, don't you think?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30248010</id>
	<title>Re:Need a way to encrypt Limewire now</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259353800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I like to think it the other way around, after all, with encryption who needs to be anonymous?<br>Cheers</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like to think it the other way around , after all , with encryption who needs to be anonymous ? Cheers</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like to think it the other way around, after all, with encryption who needs to be anonymous?Cheers</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245206</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244848</id>
	<title>"Suspected"</title>
	<author>Rik Sweeney</author>
	<datestamp>1259331840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In other words, they can prove that the person uses BitTorrent but not what they're using it for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In other words , they can prove that the person uses BitTorrent but not what they 're using it for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In other words, they can prove that the person uses BitTorrent but not what they're using it for.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245734</id>
	<title>Mob mentality doesn't always apply</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259339220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>if millions of people find a particular type of behaviour acceptable that it should be legalised?</i> </p><p>No. To use the often recycled example, the majority of people once thought that slavery was an acceptable practice, but that doesn't mean it should have been. This isn't to say that downloading and slavery are immediately comparable, but rather that a thing isn't necessarily right because "a lot of people are doing/supporting it."</p><p>On the other hand, the huge amount of torrent users shows a fundamental lack of support from the industry for what could be a viable market. Unfortunately it may very well be a case of "too little, too late" to tap, but had they done so they probably could have been making an extra chunk-'o'-change by this point off of online downloads. Things like the iTunes store are definitely still profitable.</p><p>They may still have a chance though. Personally, if I could purchase the various episodes of shows I like to watch for a reasonable price (at they are released), especially if they were sans commercials, I'd have my wallet open pretty quickly. Cable and even satellite seem to be dying media, and being able to pick-and-choose what you want online could be a fairly easy sell for studios. Even if they only charged something under a buck, they'd probably still make a fair bit of cash, especially if they threw a few ads on the website (not the video) for related products (e.g. if you're watching a season 2 episode of "show X" and season 1 is available on DVD, advertise!).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if millions of people find a particular type of behaviour acceptable that it should be legalised ?
No. To use the often recycled example , the majority of people once thought that slavery was an acceptable practice , but that does n't mean it should have been .
This is n't to say that downloading and slavery are immediately comparable , but rather that a thing is n't necessarily right because " a lot of people are doing/supporting it .
" On the other hand , the huge amount of torrent users shows a fundamental lack of support from the industry for what could be a viable market .
Unfortunately it may very well be a case of " too little , too late " to tap , but had they done so they probably could have been making an extra chunk-'o'-change by this point off of online downloads .
Things like the iTunes store are definitely still profitable.They may still have a chance though .
Personally , if I could purchase the various episodes of shows I like to watch for a reasonable price ( at they are released ) , especially if they were sans commercials , I 'd have my wallet open pretty quickly .
Cable and even satellite seem to be dying media , and being able to pick-and-choose what you want online could be a fairly easy sell for studios .
Even if they only charged something under a buck , they 'd probably still make a fair bit of cash , especially if they threw a few ads on the website ( not the video ) for related products ( e.g .
if you 're watching a season 2 episode of " show X " and season 1 is available on DVD , advertise !
) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if millions of people find a particular type of behaviour acceptable that it should be legalised?
No. To use the often recycled example, the majority of people once thought that slavery was an acceptable practice, but that doesn't mean it should have been.
This isn't to say that downloading and slavery are immediately comparable, but rather that a thing isn't necessarily right because "a lot of people are doing/supporting it.
"On the other hand, the huge amount of torrent users shows a fundamental lack of support from the industry for what could be a viable market.
Unfortunately it may very well be a case of "too little, too late" to tap, but had they done so they probably could have been making an extra chunk-'o'-change by this point off of online downloads.
Things like the iTunes store are definitely still profitable.They may still have a chance though.
Personally, if I could purchase the various episodes of shows I like to watch for a reasonable price (at they are released), especially if they were sans commercials, I'd have my wallet open pretty quickly.
Cable and even satellite seem to be dying media, and being able to pick-and-choose what you want online could be a fairly easy sell for studios.
Even if they only charged something under a buck, they'd probably still make a fair bit of cash, especially if they threw a few ads on the website (not the video) for related products (e.g.
if you're watching a season 2 episode of "show X" and season 1 is available on DVD, advertise!
).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30253272</id>
	<title>Re:Time to get a Relakks account</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259401620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Same here. I haven't seen any movies lately - legal or downloaded - because I've been too busy working 80 hour weeks trying to earn enough to pay my bills.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Same here .
I have n't seen any movies lately - legal or downloaded - because I 've been too busy working 80 hour weeks trying to earn enough to pay my bills .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same here.
I haven't seen any movies lately - legal or downloaded - because I've been too busy working 80 hour weeks trying to earn enough to pay my bills.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245032</id>
	<title>Narrow Definition of Infringement?</title>
	<author>mrpacmanjel</author>
	<datestamp>1259333760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you go to the ACS web site thier definition of infringement seems to only apply to P2P traffic and even then seems to be limited to uploads.</p><p>Anyone with half a brain-cell would not use P2P networks for piracy anyway!</p><p>If you are really worried, the article has a link to <a href="http://www.beingthreatened.com/" title="beingthreatened.com">http://www.beingthreatened.com/</a> [beingthreatened.com] - they seem to have some genuine advice.</p><p>By the way if you decide to pay the fine, it means you have admitted to guilt and will not be able to contest it or get your money back!<br>If you recieve a letter asking for payment under NO circumstances pay it!</p><p>Also, reply to the letter as soon as you can - you have a limited time to respond to it (cannot remember how long).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you go to the ACS web site thier definition of infringement seems to only apply to P2P traffic and even then seems to be limited to uploads.Anyone with half a brain-cell would not use P2P networks for piracy anyway ! If you are really worried , the article has a link to http : //www.beingthreatened.com/ [ beingthreatened.com ] - they seem to have some genuine advice.By the way if you decide to pay the fine , it means you have admitted to guilt and will not be able to contest it or get your money back ! If you recieve a letter asking for payment under NO circumstances pay it ! Also , reply to the letter as soon as you can - you have a limited time to respond to it ( can not remember how long ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you go to the ACS web site thier definition of infringement seems to only apply to P2P traffic and even then seems to be limited to uploads.Anyone with half a brain-cell would not use P2P networks for piracy anyway!If you are really worried, the article has a link to http://www.beingthreatened.com/ [beingthreatened.com] - they seem to have some genuine advice.By the way if you decide to pay the fine, it means you have admitted to guilt and will not be able to contest it or get your money back!If you recieve a letter asking for payment under NO circumstances pay it!Also, reply to the letter as soon as you can - you have a limited time to respond to it (cannot remember how long).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244966</id>
	<title>So BT are even worse</title>
	<author>jabjoe</author>
	<datestamp>1259333160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So not only are BT expensive, slow, with terrible customer service (bar one guy I managed to get hold of when I was stupid enough to be with BT), but they give up their customers, or even just hand them over without being ask to.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So not only are BT expensive , slow , with terrible customer service ( bar one guy I managed to get hold of when I was stupid enough to be with BT ) , but they give up their customers , or even just hand them over without being ask to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So not only are BT expensive, slow, with terrible customer service (bar one guy I managed to get hold of when I was stupid enough to be with BT), but they give up their customers, or even just hand them over without being ask to.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30255274</id>
	<title>Re:It will never end</title>
	<author>AmiMoJo</author>
	<datestamp>1259431560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thing is, 2008 was a record year for Holliwood. More movies made (about 2x as many as in 2001), highest ever profits.</p><p>File sharing just means that movie studios need to alter their business model a bit, which they have begun to do. As fewer and fewer people were going to the cinema they made the experience more worth while with 3D and better sound/image quality. They expanded their lines of mechanise and branched into other media.</p><p>I suppose they would argue that they could be making even more money from all that stuff if it wasn't for P2P, but in the end every person has only so much money to spend. They will dispose of their money somehow, all you have to do is provide them with something they want.</p><p>At least until Star Trek style replicators appear, then they are fucked.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thing is , 2008 was a record year for Holliwood .
More movies made ( about 2x as many as in 2001 ) , highest ever profits.File sharing just means that movie studios need to alter their business model a bit , which they have begun to do .
As fewer and fewer people were going to the cinema they made the experience more worth while with 3D and better sound/image quality .
They expanded their lines of mechanise and branched into other media.I suppose they would argue that they could be making even more money from all that stuff if it was n't for P2P , but in the end every person has only so much money to spend .
They will dispose of their money somehow , all you have to do is provide them with something they want.At least until Star Trek style replicators appear , then they are fucked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thing is, 2008 was a record year for Holliwood.
More movies made (about 2x as many as in 2001), highest ever profits.File sharing just means that movie studios need to alter their business model a bit, which they have begun to do.
As fewer and fewer people were going to the cinema they made the experience more worth while with 3D and better sound/image quality.
They expanded their lines of mechanise and branched into other media.I suppose they would argue that they could be making even more money from all that stuff if it wasn't for P2P, but in the end every person has only so much money to spend.
They will dispose of their money somehow, all you have to do is provide them with something they want.At least until Star Trek style replicators appear, then they are fucked.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245118</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30247096</id>
	<title>V for Vendetta</title>
	<author>nanospook</author>
	<datestamp>1259348280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The brits need to torrent this movie and then emulate it, it seems like they are slowly working their way into a police state..</htmltext>
<tokenext>The brits need to torrent this movie and then emulate it , it seems like they are slowly working their way into a police state. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The brits need to torrent this movie and then emulate it, it seems like they are slowly working their way into a police state..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245136</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder how they found the 25000 BT users...</title>
	<author>u38cg</author>
	<datestamp>1259334900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My suspicion is that these are broadband accounts which have gone through a reseller.  BT has something like 400 resellers on its books, so a substantial number of people going through $SOME ISP are actually getting service from BT.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My suspicion is that these are broadband accounts which have gone through a reseller .
BT has something like 400 resellers on its books , so a substantial number of people going through $ SOME ISP are actually getting service from BT .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My suspicion is that these are broadband accounts which have gone through a reseller.
BT has something like 400 resellers on its books, so a substantial number of people going through $SOME ISP are actually getting service from BT.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30253526</id>
	<title>Re:It will never end</title>
	<author>mldi</author>
	<datestamp>1259407560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually, I don't really pirate because there's not a whole lot worth pirating. You quoted 2012 and Avatar. Yawn. If I truly get bored, I hit up the local Red Box. If there's a film I really want to see, I'll wait until I can rent it. I REFUSE to pay $10/ticket to see it in the theater, and it's not even the theater that's coming away from the majority of that ticket price. I remember 4-5 short years ago when I was paying $5. Now it's $10. That's 100\% inflation in 5 years. You tell ME why they're "losing" business?
<br> <br>
3 conditions for me giving them my money:<br>
1) Quality films, and it's helpful not to spit out crappy sequels or remakes <br>
2) Tickets for 2 people should be less than it costs to buy the damn thing<br>
3) Reduce licensing costs so that the theaters actually showing the films make a little cash. It's unreal the turnover rate for theaters these days.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , I do n't really pirate because there 's not a whole lot worth pirating .
You quoted 2012 and Avatar .
Yawn. If I truly get bored , I hit up the local Red Box .
If there 's a film I really want to see , I 'll wait until I can rent it .
I REFUSE to pay $ 10/ticket to see it in the theater , and it 's not even the theater that 's coming away from the majority of that ticket price .
I remember 4-5 short years ago when I was paying $ 5 .
Now it 's $ 10 .
That 's 100 \ % inflation in 5 years .
You tell ME why they 're " losing " business ?
3 conditions for me giving them my money : 1 ) Quality films , and it 's helpful not to spit out crappy sequels or remakes 2 ) Tickets for 2 people should be less than it costs to buy the damn thing 3 ) Reduce licensing costs so that the theaters actually showing the films make a little cash .
It 's unreal the turnover rate for theaters these days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, I don't really pirate because there's not a whole lot worth pirating.
You quoted 2012 and Avatar.
Yawn. If I truly get bored, I hit up the local Red Box.
If there's a film I really want to see, I'll wait until I can rent it.
I REFUSE to pay $10/ticket to see it in the theater, and it's not even the theater that's coming away from the majority of that ticket price.
I remember 4-5 short years ago when I was paying $5.
Now it's $10.
That's 100\% inflation in 5 years.
You tell ME why they're "losing" business?
3 conditions for me giving them my money:
1) Quality films, and it's helpful not to spit out crappy sequels or remakes 
2) Tickets for 2 people should be less than it costs to buy the damn thing
3) Reduce licensing costs so that the theaters actually showing the films make a little cash.
It's unreal the turnover rate for theaters these days.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245118</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30248178</id>
	<title>Re:Better in Italy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259355060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Considering some of the stories I have been reading about Italian politicians lately, I find that very easy to believe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering some of the stories I have been reading about Italian politicians lately , I find that very easy to believe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering some of the stories I have been reading about Italian politicians lately, I find that very easy to believe.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244788</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244956</id>
	<title>Why, oh why, oh why?</title>
	<author>xirtam\_work</author>
	<datestamp>1259332980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't the logical conclusion that if millions of people find a particular type of behaviour acceptable that it should be legalised? Otherwise it's socially unjust. We're not talking about murder or actual *stealing*. We're talking about copyright infringement. If we think it's a bad thing then we should also be allowed to decide how bad the punishment is, whether it's a small fine or a prison sentence.
<p>
I visit the cinema on average once a week and every time the copyright warning is displayed and mentions 10 years in prison for recording a movie in a cinema I cringe. That's more than people get for killing and maiming people, robbing banks and committing other violent crimes. The MP's are in the pockets of the media companies. I'm not talking about small indie film studios, but the distributors and those who own them like Sony, etc. They've been persuaded that if the penalties are high enough people will not perform actions that are trivial to execute and have no visible consequences. This has been shown not to be true time and time again.
</p><p>
I buy lots of DVDs and DVD boxsets. I probably spent about &pound;500 a year on these. I pay for the cinema one a week. I buy music on iTunes and only search elsewhere online if I can't find what I want. As a kid I pirated every virtual computer game in existence in the 8/16 bit eras. Now I rarely play games, apart from on my iPhone which I pay for. I don't have TV at home, so *sometimes* I get TV shows I like online before going out and buying the full season boxset as soon as it becomes available. I might consider buying them on iTunes or similar if they were available at a reasonable price, but they're not. Most episodes of TV shows cost far more than the equivalent DVD for lower quality and no physical media to keep and store and are non-transferable to other machines, etc.

I hope I'm not one of the people discovered in this haul of IP addresses, but I do not download movies, only a little bit of TV. Fingers crossed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't the logical conclusion that if millions of people find a particular type of behaviour acceptable that it should be legalised ?
Otherwise it 's socially unjust .
We 're not talking about murder or actual * stealing * .
We 're talking about copyright infringement .
If we think it 's a bad thing then we should also be allowed to decide how bad the punishment is , whether it 's a small fine or a prison sentence .
I visit the cinema on average once a week and every time the copyright warning is displayed and mentions 10 years in prison for recording a movie in a cinema I cringe .
That 's more than people get for killing and maiming people , robbing banks and committing other violent crimes .
The MP 's are in the pockets of the media companies .
I 'm not talking about small indie film studios , but the distributors and those who own them like Sony , etc .
They 've been persuaded that if the penalties are high enough people will not perform actions that are trivial to execute and have no visible consequences .
This has been shown not to be true time and time again .
I buy lots of DVDs and DVD boxsets .
I probably spent about   500 a year on these .
I pay for the cinema one a week .
I buy music on iTunes and only search elsewhere online if I ca n't find what I want .
As a kid I pirated every virtual computer game in existence in the 8/16 bit eras .
Now I rarely play games , apart from on my iPhone which I pay for .
I do n't have TV at home , so * sometimes * I get TV shows I like online before going out and buying the full season boxset as soon as it becomes available .
I might consider buying them on iTunes or similar if they were available at a reasonable price , but they 're not .
Most episodes of TV shows cost far more than the equivalent DVD for lower quality and no physical media to keep and store and are non-transferable to other machines , etc .
I hope I 'm not one of the people discovered in this haul of IP addresses , but I do not download movies , only a little bit of TV .
Fingers crossed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't the logical conclusion that if millions of people find a particular type of behaviour acceptable that it should be legalised?
Otherwise it's socially unjust.
We're not talking about murder or actual *stealing*.
We're talking about copyright infringement.
If we think it's a bad thing then we should also be allowed to decide how bad the punishment is, whether it's a small fine or a prison sentence.
I visit the cinema on average once a week and every time the copyright warning is displayed and mentions 10 years in prison for recording a movie in a cinema I cringe.
That's more than people get for killing and maiming people, robbing banks and committing other violent crimes.
The MP's are in the pockets of the media companies.
I'm not talking about small indie film studios, but the distributors and those who own them like Sony, etc.
They've been persuaded that if the penalties are high enough people will not perform actions that are trivial to execute and have no visible consequences.
This has been shown not to be true time and time again.
I buy lots of DVDs and DVD boxsets.
I probably spent about £500 a year on these.
I pay for the cinema one a week.
I buy music on iTunes and only search elsewhere online if I can't find what I want.
As a kid I pirated every virtual computer game in existence in the 8/16 bit eras.
Now I rarely play games, apart from on my iPhone which I pay for.
I don't have TV at home, so *sometimes* I get TV shows I like online before going out and buying the full season boxset as soon as it becomes available.
I might consider buying them on iTunes or similar if they were available at a reasonable price, but they're not.
Most episodes of TV shows cost far more than the equivalent DVD for lower quality and no physical media to keep and store and are non-transferable to other machines, etc.
I hope I'm not one of the people discovered in this haul of IP addresses, but I do not download movies, only a little bit of TV.
Fingers crossed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245186</id>
	<title>30,000? 25,000? 15,000?</title>
	<author>Xest</author>
	<datestamp>1259335380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The numbers are already messed up, the article above says 30,000, 25,000 of which are BT. The BBC article says only 15,000:</p><p><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8381097.stm" title="bbc.co.uk">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8381097.stm</a> [bbc.co.uk]</p><p>So how many people really are covered I wonder?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The numbers are already messed up , the article above says 30,000 , 25,000 of which are BT .
The BBC article says only 15,000 : http : //news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8381097.stm [ bbc.co.uk ] So how many people really are covered I wonder ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The numbers are already messed up, the article above says 30,000, 25,000 of which are BT.
The BBC article says only 15,000:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8381097.stm [bbc.co.uk]So how many people really are covered I wonder?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245484</id>
	<title>Re:It will never end</title>
	<author>Artifakt</author>
	<datestamp>1259337660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So what's the difference between film ending because of piracy and film ending because nobody has any spare income to afford entertainment? You want to sell 100 Million tickets in the US, better have at least 100 Million people with enough income to reasonably afford it. Means is more basic than intent. You can (maybe) change the minds of people who have intent to watch without paying, you can (maybe) convince them to buy your formula blockbuster without clocking in that predictable thrill-ride is an oxymoron, but you absolutely can't provide them with the means to buy a ticket and still make a profit.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Right now, the film industry is reaping the 'benefits' of real wages having remained static for most since the 1970's as taxes rose, savings declines, and credit moved from something good customers paid off quickly to a lifetime of working for the credit companies. The industry is far from the only one, but they get to blame the problems on pirates instead of looking at the other factors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So what 's the difference between film ending because of piracy and film ending because nobody has any spare income to afford entertainment ?
You want to sell 100 Million tickets in the US , better have at least 100 Million people with enough income to reasonably afford it .
Means is more basic than intent .
You can ( maybe ) change the minds of people who have intent to watch without paying , you can ( maybe ) convince them to buy your formula blockbuster without clocking in that predictable thrill-ride is an oxymoron , but you absolutely ca n't provide them with the means to buy a ticket and still make a profit .
        Right now , the film industry is reaping the 'benefits ' of real wages having remained static for most since the 1970 's as taxes rose , savings declines , and credit moved from something good customers paid off quickly to a lifetime of working for the credit companies .
The industry is far from the only one , but they get to blame the problems on pirates instead of looking at the other factors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So what's the difference between film ending because of piracy and film ending because nobody has any spare income to afford entertainment?
You want to sell 100 Million tickets in the US, better have at least 100 Million people with enough income to reasonably afford it.
Means is more basic than intent.
You can (maybe) change the minds of people who have intent to watch without paying, you can (maybe) convince them to buy your formula blockbuster without clocking in that predictable thrill-ride is an oxymoron, but you absolutely can't provide them with the means to buy a ticket and still make a profit.
        Right now, the film industry is reaping the 'benefits' of real wages having remained static for most since the 1970's as taxes rose, savings declines, and credit moved from something good customers paid off quickly to a lifetime of working for the credit companies.
The industry is far from the only one, but they get to blame the problems on pirates instead of looking at the other factors.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245118</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246358</id>
	<title>Re:It will never end</title>
	<author>Shakrai</author>
	<datestamp>1259343240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jesus dude, you make some really great points, but haven't you ever heard of the &lt;p&gt; tag?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jesus dude , you make some really great points , but have n't you ever heard of the tag ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jesus dude, you make some really great points, but haven't you ever heard of the  tag?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245118</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246394</id>
	<title>Re:Politicians</title>
	<author>Shakrai</author>
	<datestamp>1259343480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Until they bring in brain scanners (or people who read body language) that can tell when you're lying.</p></div><p>In the UK that might actually fly too.  I heard that they've neutered the right to keep silent.  Why would brain scans pose a problem to your civil liberties if you have nothing to hide, citizen?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Until they bring in brain scanners ( or people who read body language ) that can tell when you 're lying.In the UK that might actually fly too .
I heard that they 've neutered the right to keep silent .
Why would brain scans pose a problem to your civil liberties if you have nothing to hide , citizen ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Until they bring in brain scanners (or people who read body language) that can tell when you're lying.In the UK that might actually fly too.
I heard that they've neutered the right to keep silent.
Why would brain scans pose a problem to your civil liberties if you have nothing to hide, citizen?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245602</id>
	<title>Re:It will never end</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1259338500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I find it fascinating and amusing that people fail to appreciate that people are quite naturally creative and expressive.  That some fairly small group of people has effectively taken control of that and made it into an industry worshipped by the masses is something that happened after the fact.  Creativity and expressiveness enabled the industry.  The industry does more to control and limit creativity and expressiveness than it does to encourage it.  In fact, many ideas and concepts (both good and bad) are kept silent by the industrialists.  One only has to point to Firefly and a few others to see how it happens.</p><p>There will always be some people who will do it for fun instead of profit.  Always.</p><p>The industrialists are simply too greedy and do not appreciate the peril they bring upon themselves.  They have made lots of money over the past 20 years... their best years so far.  The problem is that it is not enough for them.  "Growth" is their metric for success.  There is no perceived cap or saturation point in their business vision.  If anything slows their growth, they will find a way to destroy it or use it as an excuse to get more legislation written in their favor.</p><p>Their foundation is their audience... their customers.  They seek to weaken their foundation.  What happens to their structure when the foundation is weakened?  Nothing surprising about that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I find it fascinating and amusing that people fail to appreciate that people are quite naturally creative and expressive .
That some fairly small group of people has effectively taken control of that and made it into an industry worshipped by the masses is something that happened after the fact .
Creativity and expressiveness enabled the industry .
The industry does more to control and limit creativity and expressiveness than it does to encourage it .
In fact , many ideas and concepts ( both good and bad ) are kept silent by the industrialists .
One only has to point to Firefly and a few others to see how it happens.There will always be some people who will do it for fun instead of profit .
Always.The industrialists are simply too greedy and do not appreciate the peril they bring upon themselves .
They have made lots of money over the past 20 years... their best years so far .
The problem is that it is not enough for them .
" Growth " is their metric for success .
There is no perceived cap or saturation point in their business vision .
If anything slows their growth , they will find a way to destroy it or use it as an excuse to get more legislation written in their favor.Their foundation is their audience... their customers .
They seek to weaken their foundation .
What happens to their structure when the foundation is weakened ?
Nothing surprising about that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find it fascinating and amusing that people fail to appreciate that people are quite naturally creative and expressive.
That some fairly small group of people has effectively taken control of that and made it into an industry worshipped by the masses is something that happened after the fact.
Creativity and expressiveness enabled the industry.
The industry does more to control and limit creativity and expressiveness than it does to encourage it.
In fact, many ideas and concepts (both good and bad) are kept silent by the industrialists.
One only has to point to Firefly and a few others to see how it happens.There will always be some people who will do it for fun instead of profit.
Always.The industrialists are simply too greedy and do not appreciate the peril they bring upon themselves.
They have made lots of money over the past 20 years... their best years so far.
The problem is that it is not enough for them.
"Growth" is their metric for success.
There is no perceived cap or saturation point in their business vision.
If anything slows their growth, they will find a way to destroy it or use it as an excuse to get more legislation written in their favor.Their foundation is their audience... their customers.
They seek to weaken their foundation.
What happens to their structure when the foundation is weakened?
Nothing surprising about that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245118</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30250170</id>
	<title>Re:It will never end</title>
	<author>sticky\_charris</author>
	<datestamp>1259322840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And good for you.  This whole thing wouldn't be so much of a problem if there was more people coughing up and less people downloading.<br> <br>

When I started with torrents it was a few scoundrels ripping off a few films - now everyone and their dog is doing it.  I wish we hadn't all shown our brothers and mothers how to do it, and made the clients so user friendly.  It is now way too mainstream, and that is why governments are now involved.<br> <br>

Hopefully new legislation will reduce the numbers once again so that only those who are truly determined will be able to get around it.  The government can then pat themselves on the back for reducing it by 70\% and everyone is happy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And good for you .
This whole thing would n't be so much of a problem if there was more people coughing up and less people downloading .
When I started with torrents it was a few scoundrels ripping off a few films - now everyone and their dog is doing it .
I wish we had n't all shown our brothers and mothers how to do it , and made the clients so user friendly .
It is now way too mainstream , and that is why governments are now involved .
Hopefully new legislation will reduce the numbers once again so that only those who are truly determined will be able to get around it .
The government can then pat themselves on the back for reducing it by 70 \ % and everyone is happy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And good for you.
This whole thing wouldn't be so much of a problem if there was more people coughing up and less people downloading.
When I started with torrents it was a few scoundrels ripping off a few films - now everyone and their dog is doing it.
I wish we hadn't all shown our brothers and mothers how to do it, and made the clients so user friendly.
It is now way too mainstream, and that is why governments are now involved.
Hopefully new legislation will reduce the numbers once again so that only those who are truly determined will be able to get around it.
The government can then pat themselves on the back for reducing it by 70\% and everyone is happy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30247234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244770</id>
	<title>I concur!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259331000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Muslims are inhuman sacks of dog shit.<br> <br>FUCK ALLAH! FUCK MOHAMMAD! FUCK ISLAM!!!<br> <br>Free Iran!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Muslims are inhuman sacks of dog shit .
FUCK ALLAH !
FUCK MOHAMMAD !
FUCK ISLAM ! ! !
Free Iran !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Muslims are inhuman sacks of dog shit.
FUCK ALLAH!
FUCK MOHAMMAD!
FUCK ISLAM!!!
Free Iran!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30253446</id>
	<title>Re:It will never end</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259405880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>they must be making lots of money to fund all these lawyers</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>they must be making lots of money to fund all these lawyers</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they must be making lots of money to fund all these lawyers</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244786</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244846</id>
	<title>Politicians</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259331840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everyone who's been observing politicians knows how to react to such allegations: "I do not remember doing that" (you don't deny, so you can't get caught in a lie).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone who 's been observing politicians knows how to react to such allegations : " I do not remember doing that " ( you do n't deny , so you ca n't get caught in a lie ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone who's been observing politicians knows how to react to such allegations: "I do not remember doing that" (you don't deny, so you can't get caught in a lie).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245008</id>
	<title>Re:Christmas gifts, they start here.shoes,handbag,</title>
	<author>Inda</author>
	<datestamp>1259333580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>If your goal was best Ingrish, I would have bought a pair of Nike shox and a handbag.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If your goal was best Ingrish , I would have bought a pair of Nike shox and a handbag .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If your goal was best Ingrish, I would have bought a pair of Nike shox and a handbag.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244762</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246212</id>
	<title>Seen ACS:Law's 5 point plan?</title>
	<author>naich</author>
	<datestamp>1259342220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is to reduce piracy.  Seems reasonable.</p><p>"Introduce fixed fines of &pound;750.00 minimum<br>Introduce statutory damages of &pound;750.00 as a minimum for each act of copyright infringement (such provision exists presently in the United States);</p><p>ISPs to provide names of internet account holders<br>Make all Internet Service Providers produce, on request of a copyright owner or licensee, the identities of the account holders of the internet connection used for illegal file sharing of their copyrighted material. The cost of producing such information would be met by the copyright owner requesting it;</p><p>Strict liability for internet account holders<br>Make the account holder of the internet connection strictly liable for infringements where their connection was used for illegal file sharing</p><p>Simplify the court process<br>Streamline, simplify and speed up the court process of a copyright owner applying for the identities of the account holders from ISPs (this is presently a complex and time-consuming procedure); and</p><p>Standardise letters of claim and court documents<br>Secure approval and consensus for standard-form letters, documents and claims making the process of notification and prosecution of an identified infringement clear and easy to understand, with the presumption of innocence until guilt is proven."</p><p>Sorry, did I say reasonable, I meant horrifying.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is to reduce piracy .
Seems reasonable .
" Introduce fixed fines of   750.00 minimumIntroduce statutory damages of   750.00 as a minimum for each act of copyright infringement ( such provision exists presently in the United States ) ; ISPs to provide names of internet account holdersMake all Internet Service Providers produce , on request of a copyright owner or licensee , the identities of the account holders of the internet connection used for illegal file sharing of their copyrighted material .
The cost of producing such information would be met by the copyright owner requesting it ; Strict liability for internet account holdersMake the account holder of the internet connection strictly liable for infringements where their connection was used for illegal file sharingSimplify the court processStreamline , simplify and speed up the court process of a copyright owner applying for the identities of the account holders from ISPs ( this is presently a complex and time-consuming procedure ) ; andStandardise letters of claim and court documentsSecure approval and consensus for standard-form letters , documents and claims making the process of notification and prosecution of an identified infringement clear and easy to understand , with the presumption of innocence until guilt is proven .
" Sorry , did I say reasonable , I meant horrifying .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is to reduce piracy.
Seems reasonable.
"Introduce fixed fines of £750.00 minimumIntroduce statutory damages of £750.00 as a minimum for each act of copyright infringement (such provision exists presently in the United States);ISPs to provide names of internet account holdersMake all Internet Service Providers produce, on request of a copyright owner or licensee, the identities of the account holders of the internet connection used for illegal file sharing of their copyrighted material.
The cost of producing such information would be met by the copyright owner requesting it;Strict liability for internet account holdersMake the account holder of the internet connection strictly liable for infringements where their connection was used for illegal file sharingSimplify the court processStreamline, simplify and speed up the court process of a copyright owner applying for the identities of the account holders from ISPs (this is presently a complex and time-consuming procedure); andStandardise letters of claim and court documentsSecure approval and consensus for standard-form letters, documents and claims making the process of notification and prosecution of an identified infringement clear and easy to understand, with the presumption of innocence until guilt is proven.
"Sorry, did I say reasonable, I meant horrifying.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244964</id>
	<title>No, you won't</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259333100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What will you personally - aside from posting on Slashdot and internet forums - do about it?</p><p>Yeah... Thought so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What will you personally - aside from posting on Slashdot and internet forums - do about it ? Yeah... Thought so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What will you personally - aside from posting on Slashdot and internet forums - do about it?Yeah... Thought so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244786</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244808</id>
	<title>Thank gawd I use FTP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259331360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, I've downloaded movies and TV shows using plain old (and I mean old) FTP.   When am I going to get my letter?<br>I hate this protocol-specific gnashing of teeth...if you're downloading illegally, it doesn't matter what protocol you're using.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , I 've downloaded movies and TV shows using plain old ( and I mean old ) FTP .
When am I going to get my letter ? I hate this protocol-specific gnashing of teeth...if you 're downloading illegally , it does n't matter what protocol you 're using .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, I've downloaded movies and TV shows using plain old (and I mean old) FTP.
When am I going to get my letter?I hate this protocol-specific gnashing of teeth...if you're downloading illegally, it doesn't matter what protocol you're using.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246270</id>
	<title>Re:Thank gawd I use FTP</title>
	<author>inhuman\_4</author>
	<datestamp>1259342700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually I think you have hit upon an interesting idea.</p><p>The lawsuits are based on the idea that the people at those IP address were downloading copyrighted content. And for this reason their private information is being released.</p><p>But what if you could muddy the waters? Make it so that there are lots of IP addresses from people who are not involved in piracy? If 10\% of the IP addresses resolved to people who were not involved in piracy, then releasing the private information would not go through because it is known that 10\% of these people are innocent. In the same way, once it gets to court, you could simply claim to be the innocent 10\%.</p><p>I have no idea how this could be implemented. But I think decoupling people from their IP is the best way to prevent these lawsuits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually I think you have hit upon an interesting idea.The lawsuits are based on the idea that the people at those IP address were downloading copyrighted content .
And for this reason their private information is being released.But what if you could muddy the waters ?
Make it so that there are lots of IP addresses from people who are not involved in piracy ?
If 10 \ % of the IP addresses resolved to people who were not involved in piracy , then releasing the private information would not go through because it is known that 10 \ % of these people are innocent .
In the same way , once it gets to court , you could simply claim to be the innocent 10 \ % .I have no idea how this could be implemented .
But I think decoupling people from their IP is the best way to prevent these lawsuits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually I think you have hit upon an interesting idea.The lawsuits are based on the idea that the people at those IP address were downloading copyrighted content.
And for this reason their private information is being released.But what if you could muddy the waters?
Make it so that there are lots of IP addresses from people who are not involved in piracy?
If 10\% of the IP addresses resolved to people who were not involved in piracy, then releasing the private information would not go through because it is known that 10\% of these people are innocent.
In the same way, once it gets to court, you could simply claim to be the innocent 10\%.I have no idea how this could be implemented.
But I think decoupling people from their IP is the best way to prevent these lawsuits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246284</id>
	<title>How much is the fine?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259342700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How much are alleged copyright infringer's going to be fined? Whats the law in the UK if you go to court? Are there statutory damages per infringement?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How much are alleged copyright infringer 's going to be fined ?
Whats the law in the UK if you go to court ?
Are there statutory damages per infringement ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How much are alleged copyright infringer's going to be fined?
Whats the law in the UK if you go to court?
Are there statutory damages per infringement?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245338</id>
	<title>Re:Politicians</title>
	<author>IBBoard</author>
	<datestamp>1259336580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Until they bring in brain scanners (or people who read body language) that can tell when you're lying. At that point you need to start wiping your memory of downloading copyrighted content, leaving you with the wonderful situation of going "ooo, where did that come from?"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Until they bring in brain scanners ( or people who read body language ) that can tell when you 're lying .
At that point you need to start wiping your memory of downloading copyrighted content , leaving you with the wonderful situation of going " ooo , where did that come from ?
" : D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Until they bring in brain scanners (or people who read body language) that can tell when you're lying.
At that point you need to start wiping your memory of downloading copyrighted content, leaving you with the wonderful situation of going "ooo, where did that come from?
" :D</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244832</id>
	<title>Re:Thank gawd I use FTP</title>
	<author>Chatterton</author>
	<datestamp>1259331720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes. Unfortunatly it is more easy to track P2P users than FTP users. Now what I don't understand is that they don't seed the tracked with some false IPs like the one of the Queen and some institutions for letting them receive these letters too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes .
Unfortunatly it is more easy to track P2P users than FTP users .
Now what I do n't understand is that they do n't seed the tracked with some false IPs like the one of the Queen and some institutions for letting them receive these letters too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes.
Unfortunatly it is more easy to track P2P users than FTP users.
Now what I don't understand is that they don't seed the tracked with some false IPs like the one of the Queen and some institutions for letting them receive these letters too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244808</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30248854</id>
	<title>Re:Thank gawd I use FTP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259316120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm pretty sure there's no need to seed with Royal IPs.... or Minister's home IPs either.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm pretty sure there 's no need to seed with Royal IPs.... or Minister 's home IPs either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm pretty sure there's no need to seed with Royal IPs.... or Minister's home IPs either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30247422</id>
	<title>Re:Why, oh why, oh why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259350500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and what about the other millions who don't find it acceptable? who wins? the ones who shout the loudest? the ones with the largest amount of people? why is it socially unjust? just because my mob is bigger than yours?</p><p>idiot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and what about the other millions who do n't find it acceptable ?
who wins ?
the ones who shout the loudest ?
the ones with the largest amount of people ?
why is it socially unjust ?
just because my mob is bigger than yours ? idiot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and what about the other millions who don't find it acceptable?
who wins?
the ones who shout the loudest?
the ones with the largest amount of people?
why is it socially unjust?
just because my mob is bigger than yours?idiot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30250132</id>
	<title>Re:Flamebait</title>
	<author>Vahokif</author>
	<datestamp>1259322600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The important thing is that 1984 is about a totalitarian communist government. This is about large corporations trying to exert their power over people, the complete opposite.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The important thing is that 1984 is about a totalitarian communist government .
This is about large corporations trying to exert their power over people , the complete opposite .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The important thing is that 1984 is about a totalitarian communist government.
This is about large corporations trying to exert their power over people, the complete opposite.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245654</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245472</id>
	<title>Re:Need a way to encrypt Limewire now</title>
	<author>roguetrick</author>
	<datestamp>1259337600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Encryption only hides it from your ISP noticing what you're doing.  If you're hosting shit on Gnutella, your ass is going to get canned.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Encryption only hides it from your ISP noticing what you 're doing .
If you 're hosting shit on Gnutella , your ass is going to get canned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Encryption only hides it from your ISP noticing what you're doing.
If you're hosting shit on Gnutella, your ass is going to get canned.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245052</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244890</id>
	<title>It's not Nineteen Eighty-Four</title>
	<author>Sockatume</author>
	<datestamp>1259332200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, it's the real 1980s' vision of the future, only instead of OCP, it's the media industry that's gone on a power-mad rampage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , it 's the real 1980s ' vision of the future , only instead of OCP , it 's the media industry that 's gone on a power-mad rampage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, it's the real 1980s' vision of the future, only instead of OCP, it's the media industry that's gone on a power-mad rampage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244822</id>
	<title>go on, complain, I dare you</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259331600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You knew this would happen, you kidded yourself that no-one would find out if you pirated a few movies.</p><p>The ISP can and will turn over the details to the lawyers if they are ordered to, and it's there in plain text in the contract you signed.</p><p>Stop whining.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You knew this would happen , you kidded yourself that no-one would find out if you pirated a few movies.The ISP can and will turn over the details to the lawyers if they are ordered to , and it 's there in plain text in the contract you signed.Stop whining .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You knew this would happen, you kidded yourself that no-one would find out if you pirated a few movies.The ISP can and will turn over the details to the lawyers if they are ordered to, and it's there in plain text in the contract you signed.Stop whining.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244844</id>
	<title>Something-Something Wants to be Free</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259331780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>We'll build a decentralized network before we allow you to dictate which information we may copy.</i></p><p>Information?  I thought it was Hollywood movies that were being copied and distributed...?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 'll build a decentralized network before we allow you to dictate which information we may copy.Information ?
I thought it was Hollywood movies that were being copied and distributed... ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We'll build a decentralized network before we allow you to dictate which information we may copy.Information?
I thought it was Hollywood movies that were being copied and distributed...?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244786</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245052</id>
	<title>Need a way to encrypt Limewire now</title>
	<author>jackflap</author>
	<datestamp>1259333880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>any Limewire-like apps out there which support encryption?</htmltext>
<tokenext>any Limewire-like apps out there which support encryption ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>any Limewire-like apps out there which support encryption?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245998</id>
	<title>Re:Why, oh why, oh why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259340600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Isn't the logical conclusion that if millions of people find a particular type of behaviour acceptable that it should be legalised? Otherwise it's socially unjust.</p></div><p>Millions of people found slavery acceptable. That doesn't mean it should ever have been legal.</p><p>Millions of people currently find all sorts of horrible practices acceptable. See, for example, the way women are treated in various parts of the world. That doesn't mean that it should be legal.</p><p>A huge number of people believing something is acceptable does not mean that it is, in fact, acceptable.</p><p>Please note that I'm not making a judgment on the issue of copyright law one way or another; I'm merely pointing out that your argument is flawed.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't the logical conclusion that if millions of people find a particular type of behaviour acceptable that it should be legalised ?
Otherwise it 's socially unjust.Millions of people found slavery acceptable .
That does n't mean it should ever have been legal.Millions of people currently find all sorts of horrible practices acceptable .
See , for example , the way women are treated in various parts of the world .
That does n't mean that it should be legal.A huge number of people believing something is acceptable does not mean that it is , in fact , acceptable.Please note that I 'm not making a judgment on the issue of copyright law one way or another ; I 'm merely pointing out that your argument is flawed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't the logical conclusion that if millions of people find a particular type of behaviour acceptable that it should be legalised?
Otherwise it's socially unjust.Millions of people found slavery acceptable.
That doesn't mean it should ever have been legal.Millions of people currently find all sorts of horrible practices acceptable.
See, for example, the way women are treated in various parts of the world.
That doesn't mean that it should be legal.A huge number of people believing something is acceptable does not mean that it is, in fact, acceptable.Please note that I'm not making a judgment on the issue of copyright law one way or another; I'm merely pointing out that your argument is flawed.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245866</id>
	<title>Tor users will be safe ..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259339940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It really is time for the UK to use tor full time to retain any degree of privacy.</p><p>Shame we're going to be running at 1995 speeds...</p><p>Better slow and safe though.</p><p>The more nodes should also help speed up the network..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It really is time for the UK to use tor full time to retain any degree of privacy.Shame we 're going to be running at 1995 speeds...Better slow and safe though.The more nodes should also help speed up the network. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It really is time for the UK to use tor full time to retain any degree of privacy.Shame we're going to be running at 1995 speeds...Better slow and safe though.The more nodes should also help speed up the network..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245206</id>
	<title>Re:Need a way to encrypt Limewire now</title>
	<author>Per Wigren</author>
	<datestamp>1259335500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You don't need encryption, you need anonymity.<br>
There are a few networks like <a href="http://oneswarm.cs.washington.edu/" title="washington.edu">OneSwarm</a> [washington.edu] and <a href="http://gnunet.org/" title="gnunet.org">GNUnet</a> [gnunet.org] and you can run a <a href="http://forum.i2p2.de/viewforum.php?f=25" title="i2p2.de">Gnutella network</a> [i2p2.de] or <a href="http://forum.i2p2.de/viewforum.php?f=21" title="i2p2.de">BitTorrent</a> [i2p2.de] on top of <a href="http://www.i2p2.de/" title="i2p2.de">I2P</a> [i2p2.de]. Don't expect to find much, though.<br>
You can also sign up for an anonymous VPN service like <a href="https://www.relakks.com/?cid=gb" title="relakks.com">Relakks</a> [relakks.com] and continue to use whatever you are used to.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't need encryption , you need anonymity .
There are a few networks like OneSwarm [ washington.edu ] and GNUnet [ gnunet.org ] and you can run a Gnutella network [ i2p2.de ] or BitTorrent [ i2p2.de ] on top of I2P [ i2p2.de ] .
Do n't expect to find much , though .
You can also sign up for an anonymous VPN service like Relakks [ relakks.com ] and continue to use whatever you are used to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't need encryption, you need anonymity.
There are a few networks like OneSwarm [washington.edu] and GNUnet [gnunet.org] and you can run a Gnutella network [i2p2.de] or BitTorrent [i2p2.de] on top of I2P [i2p2.de].
Don't expect to find much, though.
You can also sign up for an anonymous VPN service like Relakks [relakks.com] and continue to use whatever you are used to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245052</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244788</id>
	<title>Better in Italy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259331180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Strange to say, but in Italy we protect more our privacy than in UK: our Data Privacy Authority decided that it's against the law to provide a correspondence between IP Address and real person name if the suspected violation is only for copyright issues.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Strange to say , but in Italy we protect more our privacy than in UK : our Data Privacy Authority decided that it 's against the law to provide a correspondence between IP Address and real person name if the suspected violation is only for copyright issues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Strange to say, but in Italy we protect more our privacy than in UK: our Data Privacy Authority decided that it's against the law to provide a correspondence between IP Address and real person name if the suspected violation is only for copyright issues.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245268</id>
	<title>Re:No, you won't</title>
	<author>Ragzouken</author>
	<datestamp>1259335920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just so you know, a linebreak does not constitute an adequate chance to respond to your first question. Do you understand?</p><p>I'll take that as a yes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just so you know , a linebreak does not constitute an adequate chance to respond to your first question .
Do you understand ? I 'll take that as a yes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just so you know, a linebreak does not constitute an adequate chance to respond to your first question.
Do you understand?I'll take that as a yes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30250966</id>
	<title>Enough is enough</title>
	<author>AlgorithMan</author>
	<datestamp>1259327400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I just wrote a mail to TPB and told them, they should promote anonymous P2P... a suggestion by them should skyrocket the transfer-rates (which is the major problem with anonymous P2P so far)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just wrote a mail to TPB and told them , they should promote anonymous P2P... a suggestion by them should skyrocket the transfer-rates ( which is the major problem with anonymous P2P so far )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just wrote a mail to TPB and told them, they should promote anonymous P2P... a suggestion by them should skyrocket the transfer-rates (which is the major problem with anonymous P2P so far)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245510</id>
	<title>Re:BT / Virgin Media / etc</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259337840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>BT used to be the government owned monopoly, and still has many links (jobs for the boys etc) with the government, so it's not suprising at all.<br>(In fact if you want adsl, you still need a BT phone line before you can get it, the other ISPs have to rent it off BT).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>BT used to be the government owned monopoly , and still has many links ( jobs for the boys etc ) with the government , so it 's not suprising at all .
( In fact if you want adsl , you still need a BT phone line before you can get it , the other ISPs have to rent it off BT ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BT used to be the government owned monopoly, and still has many links (jobs for the boys etc) with the government, so it's not suprising at all.
(In fact if you want adsl, you still need a BT phone line before you can get it, the other ISPs have to rent it off BT).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244858</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245146</id>
	<title>Re:It's not Nineteen Eighty-Four</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259334960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, because if I beat back a thief in my house I'm on a power-mad rampage.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , because if I beat back a thief in my house I 'm on a power-mad rampage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, because if I beat back a thief in my house I'm on a power-mad rampage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244764</id>
	<title>Who cares?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259330820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Under Sharia Law these infidel thieves would have their hands cut off; much harder to steal if you don't have any hands.  Muslims are violent subhumans.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Under Sharia Law these infidel thieves would have their hands cut off ; much harder to steal if you do n't have any hands .
Muslims are violent subhumans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Under Sharia Law these infidel thieves would have their hands cut off; much harder to steal if you don't have any hands.
Muslims are violent subhumans.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246282</id>
	<title>Re:Flamebait</title>
	<author>BrokenHalo</author>
	<datestamp>1259342700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sabre rattling or not, the courts have let themselves in for a long, boring job of listening to lots of spurious complaints. <br> <br>Given that judges and courts frequently complain that their offices are under-resourced and overworked, leading to long delays in prosecution of more serious cases, one doesn't need a very wide streak of cynicism to wonder if there is no better way for them to occupy their time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sabre rattling or not , the courts have let themselves in for a long , boring job of listening to lots of spurious complaints .
Given that judges and courts frequently complain that their offices are under-resourced and overworked , leading to long delays in prosecution of more serious cases , one does n't need a very wide streak of cynicism to wonder if there is no better way for them to occupy their time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sabre rattling or not, the courts have let themselves in for a long, boring job of listening to lots of spurious complaints.
Given that judges and courts frequently complain that their offices are under-resourced and overworked, leading to long delays in prosecution of more serious cases, one doesn't need a very wide streak of cynicism to wonder if there is no better way for them to occupy their time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245122</id>
	<title>Re:Why, oh why, oh why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259334780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My thoughs on this are if there are so many people "pirating" movies/tv shows then there must be a market to allow users to download them and pay for them either individually or via a subscription. The future is clearly on-demand viewing.<br>Why are the copyright holders trying so hard to protect their current revenue stream when there is an un-tapped additional revenue stream? In the same way that downloading music online legally has flourished since Napster's made people think it was ok to not own physical media downloading/streaming films/tv shows will catch on and be big business, eventually putting dvd shops, dvd rental places and traditional tv channels out of business.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My thoughs on this are if there are so many people " pirating " movies/tv shows then there must be a market to allow users to download them and pay for them either individually or via a subscription .
The future is clearly on-demand viewing.Why are the copyright holders trying so hard to protect their current revenue stream when there is an un-tapped additional revenue stream ?
In the same way that downloading music online legally has flourished since Napster 's made people think it was ok to not own physical media downloading/streaming films/tv shows will catch on and be big business , eventually putting dvd shops , dvd rental places and traditional tv channels out of business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My thoughs on this are if there are so many people "pirating" movies/tv shows then there must be a market to allow users to download them and pay for them either individually or via a subscription.
The future is clearly on-demand viewing.Why are the copyright holders trying so hard to protect their current revenue stream when there is an un-tapped additional revenue stream?
In the same way that downloading music online legally has flourished since Napster's made people think it was ok to not own physical media downloading/streaming films/tv shows will catch on and be big business, eventually putting dvd shops, dvd rental places and traditional tv channels out of business.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245258</id>
	<title>Re:Flamebait</title>
	<author>Vahokif</author>
	<datestamp>1259335920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Have you actually read the book?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you actually read the book ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you actually read the book?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245470</id>
	<title>That's criminal extortion. Period.</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1259337540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The customers concerned are 'suspected' of illegally file sharing (P2P) approximately 291 movie titles, they now face threatening demands for money (settlement) or risk the prospect <em>of court action</em>.</p></div><p>The emphasized part is bullshit fearmongering to get them to pay. Expect the &ldquo;charges&rdquo; to be dropped as soon as you refuse and tell them to go fuck themselves. I&rsquo;ve already seen it twice. You don&rsquo;t pay, and nothing happens.</p><p>Which is obvious, since they have no proof, no legal anything, and were it not for the changes they pressed into law, they would not even be listened to by the courts.</p><p>If you got such a letter, tell them to go fuck themselves, because they don&rsquo;t even know what &ldquo;proof&rdquo; is in computers, because they know shit about how computers work.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The customers concerned are 'suspected ' of illegally file sharing ( P2P ) approximately 291 movie titles , they now face threatening demands for money ( settlement ) or risk the prospect of court action.The emphasized part is bullshit fearmongering to get them to pay .
Expect the    charges    to be dropped as soon as you refuse and tell them to go fuck themselves .
I    ve already seen it twice .
You don    t pay , and nothing happens.Which is obvious , since they have no proof , no legal anything , and were it not for the changes they pressed into law , they would not even be listened to by the courts.If you got such a letter , tell them to go fuck themselves , because they don    t even know what    proof    is in computers , because they know shit about how computers work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The customers concerned are 'suspected' of illegally file sharing (P2P) approximately 291 movie titles, they now face threatening demands for money (settlement) or risk the prospect of court action.The emphasized part is bullshit fearmongering to get them to pay.
Expect the “charges” to be dropped as soon as you refuse and tell them to go fuck themselves.
I’ve already seen it twice.
You don’t pay, and nothing happens.Which is obvious, since they have no proof, no legal anything, and were it not for the changes they pressed into law, they would not even be listened to by the courts.If you got such a letter, tell them to go fuck themselves, because they don’t even know what “proof” is in computers, because they know shit about how computers work.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245776</id>
	<title>Were these IPs collected during Phorm trials?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259339400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As I remember the whole Phorm trial was illegal, so that would render the IPs inadmissable evidence?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As I remember the whole Phorm trial was illegal , so that would render the IPs inadmissable evidence ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As I remember the whole Phorm trial was illegal, so that would render the IPs inadmissable evidence?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245102</id>
	<title>Take action</title>
	<author>CookedGryphon</author>
	<datestamp>1259334540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everyone who thinks this is a bad idea should sign this government petition, get everyone they know to sign the petition, and generally cause a ruckus<br><a href="http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/dontdisconnectus/" title="number10.gov.uk" rel="nofollow">http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/dontdisconnectus/</a> [number10.gov.uk]</p><p>Then install Tor, because you have to look out for yourself when you don't live in a democracy any more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone who thinks this is a bad idea should sign this government petition , get everyone they know to sign the petition , and generally cause a ruckushttp : //petitions.number10.gov.uk/dontdisconnectus/ [ number10.gov.uk ] Then install Tor , because you have to look out for yourself when you do n't live in a democracy any more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone who thinks this is a bad idea should sign this government petition, get everyone they know to sign the petition, and generally cause a ruckushttp://petitions.number10.gov.uk/dontdisconnectus/ [number10.gov.uk]Then install Tor, because you have to look out for yourself when you don't live in a democracy any more.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244838</id>
	<title>Time to get a Relakks account</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259331780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Guess it's time to get a <a href="https://www.relakks.com/" title="relakks.com">Relakks</a> [relakks.com] account. Basically you use a VPN account which gives you some random Swedish IP address. This will keep you off the radar of those collecting IP addresses for a while.</p><p>Not related to them or anything, I was just a satisfied customer for a few months. I gave it up when I realized I almost never downloaded movies and music anymore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Guess it 's time to get a Relakks [ relakks.com ] account .
Basically you use a VPN account which gives you some random Swedish IP address .
This will keep you off the radar of those collecting IP addresses for a while.Not related to them or anything , I was just a satisfied customer for a few months .
I gave it up when I realized I almost never downloaded movies and music anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Guess it's time to get a Relakks [relakks.com] account.
Basically you use a VPN account which gives you some random Swedish IP address.
This will keep you off the radar of those collecting IP addresses for a while.Not related to them or anything, I was just a satisfied customer for a few months.
I gave it up when I realized I almost never downloaded movies and music anymore.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245888</id>
	<title>Re:It will never end</title>
	<author>JPLemme</author>
	<datestamp>1259340000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are only so many hours in a day, and there are only so many movies and television shows that people can consume. If the costs of reproduction and distribution fall precipitously, people aren't going to see ten movies a week or watch TV for an additional four hours a day. They'll just spend less money to consume about the same amount of content. That would be true even in a world with no piracy. And with more bandwidth to fill, that smaller pool of money needs to fund the creation of even more content. Risky, expensive productions were going to wither away even if BitTorrent had never been created. Or put another way, don't blame piracy for <i>The Jay Leno Show</i> or <i>Saw VI</i>. In fact (although the huge biases make it hard to trust any study of the topic), I wouldn't be surprised if most pirates haven't greatly reduced their spending on media as distribution costs fell; but rather started accumulating more bits for the same amount of money.
<br> <br>
Once content producers figure out how to make money in a world without physical media (which requires them to figure out how to offer their customers what they want at a prices they'll pay -- you'd think it wouldn't be so hard), the content will flow again. There may be less money available to create it, and they may need to change the ways they fund it, but people with a story to tell will find a way to tell their story. The radio and the phonograph didn't kill live music, movies didn't kill live theater, television didn't kill movies, and the VCR didn't kill anything. In all of these cases there were big winners and big losers, and the scope and/or quality of the content may have morphed over the decades, but there is more stuff (both good and bad) than ever before.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are only so many hours in a day , and there are only so many movies and television shows that people can consume .
If the costs of reproduction and distribution fall precipitously , people are n't going to see ten movies a week or watch TV for an additional four hours a day .
They 'll just spend less money to consume about the same amount of content .
That would be true even in a world with no piracy .
And with more bandwidth to fill , that smaller pool of money needs to fund the creation of even more content .
Risky , expensive productions were going to wither away even if BitTorrent had never been created .
Or put another way , do n't blame piracy for The Jay Leno Show or Saw VI .
In fact ( although the huge biases make it hard to trust any study of the topic ) , I would n't be surprised if most pirates have n't greatly reduced their spending on media as distribution costs fell ; but rather started accumulating more bits for the same amount of money .
Once content producers figure out how to make money in a world without physical media ( which requires them to figure out how to offer their customers what they want at a prices they 'll pay -- you 'd think it would n't be so hard ) , the content will flow again .
There may be less money available to create it , and they may need to change the ways they fund it , but people with a story to tell will find a way to tell their story .
The radio and the phonograph did n't kill live music , movies did n't kill live theater , television did n't kill movies , and the VCR did n't kill anything .
In all of these cases there were big winners and big losers , and the scope and/or quality of the content may have morphed over the decades , but there is more stuff ( both good and bad ) than ever before .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are only so many hours in a day, and there are only so many movies and television shows that people can consume.
If the costs of reproduction and distribution fall precipitously, people aren't going to see ten movies a week or watch TV for an additional four hours a day.
They'll just spend less money to consume about the same amount of content.
That would be true even in a world with no piracy.
And with more bandwidth to fill, that smaller pool of money needs to fund the creation of even more content.
Risky, expensive productions were going to wither away even if BitTorrent had never been created.
Or put another way, don't blame piracy for The Jay Leno Show or Saw VI.
In fact (although the huge biases make it hard to trust any study of the topic), I wouldn't be surprised if most pirates haven't greatly reduced their spending on media as distribution costs fell; but rather started accumulating more bits for the same amount of money.
Once content producers figure out how to make money in a world without physical media (which requires them to figure out how to offer their customers what they want at a prices they'll pay -- you'd think it wouldn't be so hard), the content will flow again.
There may be less money available to create it, and they may need to change the ways they fund it, but people with a story to tell will find a way to tell their story.
The radio and the phonograph didn't kill live music, movies didn't kill live theater, television didn't kill movies, and the VCR didn't kill anything.
In all of these cases there were big winners and big losers, and the scope and/or quality of the content may have morphed over the decades, but there is more stuff (both good and bad) than ever before.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245118</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245574</id>
	<title>Re:Time to get a Relakks account</title>
	<author>jandersen</author>
	<datestamp>1259338320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not sure; I think the real deal is to stay low-profile, if you want to do something that is illegal - or even quit doing it. A bit like growing cannabis - if you grow a plant or two in your garden, you will probably get off with a warning, if the police go as far as intervening, which they may well not do, since they have far more important things to do, but if you grow a major crop of the stuff, they will of course come after you, and you will have a longish holiday.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not sure ; I think the real deal is to stay low-profile , if you want to do something that is illegal - or even quit doing it .
A bit like growing cannabis - if you grow a plant or two in your garden , you will probably get off with a warning , if the police go as far as intervening , which they may well not do , since they have far more important things to do , but if you grow a major crop of the stuff , they will of course come after you , and you will have a longish holiday .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not sure; I think the real deal is to stay low-profile, if you want to do something that is illegal - or even quit doing it.
A bit like growing cannabis - if you grow a plant or two in your garden, you will probably get off with a warning, if the police go as far as intervening, which they may well not do, since they have far more important things to do, but if you grow a major crop of the stuff, they will of course come after you, and you will have a longish holiday.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244838</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30251166</id>
	<title>Re:Time to get a Relakks account</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259328480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Add me to the list.</p><p>I keep my p2p client running all day, mostly uploading, not downloading. I've only downloaded a Hollywood movie in the last months. No music, either. OTOH, I use p2p to download foreign movies and old movies that will never be shown or otherwise distributed in my country.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Add me to the list.I keep my p2p client running all day , mostly uploading , not downloading .
I 've only downloaded a Hollywood movie in the last months .
No music , either .
OTOH , I use p2p to download foreign movies and old movies that will never be shown or otherwise distributed in my country .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Add me to the list.I keep my p2p client running all day, mostly uploading, not downloading.
I've only downloaded a Hollywood movie in the last months.
No music, either.
OTOH, I use p2p to download foreign movies and old movies that will never be shown or otherwise distributed in my country.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30247030</id>
	<title>Another Tool in the Box...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259347740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't forget <a href="http://phoenixlabs.org/pg2/" title="phoenixlabs.org" rel="nofollow">Peer Guardian</a> [phoenixlabs.org]!</p><p>Peer Guardian basically denies any connection from known hostile IP addresses.  It works for Anti-p2p, spammers, scammers and adware sites, keeping them from ever connecting to your machine.  If they can't see your torrent, then they don't have as strong a case to file a letter.</p><p>Remember, no defense is perfect by itself.  But if you use a layered defense, such as encrypted torrents, programs such as PeerGuardian to deny connections from bad guys, and other tactics, then you can greatly increase your level of protection.  But at the end of the day, nothing will protect you from the shotgun approach these jerks are using.  It's going to come to a point where anyone using ANY form of torrent client is going to be automagically guilty of a crime.</p><p>Until that time, don't be ignorant of the tools you have to fight them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't forget Peer Guardian [ phoenixlabs.org ] ! Peer Guardian basically denies any connection from known hostile IP addresses .
It works for Anti-p2p , spammers , scammers and adware sites , keeping them from ever connecting to your machine .
If they ca n't see your torrent , then they do n't have as strong a case to file a letter.Remember , no defense is perfect by itself .
But if you use a layered defense , such as encrypted torrents , programs such as PeerGuardian to deny connections from bad guys , and other tactics , then you can greatly increase your level of protection .
But at the end of the day , nothing will protect you from the shotgun approach these jerks are using .
It 's going to come to a point where anyone using ANY form of torrent client is going to be automagically guilty of a crime.Until that time , do n't be ignorant of the tools you have to fight them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't forget Peer Guardian [phoenixlabs.org]!Peer Guardian basically denies any connection from known hostile IP addresses.
It works for Anti-p2p, spammers, scammers and adware sites, keeping them from ever connecting to your machine.
If they can't see your torrent, then they don't have as strong a case to file a letter.Remember, no defense is perfect by itself.
But if you use a layered defense, such as encrypted torrents, programs such as PeerGuardian to deny connections from bad guys, and other tactics, then you can greatly increase your level of protection.
But at the end of the day, nothing will protect you from the shotgun approach these jerks are using.
It's going to come to a point where anyone using ANY form of torrent client is going to be automagically guilty of a crime.Until that time, don't be ignorant of the tools you have to fight them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244786</id>
	<title>It will never end</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259331180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We'll build a decentralized network before we allow you to dictate which information we may copy. We have the technology, we have the know how and you're giving us the motivation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 'll build a decentralized network before we allow you to dictate which information we may copy .
We have the technology , we have the know how and you 're giving us the motivation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We'll build a decentralized network before we allow you to dictate which information we may copy.
We have the technology, we have the know how and you're giving us the motivation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245144</id>
	<title>Time to encrypt everything.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259334960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How much more of this crap will it take before all internet traffic is switched to use HTTPS, PGP etc. ?</p><p>What is it going to take for the geeks of the world to say "enough of this crap" ?</p><p>It is our internet after all.  We built it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How much more of this crap will it take before all internet traffic is switched to use HTTPS , PGP etc .
? What is it going to take for the geeks of the world to say " enough of this crap " ? It is our internet after all .
We built it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How much more of this crap will it take before all internet traffic is switched to use HTTPS, PGP etc.
?What is it going to take for the geeks of the world to say "enough of this crap" ?It is our internet after all.
We built it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244762</id>
	<title>Christmas gifts, they start here.shoes,handbag,ect</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259330760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://www.coolforsale.com<br>Dear ladies and gentlemen Hello, In order to meet Christmas, Site launched Christmas spree, welcome new and old customers come to participate in the  there are unexpected surprises, look forward to your arrival. Only this site have this treatmentOur goal is "Best quality, Best reputation , Best services". Your satisfaction is our main pursue. You can find the best products from us, meeting your different needs.<br>Ladies and Gentlemen  weicome  to  my  coolforsale.com.Here,there  are   the   most   fashion   products . Pass by but don't   miss  it.Select  your  favorite  clothing!  Welcome  to come  next   time ! Thank you!     http://www.coolforsale.com/productlist.asp?id=s76 (Tracksuit w)<br>ugg boot,POLO hoody,Jacket,<br>Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33<br>Nike shox(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $35<br>Handbags(Coach lv fendi d&amp;g) $35<br>Tshirts (Polo<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,ed hardy,lacoste) $16<br>free shipping<br>Thanks!!! Advance wish you a merry Christmas.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.coolforsale.comDear ladies and gentlemen Hello , In order to meet Christmas , Site launched Christmas spree , welcome new and old customers come to participate in the there are unexpected surprises , look forward to your arrival .
Only this site have this treatmentOur goal is " Best quality , Best reputation , Best services " .
Your satisfaction is our main pursue .
You can find the best products from us , meeting your different needs.Ladies and Gentlemen weicome to my coolforsale.com.Here,there are the most fashion products .
Pass by but do n't miss it.Select your favorite clothing !
Welcome to come next time !
Thank you !
http : //www.coolforsale.com/productlist.asp ? id = s76 ( Tracksuit w ) ugg boot,POLO hoody,Jacket,Air jordan ( 1-24 ) shoes $ 33Nike shox ( R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3 ) $ 35Handbags ( Coach lv fendi d&amp;g ) $ 35Tshirts ( Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste ) $ 16free shippingThanks ! ! !
Advance wish you a merry Christmas .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.coolforsale.comDear ladies and gentlemen Hello, In order to meet Christmas, Site launched Christmas spree, welcome new and old customers come to participate in the  there are unexpected surprises, look forward to your arrival.
Only this site have this treatmentOur goal is "Best quality, Best reputation , Best services".
Your satisfaction is our main pursue.
You can find the best products from us, meeting your different needs.Ladies and Gentlemen  weicome  to  my  coolforsale.com.Here,there  are   the   most   fashion   products .
Pass by but don't   miss  it.Select  your  favorite  clothing!
Welcome  to come  next   time !
Thank you!
http://www.coolforsale.com/productlist.asp?id=s76 (Tracksuit w)ugg boot,POLO hoody,Jacket,Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33Nike shox(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $35Handbags(Coach lv fendi d&amp;g) $35Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $16free shippingThanks!!!
Advance wish you a merry Christmas.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245180</id>
	<title>Re:Need a way to encrypt Limewire now</title>
	<author>jank1887</author>
	<datestamp>1259335260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>yes, you can find them here:</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison\_of\_BitTorrent\_clients#Features\_I" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison\_of\_BitTorrent\_clients#Features\_I</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>Sort according to Encryption setting. note you won't see LimeWire on the list. Don't be scared.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>yes , you can find them here : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison \ _of \ _BitTorrent \ _clients # Features \ _I [ wikipedia.org ] Sort according to Encryption setting .
note you wo n't see LimeWire on the list .
Do n't be scared .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yes, you can find them here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison\_of\_BitTorrent\_clients#Features\_I [wikipedia.org]Sort according to Encryption setting.
note you won't see LimeWire on the list.
Don't be scared.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245052</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246280</id>
	<title>Re:Need a way to encrypt Limewire now</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259342700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One Swarm isn't anonymous. It is privacy preserving, you choose if you only want to connect to known hosts. The default for most users is to add the community list to the known or accepted hosts - anyone can be part of the community group so it defeats the purpose of using the software.</p><p>We need a new p2p focused anonymous system.</p><p>Tor is no good for privacy as it has been broken, its not trivial to break but it is still not secure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One Swarm is n't anonymous .
It is privacy preserving , you choose if you only want to connect to known hosts .
The default for most users is to add the community list to the known or accepted hosts - anyone can be part of the community group so it defeats the purpose of using the software.We need a new p2p focused anonymous system.Tor is no good for privacy as it has been broken , its not trivial to break but it is still not secure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One Swarm isn't anonymous.
It is privacy preserving, you choose if you only want to connect to known hosts.
The default for most users is to add the community list to the known or accepted hosts - anyone can be part of the community group so it defeats the purpose of using the software.We need a new p2p focused anonymous system.Tor is no good for privacy as it has been broken, its not trivial to break but it is still not secure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245206</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30254024</id>
	<title>Re:Something-Something Wants to be Free</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259417100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> "hollywood information" vs. "regular information"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" hollywood information " vs. " regular information "</tokentext>
<sentencetext> "hollywood information" vs. "regular information"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244850</id>
	<title>Re:Flamebait</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259331840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did you bother reading the FA?  Of course not, this is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/..  If you had, you would see that this is legal sabre rattling.  Certainly no worse than the RIAA taking children to court in the US.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did you bother reading the FA ?
Of course not , this is /.. If you had , you would see that this is legal sabre rattling .
Certainly no worse than the RIAA taking children to court in the US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did you bother reading the FA?
Of course not, this is /..  If you had, you would see that this is legal sabre rattling.
Certainly no worse than the RIAA taking children to court in the US.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30247122</id>
	<title>Re:BT / Virgin Media / etc</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259348520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; BT being the biggest ISP in the UK by quite a big margin*</p><p>Here you go, from OFCOM in September:</p><p>http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/4044-q1-2009-market-data-published-by-ofcom.html</p><p>BT Retail have now actually been surpassed in residential numbers by TalkTalk, with 4.7 million LLU customers after they consumed Tiscali.</p><p>Bizarrely, these oversubscribed and impersonal networks actually *attract* more customers every quarter!  BT Retail added 72,000 net in the last quarter, despite rubbish service.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; BT being the biggest ISP in the UK by quite a big margin * Here you go , from OFCOM in September : http : //www.thinkbroadband.com/news/4044-q1-2009-market-data-published-by-ofcom.htmlBT Retail have now actually been surpassed in residential numbers by TalkTalk , with 4.7 million LLU customers after they consumed Tiscali.Bizarrely , these oversubscribed and impersonal networks actually * attract * more customers every quarter !
BT Retail added 72,000 net in the last quarter , despite rubbish service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; BT being the biggest ISP in the UK by quite a big margin*Here you go, from OFCOM in September:http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/4044-q1-2009-market-data-published-by-ofcom.htmlBT Retail have now actually been surpassed in residential numbers by TalkTalk, with 4.7 million LLU customers after they consumed Tiscali.Bizarrely, these oversubscribed and impersonal networks actually *attract* more customers every quarter!
BT Retail added 72,000 net in the last quarter, despite rubbish service.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244858</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244946</id>
	<title>Re:Thank gawd I use FTP</title>
	<author>twoshortplanks</author>
	<datestamp>1259332860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Er...in this case BT refers to the communications company British Telecom, not Bittorrent.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Er...in this case BT refers to the communications company British Telecom , not Bittorrent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Er...in this case BT refers to the communications company British Telecom, not Bittorrent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244808</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245376</id>
	<title>For one, it's easy to get around</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1259336940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Now what I don't understand is that they don't seed the tracked with some false IPs</p></div><p>Under the assumption that the party sending out the letters is doing the due diligence thing, they'd connect to the IP claiming to seed and ask it for a chunk of the torrented bit sequence.  If the client doesn't get one, there's no infringement going no.</p><p>Now, we can discuss whether the due diligence assumption is realistic, of course, but if I were them and I was genuine about preventing piracy (as opposed to going scaremongering), that's what I'd do.  (fwiw...)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now what I do n't understand is that they do n't seed the tracked with some false IPsUnder the assumption that the party sending out the letters is doing the due diligence thing , they 'd connect to the IP claiming to seed and ask it for a chunk of the torrented bit sequence .
If the client does n't get one , there 's no infringement going no.Now , we can discuss whether the due diligence assumption is realistic , of course , but if I were them and I was genuine about preventing piracy ( as opposed to going scaremongering ) , that 's what I 'd do .
( fwiw... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now what I don't understand is that they don't seed the tracked with some false IPsUnder the assumption that the party sending out the letters is doing the due diligence thing, they'd connect to the IP claiming to seed and ask it for a chunk of the torrented bit sequence.
If the client doesn't get one, there's no infringement going no.Now, we can discuss whether the due diligence assumption is realistic, of course, but if I were them and I was genuine about preventing piracy (as opposed to going scaremongering), that's what I'd do.
(fwiw...)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246230</id>
	<title>'suspected'</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1259342280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So you can be fined in the UK just for *suspicion*? And who is sending these letters, the industry of the court? If its the industry as the story suggests, id say there some legal issues with making threats with no proof.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So you can be fined in the UK just for * suspicion * ?
And who is sending these letters , the industry of the court ?
If its the industry as the story suggests , id say there some legal issues with making threats with no proof .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you can be fined in the UK just for *suspicion*?
And who is sending these letters, the industry of the court?
If its the industry as the story suggests, id say there some legal issues with making threats with no proof.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30247586</id>
	<title>Re:Flamebait</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259351280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>assumes that everybody outside of the Party is a criminal</p></div></blockquote><p>
Actually the Party don't give a toss about the prols. They give them porn, beer and movies and leave them too it. They figure they're too stupid and docile to revolt.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>assumes that everybody outside of the Party is a criminal Actually the Party do n't give a toss about the prols .
They give them porn , beer and movies and leave them too it .
They figure they 're too stupid and docile to revolt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>assumes that everybody outside of the Party is a criminal
Actually the Party don't give a toss about the prols.
They give them porn, beer and movies and leave them too it.
They figure they're too stupid and docile to revolt.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245654</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30247234</id>
	<title>Re:It will never end</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259349180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>meanwhile honest people like me just rent movies from amazon at low cost and zero hassle. And I don't haver to act like a fucking undercover agent to enjoy my perfect quality DVD movies.</p><p>Enjoy your play acting at being a rebel kiddo. The rest of us just enjoy watching movies without all this bullshit hassle you pirate kids put up with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>meanwhile honest people like me just rent movies from amazon at low cost and zero hassle .
And I do n't haver to act like a fucking undercover agent to enjoy my perfect quality DVD movies.Enjoy your play acting at being a rebel kiddo .
The rest of us just enjoy watching movies without all this bullshit hassle you pirate kids put up with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>meanwhile honest people like me just rent movies from amazon at low cost and zero hassle.
And I don't haver to act like a fucking undercover agent to enjoy my perfect quality DVD movies.Enjoy your play acting at being a rebel kiddo.
The rest of us just enjoy watching movies without all this bullshit hassle you pirate kids put up with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244786</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30253388</id>
	<title>Re:Why, oh why, oh why?</title>
	<author>mpe</author>
	<datestamp>1259404260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Isn't the logical conclusion that if millions of people find a particular type of behaviour acceptable that it should be legalised? Otherwise it's socially unjust.</i> <br> <br>That line has previously been crossed with drug prohibition. Even though effects of prohibition are more damaging to society than the most dangerous drugs.<br> <br> <i>We're talking about copyright infringement. If we think it's a bad thing then we should also be allowed to decide how bad the punishment is, whether it's a small fine or a prison sentence.
<br>
I visit the cinema on average once a week and every time the copyright warning is displayed and mentions 10 years in prison for recording a movie in a cinema I cringe. That's more than people get for killing and maiming people, robbing banks and committing other violent crimes.</i> <br> <br>It's also more than you'd get for actually stealing a DVD or even sneaking into the cinema without a ticket.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't the logical conclusion that if millions of people find a particular type of behaviour acceptable that it should be legalised ?
Otherwise it 's socially unjust .
That line has previously been crossed with drug prohibition .
Even though effects of prohibition are more damaging to society than the most dangerous drugs .
We 're talking about copyright infringement .
If we think it 's a bad thing then we should also be allowed to decide how bad the punishment is , whether it 's a small fine or a prison sentence .
I visit the cinema on average once a week and every time the copyright warning is displayed and mentions 10 years in prison for recording a movie in a cinema I cringe .
That 's more than people get for killing and maiming people , robbing banks and committing other violent crimes .
It 's also more than you 'd get for actually stealing a DVD or even sneaking into the cinema without a ticket .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't the logical conclusion that if millions of people find a particular type of behaviour acceptable that it should be legalised?
Otherwise it's socially unjust.
That line has previously been crossed with drug prohibition.
Even though effects of prohibition are more damaging to society than the most dangerous drugs.
We're talking about copyright infringement.
If we think it's a bad thing then we should also be allowed to decide how bad the punishment is, whether it's a small fine or a prison sentence.
I visit the cinema on average once a week and every time the copyright warning is displayed and mentions 10 years in prison for recording a movie in a cinema I cringe.
That's more than people get for killing and maiming people, robbing banks and committing other violent crimes.
It's also more than you'd get for actually stealing a DVD or even sneaking into the cinema without a ticket.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244948</id>
	<title>Re:Politicians</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259332860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's true that, because of illegal downloading, stars are going to live in small homes and die of starvation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's true that , because of illegal downloading , stars are going to live in small homes and die of starvation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's true that, because of illegal downloading, stars are going to live in small homes and die of starvation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245440</id>
	<title>Re:Time to encrypt everything.</title>
	<author>mrsquid0</author>
	<datestamp>1259337300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;It is our internet after all. We built it.</p><p>The internet was build primarily by various universities, governments, and the US military, and it basically remained their toy for about twenty years.  In the early 1990s a clever piece of software came along that allowed people without deep computer knowledge (well beyond that of the typical BBS/Fidonet user of the time) to use it easily.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; It is our internet after all .
We built it.The internet was build primarily by various universities , governments , and the US military , and it basically remained their toy for about twenty years .
In the early 1990s a clever piece of software came along that allowed people without deep computer knowledge ( well beyond that of the typical BBS/Fidonet user of the time ) to use it easily .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;It is our internet after all.
We built it.The internet was build primarily by various universities, governments, and the US military, and it basically remained their toy for about twenty years.
In the early 1990s a clever piece of software came along that allowed people without deep computer knowledge (well beyond that of the typical BBS/Fidonet user of the time) to use it easily.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245520</id>
	<title>Re:Politicians</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259337960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only thing I want to know is - if you pay, are you then indemnified from further prosecution?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only thing I want to know is - if you pay , are you then indemnified from further prosecution ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only thing I want to know is - if you pay, are you then indemnified from further prosecution?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244846</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244808
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30248010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245052
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244956
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246994
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244836
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244808
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245338
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245888
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245032
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244836
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244956
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245268
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30250170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30247234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246280
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245052
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245144
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30248178
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244788
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244850
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245510
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30253388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244956
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245008
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30247122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244808
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30247422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244956
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30253272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244838
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244956
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30247586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245574
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244838
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244808
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30253526
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30254024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30253446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30251166
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244838
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245052
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30250132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30248854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244808
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244836
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30255274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245052
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_077245_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_077245.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244782
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245034
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244890
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245146
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245258
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245654
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30250132
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30247586
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244850
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246282
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_077245.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244848
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_077245.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244956
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245998
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30253388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245734
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245122
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30247422
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_077245.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245102
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_077245.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246230
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_077245.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245144
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245440
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_077245.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244808
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245724
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244832
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30248854
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245376
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246270
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244946
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_077245.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245238
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_077245.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244838
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245150
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30251166
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30253272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245574
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_077245.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245470
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_077245.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244786
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244964
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30247234
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30250170
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244844
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30254024
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30253446
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245118
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246358
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30255274
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245602
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30253526
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245484
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245888
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_077245.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245052
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245472
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245180
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245206
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30248010
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246280
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_077245.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244836
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245136
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245186
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246994
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_077245.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244822
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_077245.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244966
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_077245.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244858
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30247122
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245510
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_077245.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245338
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246394
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245520
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244948
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_077245.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245032
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30246934
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_077245.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244788
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30248178
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_077245.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30244762
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_077245.30245008
</commentlist>
</conversation>
