<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_01_009247</id>
	<title>UK Pub Reportedly Fined For Illegal Wi-Fi Download</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1259671440000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>superglaze and several other readers noted a piece up on ZDNet.co.uk reporting that last summer a pub in the UK was <a href="http://news.zdnet.co.uk/communications/0,1000000085,39909136,00.htm">fined &pound;8,000 after a customer downloaded copyrighted material</a> on its Wi-Fi connection. According to the article, whose source was the Wi-Fi hotspot provider, it was a civil action and the pub was not identified because its owner had not given permission to release the details. Techdirt is <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091128/1454517098.shtml">skeptical as to whether or not the reported fine happened</a>, given the sketchiness surrounding the details. If true, the ruling seems baffling to UK legal experts, according to ZDNet: "Internet law professor Lilian Edwards, of Sheffield Law School, told ZDNet that companies that operate a public Wi-Fi hotspot should 'not be responsible in theory' for users' illegal downloads under 'existing substantive copyright law.'" In a follow-up article, <a href="http://community.zdnet.co.uk/blog/0,1000000567,10014530o-2000331761b,00.htm">Prof. Edwards cautions</a> that such hotspot operators should "watch out for the pile of copyright infringement warnings coming your way."</htmltext>
<tokenext>superglaze and several other readers noted a piece up on ZDNet.co.uk reporting that last summer a pub in the UK was fined   8,000 after a customer downloaded copyrighted material on its Wi-Fi connection .
According to the article , whose source was the Wi-Fi hotspot provider , it was a civil action and the pub was not identified because its owner had not given permission to release the details .
Techdirt is skeptical as to whether or not the reported fine happened , given the sketchiness surrounding the details .
If true , the ruling seems baffling to UK legal experts , according to ZDNet : " Internet law professor Lilian Edwards , of Sheffield Law School , told ZDNet that companies that operate a public Wi-Fi hotspot should 'not be responsible in theory ' for users ' illegal downloads under 'existing substantive copyright law .
' " In a follow-up article , Prof. Edwards cautions that such hotspot operators should " watch out for the pile of copyright infringement warnings coming your way .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>superglaze and several other readers noted a piece up on ZDNet.co.uk reporting that last summer a pub in the UK was fined £8,000 after a customer downloaded copyrighted material on its Wi-Fi connection.
According to the article, whose source was the Wi-Fi hotspot provider, it was a civil action and the pub was not identified because its owner had not given permission to release the details.
Techdirt is skeptical as to whether or not the reported fine happened, given the sketchiness surrounding the details.
If true, the ruling seems baffling to UK legal experts, according to ZDNet: "Internet law professor Lilian Edwards, of Sheffield Law School, told ZDNet that companies that operate a public Wi-Fi hotspot should 'not be responsible in theory' for users' illegal downloads under 'existing substantive copyright law.
'" In a follow-up article, Prof. Edwards cautions that such hotspot operators should "watch out for the pile of copyright infringement warnings coming your way.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278256</id>
	<title>Re:Small Hotspot providers have no idea of risk</title>
	<author>Alwin Henseler</author>
	<datestamp>1259592420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Today you can get box solutions for under $1000 dollars to provide basic Identity Management, monitoring, logging and firewall/proxy control to give you more control but many of those solutions are still not enough to prevent file sharing, or provide extended logging with 12 months or more records in case you have to prove a legal issue</p></div><p>Get real. For a small business owner, a 'under $1000 dollars box solution with monitoring, logging etc.' is massive overkill. For a restaurant or small hotel, it's nice to provide your guests with free wireless internet access. But that's simply a service, a bonus, and nothing more. As provider of that extra service:

</p><ul>
<li> You probably don't have the money to spend much on it, since it isn't a necessity in any way (not for you, probably not for your guests). </li><li> You don't have the time or (wo)manpower (or expertise) to fiddle with it much, monitor activity, check logfiles or such. Your personnel is busy pouring coffee, you're busy running your business. </li></ul><p>

Basically you'd want a small, cheap 'thingie' that hooks up to your internet connection, throw that in a corner, and forget about it until a guest asks why the wireless internet isn't working.

Holding you responsible, or expecting you to monitor what happens on that service, is a) unrealistic, and b) unreasonable. It would be much too ask even for an ISP, whose breat and butter it is. For a small business owner, it's just a sideshow. Legislators (and courts) should keep this in mind.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Today you can get box solutions for under $ 1000 dollars to provide basic Identity Management , monitoring , logging and firewall/proxy control to give you more control but many of those solutions are still not enough to prevent file sharing , or provide extended logging with 12 months or more records in case you have to prove a legal issueGet real .
For a small business owner , a 'under $ 1000 dollars box solution with monitoring , logging etc .
' is massive overkill .
For a restaurant or small hotel , it 's nice to provide your guests with free wireless internet access .
But that 's simply a service , a bonus , and nothing more .
As provider of that extra service : You probably do n't have the money to spend much on it , since it is n't a necessity in any way ( not for you , probably not for your guests ) .
You do n't have the time or ( wo ) manpower ( or expertise ) to fiddle with it much , monitor activity , check logfiles or such .
Your personnel is busy pouring coffee , you 're busy running your business .
Basically you 'd want a small , cheap 'thingie ' that hooks up to your internet connection , throw that in a corner , and forget about it until a guest asks why the wireless internet is n't working .
Holding you responsible , or expecting you to monitor what happens on that service , is a ) unrealistic , and b ) unreasonable .
It would be much too ask even for an ISP , whose breat and butter it is .
For a small business owner , it 's just a sideshow .
Legislators ( and courts ) should keep this in mind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Today you can get box solutions for under $1000 dollars to provide basic Identity Management, monitoring, logging and firewall/proxy control to give you more control but many of those solutions are still not enough to prevent file sharing, or provide extended logging with 12 months or more records in case you have to prove a legal issueGet real.
For a small business owner, a 'under $1000 dollars box solution with monitoring, logging etc.
' is massive overkill.
For a restaurant or small hotel, it's nice to provide your guests with free wireless internet access.
But that's simply a service, a bonus, and nothing more.
As provider of that extra service:


 You probably don't have the money to spend much on it, since it isn't a necessity in any way (not for you, probably not for your guests).
You don't have the time or (wo)manpower (or expertise) to fiddle with it much, monitor activity, check logfiles or such.
Your personnel is busy pouring coffee, you're busy running your business.
Basically you'd want a small, cheap 'thingie' that hooks up to your internet connection, throw that in a corner, and forget about it until a guest asks why the wireless internet isn't working.
Holding you responsible, or expecting you to monitor what happens on that service, is a) unrealistic, and b) unreasonable.
It would be much too ask even for an ISP, whose breat and butter it is.
For a small business owner, it's just a sideshow.
Legislators (and courts) should keep this in mind.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278586</id>
	<title>Re:Simply unacceptable.</title>
	<author>interkin3tic</author>
	<datestamp>1259595780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you falsify the MAC or provide wrongful data, you get life in prison.</p></div><p>Noob question: was that hyperbole?  I can never tell when talking about laws, especially ones that the mafIAA has pushed though.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you falsify the MAC or provide wrongful data , you get life in prison.Noob question : was that hyperbole ?
I can never tell when talking about laws , especially ones that the mafIAA has pushed though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you falsify the MAC or provide wrongful data, you get life in prison.Noob question: was that hyperbole?
I can never tell when talking about laws, especially ones that the mafIAA has pushed though.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277840</id>
	<title>This story brought to you by...</title>
	<author>plover</author>
	<datestamp>1259589120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This story brought to you by the RIAA, striking fear across the globe.</p><p>No fine too ridiculous!  No defendant too vulnerable!  No sense of proportion!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This story brought to you by the RIAA , striking fear across the globe.No fine too ridiculous !
No defendant too vulnerable !
No sense of proportion !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This story brought to you by the RIAA, striking fear across the globe.No fine too ridiculous!
No defendant too vulnerable!
No sense of proportion!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278068</id>
	<title>This is getting silly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259590920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I thought it was all over when thepiratebay.org went down with jail sentences and now this.  They are on to us boys...watch out.  Wait, I just finished d/ling shakira.  I'm a pirate...errrrr matey</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought it was all over when thepiratebay.org went down with jail sentences and now this .
They are on to us boys...watch out .
Wait , I just finished d/ling shakira .
I 'm a pirate...errrrr matey</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought it was all over when thepiratebay.org went down with jail sentences and now this.
They are on to us boys...watch out.
Wait, I just finished d/ling shakira.
I'm a pirate...errrrr matey</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278940</id>
	<title>Re:Simply unacceptable.</title>
	<author>tg123</author>
	<datestamp>1259598600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thank God, Buddha various Shinto deities etc.   Japan does not have such laws or you would be stuffed.</p><p>Just about every Hotel,Coffee shop, Hostel, Train station , Airport in Japan has free WIFI.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank God , Buddha various Shinto deities etc .
Japan does not have such laws or you would be stuffed.Just about every Hotel,Coffee shop , Hostel , Train station , Airport in Japan has free WIFI .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank God, Buddha various Shinto deities etc.
Japan does not have such laws or you would be stuffed.Just about every Hotel,Coffee shop, Hostel, Train station , Airport in Japan has free WIFI.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278400</id>
	<title>It is only a matter of time ..</title>
	<author>sigjuice</author>
	<datestamp>1259594160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They won't be satisfied by just suing just the hotspots.  Real soon, they will run traceroute and sue every hop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They wo n't be satisfied by just suing just the hotspots .
Real soon , they will run traceroute and sue every hop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They won't be satisfied by just suing just the hotspots.
Real soon, they will run traceroute and sue every hop.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278792</id>
	<title>big picture, distribution?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259597460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought the copyright laws related to the unlawful distribution of a file you were not authorized by the copyright owner to distribute.  How is you downloading a file distributing it?  Isn't the person offering the file the one offering it for distribution?  Maybe the law is changing to mean that since you downloaded it, YOU made the unauthorized copy?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought the copyright laws related to the unlawful distribution of a file you were not authorized by the copyright owner to distribute .
How is you downloading a file distributing it ?
Is n't the person offering the file the one offering it for distribution ?
Maybe the law is changing to mean that since you downloaded it , YOU made the unauthorized copy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought the copyright laws related to the unlawful distribution of a file you were not authorized by the copyright owner to distribute.
How is you downloading a file distributing it?
Isn't the person offering the file the one offering it for distribution?
Maybe the law is changing to mean that since you downloaded it, YOU made the unauthorized copy?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278516</id>
	<title>Re:Simply unacceptable.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259595300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Essentially you are just being a mini-ISP. You are providing internet to them. If you can be fined for what they download, then surely your ISP should be able to be fined as well?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Essentially you are just being a mini-ISP .
You are providing internet to them .
If you can be fined for what they download , then surely your ISP should be able to be fined as well ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Essentially you are just being a mini-ISP.
You are providing internet to them.
If you can be fined for what they download, then surely your ISP should be able to be fined as well?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278548</id>
	<title>Re:Simply unacceptable.</title>
	<author>interkin3tic</author>
	<datestamp>1259595480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's time to reinforce the concept that I am responsible for my actions, and nobody else.</p> </div><p>Well yeah, but you probably have less money than the pub does, so going after the pub is better.</p><p>Wait, were we talking about what gets us the most money or something silly like what is fair and logical?</p><p>Sincerely,<br>Big Content</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's time to reinforce the concept that I am responsible for my actions , and nobody else .
Well yeah , but you probably have less money than the pub does , so going after the pub is better.Wait , were we talking about what gets us the most money or something silly like what is fair and logical ? Sincerely,Big Content</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's time to reinforce the concept that I am responsible for my actions, and nobody else.
Well yeah, but you probably have less money than the pub does, so going after the pub is better.Wait, were we talking about what gets us the most money or something silly like what is fair and logical?Sincerely,Big Content
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277960</id>
	<title>Re:Simply unacceptable.</title>
	<author>ChromeAeonium</author>
	<datestamp>1259589840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If this report is true, someone who was mugged by a guy at night who was using the government's streetlights to commit the crime should sue the government.  Turnabout's fair play.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If this report is true , someone who was mugged by a guy at night who was using the government 's streetlights to commit the crime should sue the government .
Turnabout 's fair play .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this report is true, someone who was mugged by a guy at night who was using the government's streetlights to commit the crime should sue the government.
Turnabout's fair play.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30282222</id>
	<title>They can't have it both ways</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259677800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This reminds me of <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/17/1956233" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">this story</a> [slashdot.org] where a man was prosecuted for using someone else's open access point.  It seems that there is no clear definition in the UK as to who is responsible for the usage of an open access point.  Somebody needs to put some geeks in charge as these law makers don't know what they're doing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This reminds me of this story [ slashdot.org ] where a man was prosecuted for using someone else 's open access point .
It seems that there is no clear definition in the UK as to who is responsible for the usage of an open access point .
Somebody needs to put some geeks in charge as these law makers do n't know what they 're doing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This reminds me of this story [slashdot.org] where a man was prosecuted for using someone else's open access point.
It seems that there is no clear definition in the UK as to who is responsible for the usage of an open access point.
Somebody needs to put some geeks in charge as these law makers don't know what they're doing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278496</id>
	<title>Just so I'm clear</title>
	<author>nightfire-unique</author>
	<datestamp>1259595180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If one of their customers had ordered a CD with a fraudulent credit card (over their payphone), would the fine have been more, or less?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If one of their customers had ordered a CD with a fraudulent credit card ( over their payphone ) , would the fine have been more , or less ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If one of their customers had ordered a CD with a fraudulent credit card (over their payphone), would the fine have been more, or less?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277828</id>
	<title>Simply unacceptable.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259589060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, no, and more no.</p><p>This sort of litigation is unwise at best.  If providing network access makes one responsible for the users' actions, that will severely impact availability of service.  Hotels, coffee shops, airports and the like all become liable for their users.  Bad move.  What if I power my laptop using electricity at the pub but use an AirCard to use a cell phone network to infringe copyright?  Ultimately this is foolishness, regardless of how copyright infringement is viewed.</p><p>It's time to reinforce the concept that I am responsible for my actions, and nobody else.  Aiding and abetting is something entirely different from what a WiFi provider does.  Just because copyright owners can't actually track down the person infringing doesn't make it okay to pick the next guy up as the source of the proverbial pound of flesh.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , no , and more no.This sort of litigation is unwise at best .
If providing network access makes one responsible for the users ' actions , that will severely impact availability of service .
Hotels , coffee shops , airports and the like all become liable for their users .
Bad move .
What if I power my laptop using electricity at the pub but use an AirCard to use a cell phone network to infringe copyright ?
Ultimately this is foolishness , regardless of how copyright infringement is viewed.It 's time to reinforce the concept that I am responsible for my actions , and nobody else .
Aiding and abetting is something entirely different from what a WiFi provider does .
Just because copyright owners ca n't actually track down the person infringing does n't make it okay to pick the next guy up as the source of the proverbial pound of flesh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, no, and more no.This sort of litigation is unwise at best.
If providing network access makes one responsible for the users' actions, that will severely impact availability of service.
Hotels, coffee shops, airports and the like all become liable for their users.
Bad move.
What if I power my laptop using electricity at the pub but use an AirCard to use a cell phone network to infringe copyright?
Ultimately this is foolishness, regardless of how copyright infringement is viewed.It's time to reinforce the concept that I am responsible for my actions, and nobody else.
Aiding and abetting is something entirely different from what a WiFi provider does.
Just because copyright owners can't actually track down the person infringing doesn't make it okay to pick the next guy up as the source of the proverbial pound of flesh.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30282828</id>
	<title>Re:This story brought to you by...</title>
	<author>gsslay</author>
	<datestamp>1259681220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Where is the RIAA involved in this story?

See, if you can't point out for me I might end up thinking your post was a mindless knee jerk recital.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Where is the RIAA involved in this story ?
See , if you ca n't point out for me I might end up thinking your post was a mindless knee jerk recital .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where is the RIAA involved in this story?
See, if you can't point out for me I might end up thinking your post was a mindless knee jerk recital.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277840</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278754</id>
	<title>Re:Small Hotspot providers have no idea of risk</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259597220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't really think you have the slightest idea of what you are writing about.<br>Certainly - you ARNAL ( neither am I )</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't really think you have the slightest idea of what you are writing about.Certainly - you ARNAL ( neither am I )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't really think you have the slightest idea of what you are writing about.Certainly - you ARNAL ( neither am I )</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30297288</id>
	<title>Re:This story brought to you by...</title>
	<author>vuffi\_raa</author>
	<datestamp>1259596620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This story brought to you by the RIAA, striking fear across the globe.</p></div><p>not really, since the lesson is: download copywritten material and pay a fine- unless it is someone else's network- then they are responsible<br>it fails to strike fear when someone else is getting nailed for your actions</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This story brought to you by the RIAA , striking fear across the globe.not really , since the lesson is : download copywritten material and pay a fine- unless it is someone else 's network- then they are responsibleit fails to strike fear when someone else is getting nailed for your actions</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This story brought to you by the RIAA, striking fear across the globe.not really, since the lesson is: download copywritten material and pay a fine- unless it is someone else's network- then they are responsibleit fails to strike fear when someone else is getting nailed for your actions
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277840</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278636</id>
	<title>Re:Small Hotspot providers have no idea of risk</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259596140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For a small business owner, it's just a sideshow. Legislators (and courts) should keep this in mind.</p></div><p>Just wait.. running WiFi for your patrons will require the equivalent of a liquor license (aka, TAX) and you'll probably have to "card" patrons and store their details indefinitely.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For a small business owner , it 's just a sideshow .
Legislators ( and courts ) should keep this in mind.Just wait.. running WiFi for your patrons will require the equivalent of a liquor license ( aka , TAX ) and you 'll probably have to " card " patrons and store their details indefinitely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For a small business owner, it's just a sideshow.
Legislators (and courts) should keep this in mind.Just wait.. running WiFi for your patrons will require the equivalent of a liquor license (aka, TAX) and you'll probably have to "card" patrons and store their details indefinitely.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277968</id>
	<title>News Flash!</title>
	<author>mhajicek</author>
	<datestamp>1259589900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>News Flash! There was a questionable story posted last year!  As a new development, some people still think it's questionable!</htmltext>
<tokenext>News Flash !
There was a questionable story posted last year !
As a new development , some people still think it 's questionable !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>News Flash!
There was a questionable story posted last year!
As a new development, some people still think it's questionable!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278286</id>
	<title>Why download illegal files?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259592660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gq9BDjMDRRk" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">Here</a> [youtube.com] is something for you to download.<br> <br>Amen Brother!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here [ youtube.com ] is something for you to download .
Amen Brother !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here [youtube.com] is something for you to download.
Amen Brother!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30281046</id>
	<title>Unlikely to be correct</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259664960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To my best knowledge, noone was ever sued for downloading, only for uploading. Therefore, the story is at least partially bogus. There was a somewhat similar case in Germany a couple of years ago, someone used people's wifi for uploading music by the rapper named Bushido, and the wifi owners lost the case, the court claiming that it's their problem for not securing it. In this case however, the court documents are available online, and, as I said previously, talk about uploading and not downloading.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To my best knowledge , noone was ever sued for downloading , only for uploading .
Therefore , the story is at least partially bogus .
There was a somewhat similar case in Germany a couple of years ago , someone used people 's wifi for uploading music by the rapper named Bushido , and the wifi owners lost the case , the court claiming that it 's their problem for not securing it .
In this case however , the court documents are available online , and , as I said previously , talk about uploading and not downloading .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To my best knowledge, noone was ever sued for downloading, only for uploading.
Therefore, the story is at least partially bogus.
There was a somewhat similar case in Germany a couple of years ago, someone used people's wifi for uploading music by the rapper named Bushido, and the wifi owners lost the case, the court claiming that it's their problem for not securing it.
In this case however, the court documents are available online, and, as I said previously, talk about uploading and not downloading.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278200</id>
	<title>a new, creative lawsuit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259592000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Excellent, lets have a sing along in the RIAA's parking lot, which would mean the RIAA is encouraging infringement!</p><p>IANAL</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Excellent , lets have a sing along in the RIAA 's parking lot , which would mean the RIAA is encouraging infringement ! IANAL</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Excellent, lets have a sing along in the RIAA's parking lot, which would mean the RIAA is encouraging infringement!IANAL</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30281628</id>
	<title>Re:Simply unacceptable.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259671740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sanity is the median of the mental state of a society. Showing even an interest in thinking critically and expounding a belief that things should work fairly sets you apart and positions you further away from that mythical ideal. Claiming you're sane whilst all around you are not is a definition of madness.</p><p>Welcome.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sanity is the median of the mental state of a society .
Showing even an interest in thinking critically and expounding a belief that things should work fairly sets you apart and positions you further away from that mythical ideal .
Claiming you 're sane whilst all around you are not is a definition of madness.Welcome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sanity is the median of the mental state of a society.
Showing even an interest in thinking critically and expounding a belief that things should work fairly sets you apart and positions you further away from that mythical ideal.
Claiming you're sane whilst all around you are not is a definition of madness.Welcome.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278732</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30282244</id>
	<title>Hate your bartender?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259677920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Search for kiddie porn on their wifi!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Search for kiddie porn on their wifi !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Search for kiddie porn on their wifi!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30280872</id>
	<title>Re:This story brought to you by...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259663220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>actually this story was bought to you by slashdot. No excuse for piracy unsupported! no scare story about the RIAA too silly! No comparison with nazi germany too infantile!</p><p>Grow up kiddies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>actually this story was bought to you by slashdot .
No excuse for piracy unsupported !
no scare story about the RIAA too silly !
No comparison with nazi germany too infantile ! Grow up kiddies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>actually this story was bought to you by slashdot.
No excuse for piracy unsupported!
no scare story about the RIAA too silly!
No comparison with nazi germany too infantile!Grow up kiddies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277840</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278578</id>
	<title>Difference between countries</title>
	<author>Bender Unit 22</author>
	<datestamp>1259595720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On my trip to the US(Chicago), I was surprised to see all the open WiFi hotspots so many places. I used them often with my iPhone to Skype home and save 2$ pr. minute.<br>With the current anti-terror laws in many EU countries you have to register and log everything, making providing hotspots a real pain in the a.. and I find it rare to see free open hotspots anywhere. But it might just have been the places I have visited.<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On my trip to the US ( Chicago ) , I was surprised to see all the open WiFi hotspots so many places .
I used them often with my iPhone to Skype home and save 2 $ pr .
minute.With the current anti-terror laws in many EU countries you have to register and log everything , making providing hotspots a real pain in the a.. and I find it rare to see free open hotspots anywhere .
But it might just have been the places I have visited .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>On my trip to the US(Chicago), I was surprised to see all the open WiFi hotspots so many places.
I used them often with my iPhone to Skype home and save 2$ pr.
minute.With the current anti-terror laws in many EU countries you have to register and log everything, making providing hotspots a real pain in the a.. and I find it rare to see free open hotspots anywhere.
But it might just have been the places I have visited.
 </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30279000</id>
	<title>Re:This story brought to you by...</title>
	<author>tg123</author>
	<datestamp>1259599080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This story brought to you by the RIAA, striking fear across the globe.</p><p>No fine too ridiculous!  No defendant too vulnerable!  No sense of proportion!</p></div><p>This Story was also brought to you by the Letters B , S  , F &amp; U</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This story brought to you by the RIAA , striking fear across the globe.No fine too ridiculous !
No defendant too vulnerable !
No sense of proportion ! This Story was also brought to you by the Letters B , S , F &amp; U</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This story brought to you by the RIAA, striking fear across the globe.No fine too ridiculous!
No defendant too vulnerable!
No sense of proportion!This Story was also brought to you by the Letters B , S  , F &amp; U
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277840</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30280208</id>
	<title>Re:Rumor propagation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259699040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For the first time, I'm with the RIAA on this one. Everton lost. I'm suing the pub for the trauma they inflicted on me and the beer was crap too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For the first time , I 'm with the RIAA on this one .
Everton lost .
I 'm suing the pub for the trauma they inflicted on me and the beer was crap too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the first time, I'm with the RIAA on this one.
Everton lost.
I'm suing the pub for the trauma they inflicted on me and the beer was crap too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278732</id>
	<title>Re:Simply unacceptable.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259597040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"If you falsify the MAC or provide wrongful data, you get life in prison."</p><p>Yes, I caught the sarcasm.  But, PLEASE!!  We can't even get dangerous, violent criminals put in jail for life.  Put a petty thief in prison for life?  Oh, lord - there is no sanity left in the world.  None, I tell you.  "Your honor, the defendant has copied my ideas, without authorization.  I think he cost me somewhere between 1 dollar and 29 gazillion dollars.  I want to make an example of him, so please, sentence him to life without parole."</p><p>Meanwhile, political whores like Mike Huckleberry release confirmed violent nutcases to walk the streets, so that they can execute cops.</p><p>There are times when I'm GLAD that I'll be leaving this world someday.  The idea of going insane along with the rest of the world is more scary than dying.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" If you falsify the MAC or provide wrongful data , you get life in prison .
" Yes , I caught the sarcasm .
But , PLEASE ! !
We ca n't even get dangerous , violent criminals put in jail for life .
Put a petty thief in prison for life ?
Oh , lord - there is no sanity left in the world .
None , I tell you .
" Your honor , the defendant has copied my ideas , without authorization .
I think he cost me somewhere between 1 dollar and 29 gazillion dollars .
I want to make an example of him , so please , sentence him to life without parole .
" Meanwhile , political whores like Mike Huckleberry release confirmed violent nutcases to walk the streets , so that they can execute cops.There are times when I 'm GLAD that I 'll be leaving this world someday .
The idea of going insane along with the rest of the world is more scary than dying .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"If you falsify the MAC or provide wrongful data, you get life in prison.
"Yes, I caught the sarcasm.
But, PLEASE!!
We can't even get dangerous, violent criminals put in jail for life.
Put a petty thief in prison for life?
Oh, lord - there is no sanity left in the world.
None, I tell you.
"Your honor, the defendant has copied my ideas, without authorization.
I think he cost me somewhere between 1 dollar and 29 gazillion dollars.
I want to make an example of him, so please, sentence him to life without parole.
"Meanwhile, political whores like Mike Huckleberry release confirmed violent nutcases to walk the streets, so that they can execute cops.There are times when I'm GLAD that I'll be leaving this world someday.
The idea of going insane along with the rest of the world is more scary than dying.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30295874</id>
	<title>Re:Simply unacceptable.</title>
	<author>You ain't seen me!</author>
	<datestamp>1259586420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If this story is true, doesn't that make all ISPs responsible for the downloading of copyright material on their networks.
<p>

ie. the internet is illegal!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If this story is true , does n't that make all ISPs responsible for the downloading of copyright material on their networks .
ie. the internet is illegal !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this story is true, doesn't that make all ISPs responsible for the downloading of copyright material on their networks.
ie. the internet is illegal!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30279220</id>
	<title>Say I let you use the phone at my cafe</title>
	<author>presidenteloco</author>
	<datestamp>1259601300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And, out of my earshot, you order drugs from your dealer, or for that matter,<br>give the launch command for the terrorist bombing attack.</p><p>So I guess I am vicariously liable for your criminal action?</p><p>I can't see anything in my example that is not parallel to the case mentioned.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And , out of my earshot , you order drugs from your dealer , or for that matter,give the launch command for the terrorist bombing attack.So I guess I am vicariously liable for your criminal action ? I ca n't see anything in my example that is not parallel to the case mentioned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And, out of my earshot, you order drugs from your dealer, or for that matter,give the launch command for the terrorist bombing attack.So I guess I am vicariously liable for your criminal action?I can't see anything in my example that is not parallel to the case mentioned.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30294466</id>
	<title>Legally weird</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259611560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It doesn't sound like the director of The Cloud knows what he is talking about. Much more detail is needed before this becomes more than a vicious rumour adding to the background fear of the general public.</p><p>You couldn't be "fined" in a civil suit, only pay damages. In the UK we don't have punitive damages either: damages are supposed to reflect the actual loss caused to the claimant, and in economic cases this is notoriously difficult to establish.  If any pub handed over &pound;8,000 on a civil suit it could only be in (probably ill-advised) settlement to save the cost of defending a legal action.</p><p>There is a *small* possibility that local trading standards officers said they were considering prosecution, and offered a civil penalty in the alternative, which the pub was prepared to accept in order to protect its license, which would be at risk if there were criminal proceedings. (That sort of official blackmail is common in the police state that Britain has become in the 21st century.)  The usual size of a civil penalty offered for a minor offence is &pound;80.00, not &pound;8,000. Maybe the story is a typo.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It does n't sound like the director of The Cloud knows what he is talking about .
Much more detail is needed before this becomes more than a vicious rumour adding to the background fear of the general public.You could n't be " fined " in a civil suit , only pay damages .
In the UK we do n't have punitive damages either : damages are supposed to reflect the actual loss caused to the claimant , and in economic cases this is notoriously difficult to establish .
If any pub handed over   8,000 on a civil suit it could only be in ( probably ill-advised ) settlement to save the cost of defending a legal action.There is a * small * possibility that local trading standards officers said they were considering prosecution , and offered a civil penalty in the alternative , which the pub was prepared to accept in order to protect its license , which would be at risk if there were criminal proceedings .
( That sort of official blackmail is common in the police state that Britain has become in the 21st century .
) The usual size of a civil penalty offered for a minor offence is   80.00 , not   8,000 .
Maybe the story is a typo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It doesn't sound like the director of The Cloud knows what he is talking about.
Much more detail is needed before this becomes more than a vicious rumour adding to the background fear of the general public.You couldn't be "fined" in a civil suit, only pay damages.
In the UK we don't have punitive damages either: damages are supposed to reflect the actual loss caused to the claimant, and in economic cases this is notoriously difficult to establish.
If any pub handed over £8,000 on a civil suit it could only be in (probably ill-advised) settlement to save the cost of defending a legal action.There is a *small* possibility that local trading standards officers said they were considering prosecution, and offered a civil penalty in the alternative, which the pub was prepared to accept in order to protect its license, which would be at risk if there were criminal proceedings.
(That sort of official blackmail is common in the police state that Britain has become in the 21st century.
)  The usual size of a civil penalty offered for a minor offence is £80.00, not £8,000.
Maybe the story is a typo.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278018</id>
	<title>Fine the computer maker, OS maker, etc</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259590380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why stop here? Charge the computer makers, the chip makers, the OS maker, the telecom company, the maker of wires, the maker of routers, the producers of alcohol sold in the pub (as their product may have influenced the decision to download) and the list goes on... the more the better. Eventually someone will wonder, just what the hell are we doing?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why stop here ?
Charge the computer makers , the chip makers , the OS maker , the telecom company , the maker of wires , the maker of routers , the producers of alcohol sold in the pub ( as their product may have influenced the decision to download ) and the list goes on... the more the better .
Eventually someone will wonder , just what the hell are we doing ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why stop here?
Charge the computer makers, the chip makers, the OS maker, the telecom company, the maker of wires, the maker of routers, the producers of alcohol sold in the pub (as their product may have influenced the decision to download) and the list goes on... the more the better.
Eventually someone will wonder, just what the hell are we doing?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278176</id>
	<title>What Happened...</title>
	<author>IonOtter</author>
	<datestamp>1259591700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Legal-Eagle:  "companies that operate a public Wi-Fi hotspot should 'not be responsible in theory' for users' illegal downloads under 'existing substantive copyright law.'"</p><p>Quite right.  However...</p><p>RIAA/MPAA/(EU equivalent):  "Pay us or we use your @$$#0[3 as a target for the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caber\_toss" title="wikipedia.org">caber toss.</a> [wikipedia.org]"</p><p>Guess what happens.  (Note that's a statement, not a question.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Legal-Eagle : " companies that operate a public Wi-Fi hotspot should 'not be responsible in theory ' for users ' illegal downloads under 'existing substantive copyright law .
' " Quite right .
However...RIAA/MPAA/ ( EU equivalent ) : " Pay us or we use your @ $ $ # 0 [ 3 as a target for the caber toss .
[ wikipedia.org ] " Guess what happens .
( Note that 's a statement , not a question .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Legal-Eagle:  "companies that operate a public Wi-Fi hotspot should 'not be responsible in theory' for users' illegal downloads under 'existing substantive copyright law.
'"Quite right.
However...RIAA/MPAA/(EU equivalent):  "Pay us or we use your @$$#0[3 as a target for the caber toss.
[wikipedia.org]"Guess what happens.
(Note that's a statement, not a question.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278062</id>
	<title>Re:Simply unacceptable.</title>
	<author>DigiShaman</author>
	<datestamp>1259590860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>It's time to reinforce the concept that I am responsible for my actions, and nobody else</i></p><p>Sure, if you agree to have the MAC address of the device in use registered under your name. If you falsify the MAC or provide wrongful data, you get life in prison. Your objective is to bow down and pay tribute to the media overlords. They are royalty. They have power above you. They feed the coffers of your politicians whome *snickers* represent you! How DARE YOU question their authority!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's time to reinforce the concept that I am responsible for my actions , and nobody elseSure , if you agree to have the MAC address of the device in use registered under your name .
If you falsify the MAC or provide wrongful data , you get life in prison .
Your objective is to bow down and pay tribute to the media overlords .
They are royalty .
They have power above you .
They feed the coffers of your politicians whome * snickers * represent you !
How DARE YOU question their authority ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's time to reinforce the concept that I am responsible for my actions, and nobody elseSure, if you agree to have the MAC address of the device in use registered under your name.
If you falsify the MAC or provide wrongful data, you get life in prison.
Your objective is to bow down and pay tribute to the media overlords.
They are royalty.
They have power above you.
They feed the coffers of your politicians whome *snickers* represent you!
How DARE YOU question their authority!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278464</id>
	<title>it's all BS propaganda</title>
	<author>myspace-cn</author>
	<datestamp>1259594760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's all B.S. fascist propaganda to crack down on everyone in the interest of corporate profits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's all B.S .
fascist propaganda to crack down on everyone in the interest of corporate profits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's all B.S.
fascist propaganda to crack down on everyone in the interest of corporate profits.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30279944</id>
	<title>gun manufacturers, look out</title>
	<author>Dan667</author>
	<datestamp>1259608560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If this holds up then gun manufacturers can be held liable for murders using this as a precedence.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If this holds up then gun manufacturers can be held liable for murders using this as a precedence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this holds up then gun manufacturers can be held liable for murders using this as a precedence.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278052</id>
	<title>Re:Rumor propagation</title>
	<author>jhoegl</author>
	<datestamp>1259590740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Fearmongering... Fox didnt invent it, but they sure as hell showed how easy it is to make money off it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fearmongering... Fox didnt invent it , but they sure as hell showed how easy it is to make money off it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fearmongering... Fox didnt invent it, but they sure as hell showed how easy it is to make money off it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30282494</id>
	<title>Customer?</title>
	<author>gfreeman</author>
	<datestamp>1259679300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Article submitter (kdawson<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...) jumps to the conclusion that the downloader was a customer. Nowhere in the linked article does is say that it was a customer, merely that it was "someone".</p><p>If that "someone" was the pub manager then I can see why the pub manager would be the one sued by the copyright holder.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Article submitter ( kdawson ... ) jumps to the conclusion that the downloader was a customer .
Nowhere in the linked article does is say that it was a customer , merely that it was " someone " .If that " someone " was the pub manager then I can see why the pub manager would be the one sued by the copyright holder .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Article submitter (kdawson ...) jumps to the conclusion that the downloader was a customer.
Nowhere in the linked article does is say that it was a customer, merely that it was "someone".If that "someone" was the pub manager then I can see why the pub manager would be the one sued by the copyright holder.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277944</id>
	<title>Bull.</title>
	<author>FlyingBishop</author>
	<datestamp>1259589720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The hotspot owner was likely sued for refusing to do anything about repeated infringement on their network. I can't speak for the UK, but in the States, so long as you ban any MAC address associated with an IP the *IAA sends your way, they're basically happy that you've taken the trouble to minimize downloading (and the majority of pirates aren't going to bother MAC spoofing when they can just go down the street or buy what they wanted.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The hotspot owner was likely sued for refusing to do anything about repeated infringement on their network .
I ca n't speak for the UK , but in the States , so long as you ban any MAC address associated with an IP the * IAA sends your way , they 're basically happy that you 've taken the trouble to minimize downloading ( and the majority of pirates are n't going to bother MAC spoofing when they can just go down the street or buy what they wanted .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The hotspot owner was likely sued for refusing to do anything about repeated infringement on their network.
I can't speak for the UK, but in the States, so long as you ban any MAC address associated with an IP the *IAA sends your way, they're basically happy that you've taken the trouble to minimize downloading (and the majority of pirates aren't going to bother MAC spoofing when they can just go down the street or buy what they wanted.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278370</id>
	<title>Re:Small Hotspot providers have no idea of risk</title>
	<author>Freaky Spook</author>
	<datestamp>1259593680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not sure about UK Law, but Law in Australia has provisions where a non-commercial wifi hotspot served in a single premises is exempt from requiring a carrier license.</p><p>This means that the registered owner of the Internet Account is ultimately responsible for the internet connection, as they are not licensed and are not bound by the legal obligations of being a Carrier/ISP.</p><p>This puts them in a legal grey area when someone they allow/invite onto their network and someone does wrong thing as they are not afforded the legal protections of an ISP. If their network was used by a paedophilia ring, some guy using it to run his bot-net or more serious crimes it puts them in a very exposed position that has not been legally tested in this country.</p><p>Spending $1000 on a basic security product to help mitigate your exposure to the risks involved in giving people free wifi seem like a no-brainer to me in case you get law enforcement or a civil suit knocking your door one day asking questions where you cannot provide any answer to.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure about UK Law , but Law in Australia has provisions where a non-commercial wifi hotspot served in a single premises is exempt from requiring a carrier license.This means that the registered owner of the Internet Account is ultimately responsible for the internet connection , as they are not licensed and are not bound by the legal obligations of being a Carrier/ISP.This puts them in a legal grey area when someone they allow/invite onto their network and someone does wrong thing as they are not afforded the legal protections of an ISP .
If their network was used by a paedophilia ring , some guy using it to run his bot-net or more serious crimes it puts them in a very exposed position that has not been legally tested in this country.Spending $ 1000 on a basic security product to help mitigate your exposure to the risks involved in giving people free wifi seem like a no-brainer to me in case you get law enforcement or a civil suit knocking your door one day asking questions where you can not provide any answer to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure about UK Law, but Law in Australia has provisions where a non-commercial wifi hotspot served in a single premises is exempt from requiring a carrier license.This means that the registered owner of the Internet Account is ultimately responsible for the internet connection, as they are not licensed and are not bound by the legal obligations of being a Carrier/ISP.This puts them in a legal grey area when someone they allow/invite onto their network and someone does wrong thing as they are not afforded the legal protections of an ISP.
If their network was used by a paedophilia ring, some guy using it to run his bot-net or more serious crimes it puts them in a very exposed position that has not been legally tested in this country.Spending $1000 on a basic security product to help mitigate your exposure to the risks involved in giving people free wifi seem like a no-brainer to me in case you get law enforcement or a civil suit knocking your door one day asking questions where you cannot provide any answer to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277820</id>
	<title>Copyright Act exempts private, non:profit/commerce</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259589000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Also, Copyright Act exempts the transport, yet when the meter reads that it cost $0 to download then that takes the perview of exemption out of the way and into the monetary assumption of commerce that would then determine whether a profit is being derived from it's use and whether the matter is being dispensed from one's privy antiquity or publicly displayed for an investor to sample and buy.</p><p>In other words, $0 is still worth something if only to carry the venue.  I learned this somewhat from a federal case a friend of mine was forced into testifying because the prosecutors wrote that his liability was $0.02 just to get him on the bench or some bullshit.  The value was disclosed not to the jury, who would have surely seen the bad faith nature of most federal judges and the promiscuity of prosecutors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , Copyright Act exempts the transport , yet when the meter reads that it cost $ 0 to download then that takes the perview of exemption out of the way and into the monetary assumption of commerce that would then determine whether a profit is being derived from it 's use and whether the matter is being dispensed from one 's privy antiquity or publicly displayed for an investor to sample and buy.In other words , $ 0 is still worth something if only to carry the venue .
I learned this somewhat from a federal case a friend of mine was forced into testifying because the prosecutors wrote that his liability was $ 0.02 just to get him on the bench or some bullshit .
The value was disclosed not to the jury , who would have surely seen the bad faith nature of most federal judges and the promiscuity of prosecutors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, Copyright Act exempts the transport, yet when the meter reads that it cost $0 to download then that takes the perview of exemption out of the way and into the monetary assumption of commerce that would then determine whether a profit is being derived from it's use and whether the matter is being dispensed from one's privy antiquity or publicly displayed for an investor to sample and buy.In other words, $0 is still worth something if only to carry the venue.
I learned this somewhat from a federal case a friend of mine was forced into testifying because the prosecutors wrote that his liability was $0.02 just to get him on the bench or some bullshit.
The value was disclosed not to the jury, who would have surely seen the bad faith nature of most federal judges and the promiscuity of prosecutors.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30281736</id>
	<title>Pointless. Bombers used Thuraya satellite phones</title>
	<author>ickleberry</author>
	<datestamp>1259672700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As far as I remember the Mumbai bombers used Thuraya satellite phones, they all have IMEI numbers but the gateway for the network is in the UAE, so well outside India's control. <br> <br>
This seems like just another power grab/invasion of privacy and like forcing people to use WPA on their routers, trying to make sure every packet on the internet has a traceable owner.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As far as I remember the Mumbai bombers used Thuraya satellite phones , they all have IMEI numbers but the gateway for the network is in the UAE , so well outside India 's control .
This seems like just another power grab/invasion of privacy and like forcing people to use WPA on their routers , trying to make sure every packet on the internet has a traceable owner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As far as I remember the Mumbai bombers used Thuraya satellite phones, they all have IMEI numbers but the gateway for the network is in the UAE, so well outside India's control.
This seems like just another power grab/invasion of privacy and like forcing people to use WPA on their routers, trying to make sure every packet on the internet has a traceable owner.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278486</id>
	<title>Re:Simply unacceptable.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259595120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sure, if you agree to have the MAC address of the device in use registered under your name. If you falsify the MAC or provide wrongful data, you get life in prison. Your objective is to bow down and pay tribute to the media overlords</p></div><p>Actually I think it's slightly different.  You bow down to the media.  The media overlords are standing behind you.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , if you agree to have the MAC address of the device in use registered under your name .
If you falsify the MAC or provide wrongful data , you get life in prison .
Your objective is to bow down and pay tribute to the media overlordsActually I think it 's slightly different .
You bow down to the media .
The media overlords are standing behind you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, if you agree to have the MAC address of the device in use registered under your name.
If you falsify the MAC or provide wrongful data, you get life in prison.
Your objective is to bow down and pay tribute to the media overlordsActually I think it's slightly different.
You bow down to the media.
The media overlords are standing behind you.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277872</id>
	<title>Right, anybody got a coffee vending machine?</title>
	<author>Zerth</author>
	<datestamp>1259589300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll be starting a coffeeshop on my front porch.  Free wifi, $30 coffee; I'm not zoned for parking, so you'll get towed after 30 minutes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll be starting a coffeeshop on my front porch .
Free wifi , $ 30 coffee ; I 'm not zoned for parking , so you 'll get towed after 30 minutes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll be starting a coffeeshop on my front porch.
Free wifi, $30 coffee; I'm not zoned for parking, so you'll get towed after 30 minutes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278258</id>
	<title>Re:Simply unacceptable.</title>
	<author>TheModelEskimo</author>
	<datestamp>1259592420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You're absolutely correct, and I think that a phonebooth analogy ought to do pretty well here.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're absolutely correct , and I think that a phonebooth analogy ought to do pretty well here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're absolutely correct, and I think that a phonebooth analogy ought to do pretty well here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278550</id>
	<title>Re:Simply unacceptable.</title>
	<author>pipatron</author>
	<datestamp>1259595480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The major difference is that when you use the service in the Hotel, Coffee shop, Airport, cellphone, you're most probably identified. Either because you paid to gain access to the service, or because you are somehow connected to the account.
</p><p>If this place was just letting anyone using the intarwebs without keeping any logs of what computers were using it, they MAFIAA have no choice but to go for the pub.
</p><p>And when the MAFIAA does anything, it's mostly the wrong and unethical thing to do, and the laws need to be changed to make sure they have to stop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The major difference is that when you use the service in the Hotel , Coffee shop , Airport , cellphone , you 're most probably identified .
Either because you paid to gain access to the service , or because you are somehow connected to the account .
If this place was just letting anyone using the intarwebs without keeping any logs of what computers were using it , they MAFIAA have no choice but to go for the pub .
And when the MAFIAA does anything , it 's mostly the wrong and unethical thing to do , and the laws need to be changed to make sure they have to stop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The major difference is that when you use the service in the Hotel, Coffee shop, Airport, cellphone, you're most probably identified.
Either because you paid to gain access to the service, or because you are somehow connected to the account.
If this place was just letting anyone using the intarwebs without keeping any logs of what computers were using it, they MAFIAA have no choice but to go for the pub.
And when the MAFIAA does anything, it's mostly the wrong and unethical thing to do, and the laws need to be changed to make sure they have to stop.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277866</id>
	<title>Slippery Slope</title>
	<author>aXis100</author>
	<datestamp>1259589240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is scarily along the lines of the iiNet (popular Australian ISP) versus AFACT (Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft) case that just finished in the courts a few days ago.  We're all waiting for the Judge's ruling next year as it could set a huge precedent.</p><p>See <a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;q=afact+vs+iinet" title="google.com">http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;q=afact+vs+iinet</a> [google.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is scarily along the lines of the iiNet ( popular Australian ISP ) versus AFACT ( Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft ) case that just finished in the courts a few days ago .
We 're all waiting for the Judge 's ruling next year as it could set a huge precedent.See http : //www.google.com/search ? hl = en&amp;q = afact + vs + iinet [ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is scarily along the lines of the iiNet (popular Australian ISP) versus AFACT (Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft) case that just finished in the courts a few days ago.
We're all waiting for the Judge's ruling next year as it could set a huge precedent.See http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;q=afact+vs+iinet [google.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278024</id>
	<title>What is a public hotspot?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259590440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This begs the question of what a public hotspot is defined as.</p><p>If this gets overruled then I'm opening up my wireless to the public at 1K/sec so I can't be held legally responsible for any copyright infringement that occurs from my connection.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This begs the question of what a public hotspot is defined as.If this gets overruled then I 'm opening up my wireless to the public at 1K/sec so I ca n't be held legally responsible for any copyright infringement that occurs from my connection .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This begs the question of what a public hotspot is defined as.If this gets overruled then I'm opening up my wireless to the public at 1K/sec so I can't be held legally responsible for any copyright infringement that occurs from my connection.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278270</id>
	<title>it needs to stop</title>
	<author>bravo369</author>
	<datestamp>1259592600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>this needs to stop.  If this is allowed to happen then RIAA and MPAA and every other AA will just sue every hotspot operator in the country with little to no proof and force them to settle.  goodbye to open wifi and lets stay in the dark ages forever</htmltext>
<tokenext>this needs to stop .
If this is allowed to happen then RIAA and MPAA and every other AA will just sue every hotspot operator in the country with little to no proof and force them to settle .
goodbye to open wifi and lets stay in the dark ages forever</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this needs to stop.
If this is allowed to happen then RIAA and MPAA and every other AA will just sue every hotspot operator in the country with little to no proof and force them to settle.
goodbye to open wifi and lets stay in the dark ages forever</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30279066</id>
	<title>Re:Small Hotspot providers have no idea of risk</title>
	<author>socsoc</author>
	<datestamp>1259599740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I get your idea for a restaurant and many of those have started using providers anyways so they don't even own the equipment.  But a hotel?  You're gonna need a lot more backend stuff and better wap than a little linksys to give your guests internet access. $1000 would be cheap for a hotel to come out with, I'd imagine a lot more depending on the floors and layout of the hotel.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I get your idea for a restaurant and many of those have started using providers anyways so they do n't even own the equipment .
But a hotel ?
You 're gon na need a lot more backend stuff and better wap than a little linksys to give your guests internet access .
$ 1000 would be cheap for a hotel to come out with , I 'd imagine a lot more depending on the floors and layout of the hotel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I get your idea for a restaurant and many of those have started using providers anyways so they don't even own the equipment.
But a hotel?
You're gonna need a lot more backend stuff and better wap than a little linksys to give your guests internet access.
$1000 would be cheap for a hotel to come out with, I'd imagine a lot more depending on the floors and layout of the hotel.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278602</id>
	<title>What if someone commited another crime?</title>
	<author>mykos</author>
	<datestamp>1259595900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If the pub was robbed using a knife from said pub, should the pub also be responsible for what the person committing the crime did?</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the pub was robbed using a knife from said pub , should the pub also be responsible for what the person committing the crime did ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the pub was robbed using a knife from said pub, should the pub also be responsible for what the person committing the crime did?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277902</id>
	<title>Rumor propagation</title>
	<author>Red Flayer</author>
	<datestamp>1259589420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nice, some rumor propagation on the front page.<br> <br>Supposedly, according to a wifi hotspot provider, one of their unnamed clients was fined because an unnamed patron downloaded some unnamed copyrighted material.<br> <br>I'm surprised the amount wasn't also undisclosed.<br> <br>Now, I'm all for the birth of new urban legends for the hi-tech crowd... and maybe I'm a bit cynical, but this sure seems like some nice marketing for that wifi company, whose name I will omit in case marketing is what this is about.<br> <br>See, they get their name plastered on the intertubes, while their claim will get thoroughly debunked, and all people will remember is the name of the company and the fact that public wifi operators are protected by safe harbor laws.<br> <br>If the pub DID really get fined GBP 8k for copyright violations, it's probably more likely that it was because they were streaming sports content live to their patrons.  This is how I watch Rutgers football games that are not on TV... I go to a bar where they stream the games (albeit at very low res with some hiccuping) onto a big-screen TV.<br> <br>But, I'm guessing here, based on the words of that wifi company.  Which is the same thing everyone is doing, so why can't we just ignore this stupid story until there is some actual fact-checking done?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nice , some rumor propagation on the front page .
Supposedly , according to a wifi hotspot provider , one of their unnamed clients was fined because an unnamed patron downloaded some unnamed copyrighted material .
I 'm surprised the amount was n't also undisclosed .
Now , I 'm all for the birth of new urban legends for the hi-tech crowd... and maybe I 'm a bit cynical , but this sure seems like some nice marketing for that wifi company , whose name I will omit in case marketing is what this is about .
See , they get their name plastered on the intertubes , while their claim will get thoroughly debunked , and all people will remember is the name of the company and the fact that public wifi operators are protected by safe harbor laws .
If the pub DID really get fined GBP 8k for copyright violations , it 's probably more likely that it was because they were streaming sports content live to their patrons .
This is how I watch Rutgers football games that are not on TV... I go to a bar where they stream the games ( albeit at very low res with some hiccuping ) onto a big-screen TV .
But , I 'm guessing here , based on the words of that wifi company .
Which is the same thing everyone is doing , so why ca n't we just ignore this stupid story until there is some actual fact-checking done ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nice, some rumor propagation on the front page.
Supposedly, according to a wifi hotspot provider, one of their unnamed clients was fined because an unnamed patron downloaded some unnamed copyrighted material.
I'm surprised the amount wasn't also undisclosed.
Now, I'm all for the birth of new urban legends for the hi-tech crowd... and maybe I'm a bit cynical, but this sure seems like some nice marketing for that wifi company, whose name I will omit in case marketing is what this is about.
See, they get their name plastered on the intertubes, while their claim will get thoroughly debunked, and all people will remember is the name of the company and the fact that public wifi operators are protected by safe harbor laws.
If the pub DID really get fined GBP 8k for copyright violations, it's probably more likely that it was because they were streaming sports content live to their patrons.
This is how I watch Rutgers football games that are not on TV... I go to a bar where they stream the games (albeit at very low res with some hiccuping) onto a big-screen TV.
But, I'm guessing here, based on the words of that wifi company.
Which is the same thing everyone is doing, so why can't we just ignore this stupid story until there is some actual fact-checking done?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30281510</id>
	<title>Can't you USians get RIAA on making available?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259670240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can't you USians get RIAA on making available? After all, they ARE making their works available and if they weren't available on CD they wouldn't be rippable and therefore they wouldn't be put on P2P networks.</p><p>Ergo, RIAA are guilty of "making available" copyrighted works for piracy...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ca n't you USians get RIAA on making available ?
After all , they ARE making their works available and if they were n't available on CD they would n't be rippable and therefore they would n't be put on P2P networks.Ergo , RIAA are guilty of " making available " copyrighted works for piracy.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can't you USians get RIAA on making available?
After all, they ARE making their works available and if they weren't available on CD they wouldn't be rippable and therefore they wouldn't be put on P2P networks.Ergo, RIAA are guilty of "making available" copyrighted works for piracy...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277916</id>
	<title>Small Hotspot providers have no idea of risk</title>
	<author>Freaky Spook</author>
	<datestamp>1259589480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A couple of jobs ago I had several clients who were cafe's providing free Wifi.<br>Their setups just consisted of home Wifi routers, they had no ability to account for the traffic that passed through their networks and had no way to control access.</p><p>Today you can get box solutions for under $1000 dollars to provide basic Identity Management, monitoring, logging and firewall/proxy control to give you more control but many of those solutions are still not enough to prevent file sharing, or provide extended logging with 12 months or more records in case you have to prove a legal issue.</p><p>Much of the train of thought with many of these hotspot operators is to offer wifi because the cafe/restaurant down the street does it and they have no thought of their legal obligations as a service provider and really are not aware of the risk that goes with it.</p><p>The BSA/RIAA/MPAA could have a field day attempting to sue the pants off these kind of operators if they really wanted to focus their attention on it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A couple of jobs ago I had several clients who were cafe 's providing free Wifi.Their setups just consisted of home Wifi routers , they had no ability to account for the traffic that passed through their networks and had no way to control access.Today you can get box solutions for under $ 1000 dollars to provide basic Identity Management , monitoring , logging and firewall/proxy control to give you more control but many of those solutions are still not enough to prevent file sharing , or provide extended logging with 12 months or more records in case you have to prove a legal issue.Much of the train of thought with many of these hotspot operators is to offer wifi because the cafe/restaurant down the street does it and they have no thought of their legal obligations as a service provider and really are not aware of the risk that goes with it.The BSA/RIAA/MPAA could have a field day attempting to sue the pants off these kind of operators if they really wanted to focus their attention on it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A couple of jobs ago I had several clients who were cafe's providing free Wifi.Their setups just consisted of home Wifi routers, they had no ability to account for the traffic that passed through their networks and had no way to control access.Today you can get box solutions for under $1000 dollars to provide basic Identity Management, monitoring, logging and firewall/proxy control to give you more control but many of those solutions are still not enough to prevent file sharing, or provide extended logging with 12 months or more records in case you have to prove a legal issue.Much of the train of thought with many of these hotspot operators is to offer wifi because the cafe/restaurant down the street does it and they have no thought of their legal obligations as a service provider and really are not aware of the risk that goes with it.The BSA/RIAA/MPAA could have a field day attempting to sue the pants off these kind of operators if they really wanted to focus their attention on it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30279776</id>
	<title>Re:This story brought to you by...</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1259606520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This story brought to you by the RIAA, striking fear across the globe.</p></div><p>Delightfully tacky, yet unrefined; leaves an aftertaste every time!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This story brought to you by the RIAA , striking fear across the globe.Delightfully tacky , yet unrefined ; leaves an aftertaste every time !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This story brought to you by the RIAA, striking fear across the globe.Delightfully tacky, yet unrefined; leaves an aftertaste every time!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277840</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_009247_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30279066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_009247_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278052
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277902
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_009247_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_009247_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_009247_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30281628
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278732
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_009247_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278754
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_009247_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30295874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_009247_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30279000
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277840
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_009247_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278550
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_009247_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_009247_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_009247_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30297288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277840
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_009247_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_009247_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30282828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277840
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_009247_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30279776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277840
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_009247_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30280872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277840
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_009247_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_009247_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_009247_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_009247_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_009247_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30280208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277902
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_009247_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_01_009247.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277820
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_01_009247.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277944
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_01_009247.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277872
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_01_009247.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278024
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_01_009247.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277840
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30279000
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30282828
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30297288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30280872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30279776
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_01_009247.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278270
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_01_009247.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277828
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278258
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278940
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278062
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278732
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30281628
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278486
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278586
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277960
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30295874
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278516
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278550
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278548
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_01_009247.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278496
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_01_009247.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277916
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278256
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278370
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30279066
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278200
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278754
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_01_009247.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30277902
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30280208
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_009247.30278052
</commentlist>
</conversation>
