<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_07_0232243</id>
	<title>Palm Sued Over Palm Pre GPL Violation</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1260197520000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>zaxl writes <i>"Palm is being <a href="http://www.techworld.com.au/article/328719/lawsuit\_alleges\_palm\_pre\_violates\_copyright">sued by Artifex Software over the PDF viewer</a> in Palm's Pre smartphone, which may violate the GNU GPL. Artifex alleges that Palm has copied Artifex's PDF rendering engine, called muPDF, and integrated it into the Palm Pre's PDF viewer application without the proper licensing conditions. The entire application must be licensed under the GPL if muPDF is part of the application. It seems more and more cell phones are shipping with open source code, but in a closed manner."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>zaxl writes " Palm is being sued by Artifex Software over the PDF viewer in Palm 's Pre smartphone , which may violate the GNU GPL .
Artifex alleges that Palm has copied Artifex 's PDF rendering engine , called muPDF , and integrated it into the Palm Pre 's PDF viewer application without the proper licensing conditions .
The entire application must be licensed under the GPL if muPDF is part of the application .
It seems more and more cell phones are shipping with open source code , but in a closed manner .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>zaxl writes "Palm is being sued by Artifex Software over the PDF viewer in Palm's Pre smartphone, which may violate the GNU GPL.
Artifex alleges that Palm has copied Artifex's PDF rendering engine, called muPDF, and integrated it into the Palm Pre's PDF viewer application without the proper licensing conditions.
The entire application must be licensed under the GPL if muPDF is part of the application.
It seems more and more cell phones are shipping with open source code, but in a closed manner.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349126</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it?</title>
	<author>MrCrassic</author>
	<datestamp>1260119760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't the latest FIC phones allow complete access to all parts of the system code, including the bits that control the radios?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't the latest FIC phones allow complete access to all parts of the system code , including the bits that control the radios ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't the latest FIC phones allow complete access to all parts of the system code, including the bits that control the radios?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349024</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350980</id>
	<title>Re:Another example of Not Really Free</title>
	<author>donaldm</author>
	<datestamp>1260184920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I very much doubt that the "Industry" is moving to BSD licenses however if the the Industry want's to produce packages for Linux and there is huge money to be made doing this then they are going to have to get use to working with the GPL otherwise they may as well produce packages for MS Windows and all that can entail.<br>
<br>
From Fedora 12<br>
Total packages on my system:<br>
# rpm -qa |wc -l<br>
1687<br> <br>
Total packages under the BSD license:<br>
# rpm -qa --queryformat \%{License}"\n"|sort|grep BSD|wc -l<br>
169<br> <br>
I think the following shows how BSD licenses are moving to the GPL:<br>
# rpm -qa --queryformat \%{License}"\n"|sort|grep BSD|grep -v GPL|wc -l<br>
121<br> <br>
Total packages under the GPL (note LGPL is included under this as well):<br>
# rpm -qa --queryformat \%{License}"\n"|sort|grep GPL|wc -l<br>
1108<br> <br>
You can get more creative and get further statistics such as GPL3:<br>
# rpm -qa --queryformat \%{License}"\n"|sort|grep GPLv3|wc -l <br>
99<br> <br>
Also I did not take into account mixed licenses and other licenses such as Samba and MySQL, with the above commands you can get some interesting results.<br>
<br>
I am quite sure that if you look at Debian distributions you are going to see similar results although you will have to use the Debian package manager to do this.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I very much doubt that the " Industry " is moving to BSD licenses however if the the Industry want 's to produce packages for Linux and there is huge money to be made doing this then they are going to have to get use to working with the GPL otherwise they may as well produce packages for MS Windows and all that can entail .
From Fedora 12 Total packages on my system : # rpm -qa | wc -l 1687 Total packages under the BSD license : # rpm -qa --queryformat \ % { License } " \ n " | sort | grep BSD | wc -l 169 I think the following shows how BSD licenses are moving to the GPL : # rpm -qa --queryformat \ % { License } " \ n " | sort | grep BSD | grep -v GPL | wc -l 121 Total packages under the GPL ( note LGPL is included under this as well ) : # rpm -qa --queryformat \ % { License } " \ n " | sort | grep GPL | wc -l 1108 You can get more creative and get further statistics such as GPL3 : # rpm -qa --queryformat \ % { License } " \ n " | sort | grep GPLv3 | wc -l 99 Also I did not take into account mixed licenses and other licenses such as Samba and MySQL , with the above commands you can get some interesting results .
I am quite sure that if you look at Debian distributions you are going to see similar results although you will have to use the Debian package manager to do this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I very much doubt that the "Industry" is moving to BSD licenses however if the the Industry want's to produce packages for Linux and there is huge money to be made doing this then they are going to have to get use to working with the GPL otherwise they may as well produce packages for MS Windows and all that can entail.
From Fedora 12
Total packages on my system:
# rpm -qa |wc -l
1687 
Total packages under the BSD license:
# rpm -qa --queryformat \%{License}"\n"|sort|grep BSD|wc -l
169 
I think the following shows how BSD licenses are moving to the GPL:
# rpm -qa --queryformat \%{License}"\n"|sort|grep BSD|grep -v GPL|wc -l
121 
Total packages under the GPL (note LGPL is included under this as well):
# rpm -qa --queryformat \%{License}"\n"|sort|grep GPL|wc -l
1108 
You can get more creative and get further statistics such as GPL3:
# rpm -qa --queryformat \%{License}"\n"|sort|grep GPLv3|wc -l 
99 
Also I did not take into account mixed licenses and other licenses such as Samba and MySQL, with the above commands you can get some interesting results.
I am quite sure that if you look at Debian distributions you are going to see similar results although you will have to use the Debian package manager to do this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348920</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350194</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it?</title>
	<author>TangoMargarine</author>
	<datestamp>1260218700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I suspect that your post is sarcastic, and would like to say right off the bat that I'm not disagreeing with you. I think.</p><p>The problem obviously would be how to use such a homemade cell phone, as the towers are owned (licensed? rented?) by the telephone providers, who undoubtedly have rules against accessing their network without authorization (i.e., $$). P2P phone network, anyone?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I suspect that your post is sarcastic , and would like to say right off the bat that I 'm not disagreeing with you .
I think.The problem obviously would be how to use such a homemade cell phone , as the towers are owned ( licensed ?
rented ? ) by the telephone providers , who undoubtedly have rules against accessing their network without authorization ( i.e. , $ $ ) .
P2P phone network , anyone ?
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suspect that your post is sarcastic, and would like to say right off the bat that I'm not disagreeing with you.
I think.The problem obviously would be how to use such a homemade cell phone, as the towers are owned (licensed?
rented?) by the telephone providers, who undoubtedly have rules against accessing their network without authorization (i.e., $$).
P2P phone network, anyone?
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349342</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349412</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it?</title>
	<author>izomiac</author>
	<datestamp>1260122820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>we cannot risk the entire cell ecosystem on a phone that can be completely modified to do <b>anything</b>.</p></div><p>So, if it's possible to bring down the cell ecosystem using a cell phone, then why isn't anyone doing it?  I'm sure there are plenty of anti-social types that would get a kick out of it, so motivation isn't a factor.  And it's not all that difficult to send any arbitrary radio signal, so that's not an issue.  So there's both the means and the desire, yet the towers have withstood the test of time.  Something doesn't quite add up here.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>we can not risk the entire cell ecosystem on a phone that can be completely modified to do anything.So , if it 's possible to bring down the cell ecosystem using a cell phone , then why is n't anyone doing it ?
I 'm sure there are plenty of anti-social types that would get a kick out of it , so motivation is n't a factor .
And it 's not all that difficult to send any arbitrary radio signal , so that 's not an issue .
So there 's both the means and the desire , yet the towers have withstood the test of time .
Something does n't quite add up here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>we cannot risk the entire cell ecosystem on a phone that can be completely modified to do anything.So, if it's possible to bring down the cell ecosystem using a cell phone, then why isn't anyone doing it?
I'm sure there are plenty of anti-social types that would get a kick out of it, so motivation isn't a factor.
And it's not all that difficult to send any arbitrary radio signal, so that's not an issue.
So there's both the means and the desire, yet the towers have withstood the test of time.
Something doesn't quite add up here.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349024</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349846</id>
	<title>Old Article Is Old</title>
	<author>Cprossu</author>
	<datestamp>1260127620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone else notice this? -&gt; Mikael Rickn&#228;s (IDG News Service) 07/12/2009 07:53:00</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone else notice this ?
- &gt; Mikael Rickn   s ( IDG News Service ) 07/12/2009 07 : 53 : 00</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone else notice this?
-&gt; Mikael Ricknäs (IDG News Service) 07/12/2009 07:53:00</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350352</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it?</title>
	<author>DrXym</author>
	<datestamp>1260177480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>How hard is it to just release a totally OSS version of your OS with all applications and stuff there and let people modify it and put it on your phone? I really don't see the point of trying to complicate things by closing the OSS. Release everything for free and you can take a lot more free code and not having to worry about paying lots of money when you are caught.</i>
<p>
I'm sure some OS makers would be delighted to do that but some such as Apple and of course the mobile networks who are not. A network doesn't make any money if you unlock / jailbreak your phone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How hard is it to just release a totally OSS version of your OS with all applications and stuff there and let people modify it and put it on your phone ?
I really do n't see the point of trying to complicate things by closing the OSS .
Release everything for free and you can take a lot more free code and not having to worry about paying lots of money when you are caught .
I 'm sure some OS makers would be delighted to do that but some such as Apple and of course the mobile networks who are not .
A network does n't make any money if you unlock / jailbreak your phone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How hard is it to just release a totally OSS version of your OS with all applications and stuff there and let people modify it and put it on your phone?
I really don't see the point of trying to complicate things by closing the OSS.
Release everything for free and you can take a lot more free code and not having to worry about paying lots of money when you are caught.
I'm sure some OS makers would be delighted to do that but some such as Apple and of course the mobile networks who are not.
A network doesn't make any money if you unlock / jailbreak your phone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348896</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349276</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>betterunixthanunix</author>
	<datestamp>1260121320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually, copyrights are the basis of the GPL, RMS and the FSF have never denied this.  The copyleft strategy is intended to reverse the normal manner in which copyrights are used, but copyrights still form the basis of the license.  This is why the GPL carries legal weight, why it stands up in court, and why companies bother paying attention to it.<br> <br>

The only reason we have software licenses at all is copyright.  Installing software requires at least one copy of the software to be made; thus, unlike a paper book, you must get the permission of the copyright holder to use their software even after you purchase (or otherwise obtain) a copy.  The copyright holder can give you such permission with all sorts of restrictions, or without any restrictions at all (such was with the BSD license).<br> <br>

I am not saying that this system is ideal or that I support it, but it is the reality that we have to deal with.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , copyrights are the basis of the GPL , RMS and the FSF have never denied this .
The copyleft strategy is intended to reverse the normal manner in which copyrights are used , but copyrights still form the basis of the license .
This is why the GPL carries legal weight , why it stands up in court , and why companies bother paying attention to it .
The only reason we have software licenses at all is copyright .
Installing software requires at least one copy of the software to be made ; thus , unlike a paper book , you must get the permission of the copyright holder to use their software even after you purchase ( or otherwise obtain ) a copy .
The copyright holder can give you such permission with all sorts of restrictions , or without any restrictions at all ( such was with the BSD license ) .
I am not saying that this system is ideal or that I support it , but it is the reality that we have to deal with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, copyrights are the basis of the GPL, RMS and the FSF have never denied this.
The copyleft strategy is intended to reverse the normal manner in which copyrights are used, but copyrights still form the basis of the license.
This is why the GPL carries legal weight, why it stands up in court, and why companies bother paying attention to it.
The only reason we have software licenses at all is copyright.
Installing software requires at least one copy of the software to be made; thus, unlike a paper book, you must get the permission of the copyright holder to use their software even after you purchase (or otherwise obtain) a copy.
The copyright holder can give you such permission with all sorts of restrictions, or without any restrictions at all (such was with the BSD license).
I am not saying that this system is ideal or that I support it, but it is the reality that we have to deal with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349168</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349196</id>
	<title>Re:Well</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260120300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Palm actually uses a bunch of GPL'd code (the Pre is Linux based) and they do make the code available.  In fact, I think some of it even comes on the device itself.</p><p>I'm sure this is just an oversight if the code really is GPL and isn't available.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Palm actually uses a bunch of GPL 'd code ( the Pre is Linux based ) and they do make the code available .
In fact , I think some of it even comes on the device itself.I 'm sure this is just an oversight if the code really is GPL and is n't available .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Palm actually uses a bunch of GPL'd code (the Pre is Linux based) and they do make the code available.
In fact, I think some of it even comes on the device itself.I'm sure this is just an oversight if the code really is GPL and isn't available.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348704</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30353430</id>
	<title>Re:Palm Mentions mupdf on the phone</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1260203400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you look at the Artifex license page (http://www.artifex.com/indexlicense.htm) you will actually see that they have a very strange interpretation of the GPL.</p></div><p>Yeah. They seem to follow the MySQL "open source for personal use only" form of dyslexia.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you look at the Artifex license page ( http : //www.artifex.com/indexlicense.htm ) you will actually see that they have a very strange interpretation of the GPL.Yeah .
They seem to follow the MySQL " open source for personal use only " form of dyslexia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you look at the Artifex license page (http://www.artifex.com/indexlicense.htm) you will actually see that they have a very strange interpretation of the GPL.Yeah.
They seem to follow the MySQL "open source for personal use only" form of dyslexia.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349922</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348730</id>
	<title>Re:Well</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260115500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you don't like the GPL, don't use anything covered under it. Go away, nobody's stopping you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you do n't like the GPL , do n't use anything covered under it .
Go away , nobody 's stopping you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you don't like the GPL, don't use anything covered under it.
Go away, nobody's stopping you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348684</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30353356</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it?</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1260203100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The TelCo's will only go so far before they say ( and rightly so ) stop, this has to be locked down, we cannot risk the entire cell ecosystem on a phone that can be completely modified to do anything.</p></div><p>I shudder in horror at the memory of the wild years when people were allowed to connect general purpose programmable computers to the POTS network with unlocked modems. You could just send one of the hacker commands listed in the back of the manual (can you <em>imagine</em>!) and it would cheerfully oblige without even verifying that the code complied with local and federal laws. Sheer anarchy, I tell you, with nationwide blackouts on an hourly basis.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The TelCo 's will only go so far before they say ( and rightly so ) stop , this has to be locked down , we can not risk the entire cell ecosystem on a phone that can be completely modified to do anything.I shudder in horror at the memory of the wild years when people were allowed to connect general purpose programmable computers to the POTS network with unlocked modems .
You could just send one of the hacker commands listed in the back of the manual ( can you imagine !
) and it would cheerfully oblige without even verifying that the code complied with local and federal laws .
Sheer anarchy , I tell you , with nationwide blackouts on an hourly basis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The TelCo's will only go so far before they say ( and rightly so ) stop, this has to be locked down, we cannot risk the entire cell ecosystem on a phone that can be completely modified to do anything.I shudder in horror at the memory of the wild years when people were allowed to connect general purpose programmable computers to the POTS network with unlocked modems.
You could just send one of the hacker commands listed in the back of the manual (can you imagine!
) and it would cheerfully oblige without even verifying that the code complied with local and federal laws.
Sheer anarchy, I tell you, with nationwide blackouts on an hourly basis.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349024</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349448</id>
	<title>Palm Mentions mupdf on the phone</title>
	<author>xrayspx</author>
	<datestamp>1260123120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>On the phone is a PDF called "Open Source Information.pdf".  In this document they list the projects they used for the phone:
<br> <br>
libgpg-error (only certain files are licensed under GPL), linux-hotplug, libsamplerate0, fuse, freefont, vpnc, sysfsutils, iptables, dosfstools, alsa-plugins,
busybox, ipkg, netbase, oprofile, pmeloop, alsa-utils, PPP (only certain files are licensed under GPL), readline, setserial, upstart-initscripts, e2fsprogs (only
certain files are licensed under GPL), module-init-tools-cross, module-init-tool, base-passwd, iproute2, usbmon, mupdf, libpurple, makedevs, update-
modules, netcat, gdbm, cifs, rsync, update-rc.d, upstart, wireless-tools, udev, bootchart, fbset, dnsmasq, binutils, libgcrypt (only certain files are licensed
under GPL), libfuse, Sysvinit, Linux Kernel, pulseaudio, procps, psmisc, mtools, UN Batang Korean True Type Font, faad2, e2fsprogs-libs (portions are
licensed under GPL, other portions are licensed under LGPL), sysstat, screen
<br> <br>
I don't know why there's a suit unless someone requested the code and was denied, but Palm clearly advertise the fact that they use the app.  The document is 37 pages long, but it's not hard to find references to the software they use.</htmltext>
<tokenext>On the phone is a PDF called " Open Source Information.pdf " .
In this document they list the projects they used for the phone : libgpg-error ( only certain files are licensed under GPL ) , linux-hotplug , libsamplerate0 , fuse , freefont , vpnc , sysfsutils , iptables , dosfstools , alsa-plugins , busybox , ipkg , netbase , oprofile , pmeloop , alsa-utils , PPP ( only certain files are licensed under GPL ) , readline , setserial , upstart-initscripts , e2fsprogs ( only certain files are licensed under GPL ) , module-init-tools-cross , module-init-tool , base-passwd , iproute2 , usbmon , mupdf , libpurple , makedevs , update- modules , netcat , gdbm , cifs , rsync , update-rc.d , upstart , wireless-tools , udev , bootchart , fbset , dnsmasq , binutils , libgcrypt ( only certain files are licensed under GPL ) , libfuse , Sysvinit , Linux Kernel , pulseaudio , procps , psmisc , mtools , UN Batang Korean True Type Font , faad2 , e2fsprogs-libs ( portions are licensed under GPL , other portions are licensed under LGPL ) , sysstat , screen I do n't know why there 's a suit unless someone requested the code and was denied , but Palm clearly advertise the fact that they use the app .
The document is 37 pages long , but it 's not hard to find references to the software they use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the phone is a PDF called "Open Source Information.pdf".
In this document they list the projects they used for the phone:
 
libgpg-error (only certain files are licensed under GPL), linux-hotplug, libsamplerate0, fuse, freefont, vpnc, sysfsutils, iptables, dosfstools, alsa-plugins,
busybox, ipkg, netbase, oprofile, pmeloop, alsa-utils, PPP (only certain files are licensed under GPL), readline, setserial, upstart-initscripts, e2fsprogs (only
certain files are licensed under GPL), module-init-tools-cross, module-init-tool, base-passwd, iproute2, usbmon, mupdf, libpurple, makedevs, update-
modules, netcat, gdbm, cifs, rsync, update-rc.d, upstart, wireless-tools, udev, bootchart, fbset, dnsmasq, binutils, libgcrypt (only certain files are licensed
under GPL), libfuse, Sysvinit, Linux Kernel, pulseaudio, procps, psmisc, mtools, UN Batang Korean True Type Font, faad2, e2fsprogs-libs (portions are
licensed under GPL, other portions are licensed under LGPL), sysstat, screen
 
I don't know why there's a suit unless someone requested the code and was denied, but Palm clearly advertise the fact that they use the app.
The document is 37 pages long, but it's not hard to find references to the software they use.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30353894</id>
	<title>Copy of the Complaint?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260205380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does anybody have a link to the complaint?  I didn't see it on pacer, which is odd for a suit filed over a week ago.  Thanks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does anybody have a link to the complaint ?
I did n't see it on pacer , which is odd for a suit filed over a week ago .
Thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does anybody have a link to the complaint?
I didn't see it on pacer, which is odd for a suit filed over a week ago.
Thanks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350568</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it?</title>
	<author>FlyingGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1260180120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh like because dude, there is totally like no profit in that, fer sure!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh like because dude , there is totally like no profit in that , fer sure !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh like because dude, there is totally like no profit in that, fer sure!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350446</id>
	<title>Re:Well</title>
	<author>I cant believe its n</author>
	<datestamp>1260178740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Agree, but a better move would be to simply contact the developers of the GPL:ed software and ask for a commercial license instead. The GPL lets you try the software, lets you create other software around it, but if you would like to distribute your application as closed source, you may have to pay for some other form of license.
<br> <br>
I find it hard to understand why someone would start crying for not being allowed just take take several years worth of development effort, thinly repackage it and then claim that no one else is allowed to touch "their" software without paying for it.
<br> <br>
Open source your software <b>or</b> pay the original developers for a commercial license.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Agree , but a better move would be to simply contact the developers of the GPL : ed software and ask for a commercial license instead .
The GPL lets you try the software , lets you create other software around it , but if you would like to distribute your application as closed source , you may have to pay for some other form of license .
I find it hard to understand why someone would start crying for not being allowed just take take several years worth of development effort , thinly repackage it and then claim that no one else is allowed to touch " their " software without paying for it .
Open source your software or pay the original developers for a commercial license .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agree, but a better move would be to simply contact the developers of the GPL:ed software and ask for a commercial license instead.
The GPL lets you try the software, lets you create other software around it, but if you would like to distribute your application as closed source, you may have to pay for some other form of license.
I find it hard to understand why someone would start crying for not being allowed just take take several years worth of development effort, thinly repackage it and then claim that no one else is allowed to touch "their" software without paying for it.
Open source your software or pay the original developers for a commercial license.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349214</id>
	<title>Re:Another example of Not Really Free</title>
	<author>caseih</author>
	<datestamp>1260120480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah the "industry" would love all open source code to be BSD so they can use it with impunity.  Honestly let's stop this FUD.  It's simply not true.  Code under the GPL is no different from code under any other license.  If you don't use it in compliance with the license then you are in a copyright violation situation, and the law allows financial remedies for such a case.  The fact that it is GPL is irrelevant to this.  Also the summary is incorrect.  Palm is in a copyright violation now and have three choices: 1. remove the GPL code, 2.  license the code under a different arrangement, and 3. License their derivative product as GPL.</p><p>Why are you upset when copyright holders exercise their rights under the law to prevent a company from knowingly or unknowingly rip them off?  How would BSD help this situation?  Because the GPL actually has teeth we're starting to see the tip of the ice berg as far as willful license violations go.  It's impossible to judge how much code is being used illegally in proprietary products.  We're not talking GPL either.  Any license.  Microsoft code, code from some other source.</p><p>Do liberty and capitalism allow one the right to violate copyrights?  The GPL exists to protect the rights and freedoms of the developers and the end users while allowing free redistribution of code.  I know of no other license that does this so effectively.  In my opinion, if all open source code was BSD, there really would be no open source community or ecosystem.  Like Adam Smith said, sometimes you have to balance self-interest with self-interest.  The BSD doesn't do that really well.  Certainly there is zero incentive for a company to release code under the BSD if it's just going to be used directly against them.  The GPL allows companies to foster communities and promote development, while maintaining a level playing field for all the players.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah the " industry " would love all open source code to be BSD so they can use it with impunity .
Honestly let 's stop this FUD .
It 's simply not true .
Code under the GPL is no different from code under any other license .
If you do n't use it in compliance with the license then you are in a copyright violation situation , and the law allows financial remedies for such a case .
The fact that it is GPL is irrelevant to this .
Also the summary is incorrect .
Palm is in a copyright violation now and have three choices : 1. remove the GPL code , 2. license the code under a different arrangement , and 3 .
License their derivative product as GPL.Why are you upset when copyright holders exercise their rights under the law to prevent a company from knowingly or unknowingly rip them off ?
How would BSD help this situation ?
Because the GPL actually has teeth we 're starting to see the tip of the ice berg as far as willful license violations go .
It 's impossible to judge how much code is being used illegally in proprietary products .
We 're not talking GPL either .
Any license .
Microsoft code , code from some other source.Do liberty and capitalism allow one the right to violate copyrights ?
The GPL exists to protect the rights and freedoms of the developers and the end users while allowing free redistribution of code .
I know of no other license that does this so effectively .
In my opinion , if all open source code was BSD , there really would be no open source community or ecosystem .
Like Adam Smith said , sometimes you have to balance self-interest with self-interest .
The BSD does n't do that really well .
Certainly there is zero incentive for a company to release code under the BSD if it 's just going to be used directly against them .
The GPL allows companies to foster communities and promote development , while maintaining a level playing field for all the players .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah the "industry" would love all open source code to be BSD so they can use it with impunity.
Honestly let's stop this FUD.
It's simply not true.
Code under the GPL is no different from code under any other license.
If you don't use it in compliance with the license then you are in a copyright violation situation, and the law allows financial remedies for such a case.
The fact that it is GPL is irrelevant to this.
Also the summary is incorrect.
Palm is in a copyright violation now and have three choices: 1. remove the GPL code, 2.  license the code under a different arrangement, and 3.
License their derivative product as GPL.Why are you upset when copyright holders exercise their rights under the law to prevent a company from knowingly or unknowingly rip them off?
How would BSD help this situation?
Because the GPL actually has teeth we're starting to see the tip of the ice berg as far as willful license violations go.
It's impossible to judge how much code is being used illegally in proprietary products.
We're not talking GPL either.
Any license.
Microsoft code, code from some other source.Do liberty and capitalism allow one the right to violate copyrights?
The GPL exists to protect the rights and freedoms of the developers and the end users while allowing free redistribution of code.
I know of no other license that does this so effectively.
In my opinion, if all open source code was BSD, there really would be no open source community or ecosystem.
Like Adam Smith said, sometimes you have to balance self-interest with self-interest.
The BSD doesn't do that really well.
Certainly there is zero incentive for a company to release code under the BSD if it's just going to be used directly against them.
The GPL allows companies to foster communities and promote development, while maintaining a level playing field for all the players.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350008</id>
	<title>Re:Settlement is probably inevitable...</title>
	<author>wall0159</author>
	<datestamp>1260216000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"So sorry, your Honour, I didn't realise eMule was pointing at my Music collection - it was an honest mistake that I realised and repaired as soon as RIAA sent me a letter"</p><p>How do you think that'd wash?</p><p>ps. I'm not saying Palm should be crucified, just wondering why there's one standard for GPL licenses, and another for 'proper' copyright licences...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" So sorry , your Honour , I did n't realise eMule was pointing at my Music collection - it was an honest mistake that I realised and repaired as soon as RIAA sent me a letter " How do you think that 'd wash ? ps .
I 'm not saying Palm should be crucified , just wondering why there 's one standard for GPL licenses , and another for 'proper ' copyright licences.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"So sorry, your Honour, I didn't realise eMule was pointing at my Music collection - it was an honest mistake that I realised and repaired as soon as RIAA sent me a letter"How do you think that'd wash?ps.
I'm not saying Palm should be crucified, just wondering why there's one standard for GPL licenses, and another for 'proper' copyright licences...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349124</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260119760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Contrary to popular belief, comments on Slashdot are written by multiple users just like yourself (but different!).</p><p>As it actually happens, the set of people who feel compelled to comment and moderate on "Pirate Bay" stories may not be exactly the same set of people that comment and moderate on GPL licensing stories.</p><p>Of the users who comment or moderate on both kinds of stories, some might have what appear to you to be contradicting viewpoints, but you may need to stop looking at everything as black and white - maybe you'll learn something.</p><p>I understand how "RIAA should not be destroying people's lives for downloading songs" could be interpreted by you to mean "Copyright sucks, and anyone should have the right to copy anything they want."  But there's actually a not-so-subtle difference between those two viewpoints.</p><p>I also understand how you might interpret "Corporations need to comply with the terms under which they licensed others' software by releasing their source code or remove the copyright software from their product" as "Burn the evil corporations at the stake", but again, these arguments are not the same thing.</p><p>I hope this helps resolve at least some of your confusion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Contrary to popular belief , comments on Slashdot are written by multiple users just like yourself ( but different !
) .As it actually happens , the set of people who feel compelled to comment and moderate on " Pirate Bay " stories may not be exactly the same set of people that comment and moderate on GPL licensing stories.Of the users who comment or moderate on both kinds of stories , some might have what appear to you to be contradicting viewpoints , but you may need to stop looking at everything as black and white - maybe you 'll learn something.I understand how " RIAA should not be destroying people 's lives for downloading songs " could be interpreted by you to mean " Copyright sucks , and anyone should have the right to copy anything they want .
" But there 's actually a not-so-subtle difference between those two viewpoints.I also understand how you might interpret " Corporations need to comply with the terms under which they licensed others ' software by releasing their source code or remove the copyright software from their product " as " Burn the evil corporations at the stake " , but again , these arguments are not the same thing.I hope this helps resolve at least some of your confusion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Contrary to popular belief, comments on Slashdot are written by multiple users just like yourself (but different!
).As it actually happens, the set of people who feel compelled to comment and moderate on "Pirate Bay" stories may not be exactly the same set of people that comment and moderate on GPL licensing stories.Of the users who comment or moderate on both kinds of stories, some might have what appear to you to be contradicting viewpoints, but you may need to stop looking at everything as black and white - maybe you'll learn something.I understand how "RIAA should not be destroying people's lives for downloading songs" could be interpreted by you to mean "Copyright sucks, and anyone should have the right to copy anything they want.
"  But there's actually a not-so-subtle difference between those two viewpoints.I also understand how you might interpret "Corporations need to comply with the terms under which they licensed others' software by releasing their source code or remove the copyright software from their product" as "Burn the evil corporations at the stake", but again, these arguments are not the same thing.I hope this helps resolve at least some of your confusion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30352712</id>
	<title>Karma?</title>
	<author>webdog314</author>
	<datestamp>1260199980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Given Palm's recent thumbing their nose at Apple and iTunes, all I can say is, "ha ha".</htmltext>
<tokenext>Given Palm 's recent thumbing their nose at Apple and iTunes , all I can say is , " ha ha " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given Palm's recent thumbing their nose at Apple and iTunes, all I can say is, "ha ha".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350800</id>
	<title>stop the presses</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260182700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://opensource.palm.com/1.3.1/index.html" title="palm.com" rel="nofollow">http://opensource.palm.com/1.3.1/index.html</a> [palm.com]<br><a href="http://palm.cdnetworks.net/opensource/1.3.1/mupdf-1.0.tar" title="cdnetworks.net" rel="nofollow">http://palm.cdnetworks.net/opensource/1.3.1/mupdf-1.0.tar</a> [cdnetworks.net]<br><a href="http://palm.cdnetworks.net/opensource/1.3.1/mupdf-1.0.tar-patches.tgz" title="cdnetworks.net" rel="nofollow">http://palm.cdnetworks.net/opensource/1.3.1/mupdf-1.0.tar-patches.tgz</a> [cdnetworks.net]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //opensource.palm.com/1.3.1/index.html [ palm.com ] http : //palm.cdnetworks.net/opensource/1.3.1/mupdf-1.0.tar [ cdnetworks.net ] http : //palm.cdnetworks.net/opensource/1.3.1/mupdf-1.0.tar-patches.tgz [ cdnetworks.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://opensource.palm.com/1.3.1/index.html [palm.com]http://palm.cdnetworks.net/opensource/1.3.1/mupdf-1.0.tar [cdnetworks.net]http://palm.cdnetworks.net/opensource/1.3.1/mupdf-1.0.tar-patches.tgz [cdnetworks.net]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350314</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260176880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Is Slashdot for or against copyrights this week? You know, since the GPL is a copyright license and relies on copyright law to have any power.</p></div><p>Slashdot is a website and is incapable of having an opinion. Nevertheless, to answer your point: copyright licenses are a tool. Like any tool, they can be used for good or for evil. Those who consider free access to information would tend to regard the GPL as a good use of copyright as it is written to ensure free access to the licensed code, and licensing designed to prevent access to information as an evil use of copyright.</p><p>This reasoning works the same way as the idea that knives are a useful and good tool to prepare food yet consider stabbing people at random to be wrong. It is a logically consistent position even if you do not agree with the values that cause people to make the good/evil judgement in this way.</p><p>For clarity, I do not consider proprietary licensing to be evil. Now that this has been explained to you, any further posts of this nature made by you can be identified as trolling.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is Slashdot for or against copyrights this week ?
You know , since the GPL is a copyright license and relies on copyright law to have any power.Slashdot is a website and is incapable of having an opinion .
Nevertheless , to answer your point : copyright licenses are a tool .
Like any tool , they can be used for good or for evil .
Those who consider free access to information would tend to regard the GPL as a good use of copyright as it is written to ensure free access to the licensed code , and licensing designed to prevent access to information as an evil use of copyright.This reasoning works the same way as the idea that knives are a useful and good tool to prepare food yet consider stabbing people at random to be wrong .
It is a logically consistent position even if you do not agree with the values that cause people to make the good/evil judgement in this way.For clarity , I do not consider proprietary licensing to be evil .
Now that this has been explained to you , any further posts of this nature made by you can be identified as trolling .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is Slashdot for or against copyrights this week?
You know, since the GPL is a copyright license and relies on copyright law to have any power.Slashdot is a website and is incapable of having an opinion.
Nevertheless, to answer your point: copyright licenses are a tool.
Like any tool, they can be used for good or for evil.
Those who consider free access to information would tend to regard the GPL as a good use of copyright as it is written to ensure free access to the licensed code, and licensing designed to prevent access to information as an evil use of copyright.This reasoning works the same way as the idea that knives are a useful and good tool to prepare food yet consider stabbing people at random to be wrong.
It is a logically consistent position even if you do not agree with the values that cause people to make the good/evil judgement in this way.For clarity, I do not consider proprietary licensing to be evil.
Now that this has been explained to you, any further posts of this nature made by you can be identified as trolling.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348752</id>
	<title>Re:Well</title>
	<author>Chysn</author>
	<datestamp>1260115680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Well, if the GPL wasn't a bullshit license which states that you're subject to the GPL if you even use GPL software in your project</p></div></blockquote><p>The GPL is for open source software whose authors wish to encourage the development of open source software. If you're not writing open source software, you look for another solution or write it your damn self. If you ARE writing open source software, it's not a bullshit license.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , if the GPL was n't a bullshit license which states that you 're subject to the GPL if you even use GPL software in your projectThe GPL is for open source software whose authors wish to encourage the development of open source software .
If you 're not writing open source software , you look for another solution or write it your damn self .
If you ARE writing open source software , it 's not a bullshit license .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, if the GPL wasn't a bullshit license which states that you're subject to the GPL if you even use GPL software in your projectThe GPL is for open source software whose authors wish to encourage the development of open source software.
If you're not writing open source software, you look for another solution or write it your damn self.
If you ARE writing open source software, it's not a bullshit license.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348684</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30354096</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1260206220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Slashdot is neither for nor against copyright, and neither for nor against copyright reform. Slashdot is both for and against copyright, and both for and against copyright reform.</p><p>In case you hadn't noticed, we don't walk in lockstep here. There are varied opinions on every subject, including copyright.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot is neither for nor against copyright , and neither for nor against copyright reform .
Slashdot is both for and against copyright , and both for and against copyright reform.In case you had n't noticed , we do n't walk in lockstep here .
There are varied opinions on every subject , including copyright .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot is neither for nor against copyright, and neither for nor against copyright reform.
Slashdot is both for and against copyright, and both for and against copyright reform.In case you hadn't noticed, we don't walk in lockstep here.
There are varied opinions on every subject, including copyright.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30352244</id>
	<title>Not even GPLed</title>
	<author>rdtennent</author>
	<datestamp>1260198000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>From the README in the mupdf tarball on the Palm site:<p> This code is under the same licensing scheme as Ghostscript.
AFPL and one year or major release later GPL.
Because there have been no major releases yet; AFPL it is.


</p><p>If there were copyright notices in the source files, they've been stripped off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From the README in the mupdf tarball on the Palm site : This code is under the same licensing scheme as Ghostscript .
AFPL and one year or major release later GPL .
Because there have been no major releases yet ; AFPL it is .
If there were copyright notices in the source files , they 've been stripped off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the README in the mupdf tarball on the Palm site: This code is under the same licensing scheme as Ghostscript.
AFPL and one year or major release later GPL.
Because there have been no major releases yet; AFPL it is.
If there were copyright notices in the source files, they've been stripped off.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30354914</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260209520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Indeed you are confused.</p><p>But really, you don't have to make repeated posts in order to prove it. We already got it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed you are confused.But really , you do n't have to make repeated posts in order to prove it .
We already got it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeed you are confused.But really, you don't have to make repeated posts in order to prove it.
We already got it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30355286</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>fulldecent</author>
	<datestamp>1260211260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In a reasonable number of years, us GPL supporters will expect all licensed code to become pubic domain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In a reasonable number of years , us GPL supporters will expect all licensed code to become pubic domain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a reasonable number of years, us GPL supporters will expect all licensed code to become pubic domain.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349906</id>
	<title>Michael, of course</title>
	<author>ysth</author>
	<datestamp>1260128340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't know why, but I read the story title as "Palin Sued Over Palm Pre GPL Violation".</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know why , but I read the story title as " Palin Sued Over Palm Pre GPL Violation " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know why, but I read the story title as "Palin Sued Over Palm Pre GPL Violation".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350384</id>
	<title>Re:Old Article Is Old</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1260177960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Anyone else notice this? -&gt; Mikael Rickn&#228;s (IDG News Service) 07/12/2009 07:53:00</p></div></blockquote><p>

Oh dear, I've travelled back in time to the seventh of December in the year 2009.<br> <br>

There's still time, I have to warn people about Stallman before its too late.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone else notice this ?
- &gt; Mikael Rickn   s ( IDG News Service ) 07/12/2009 07 : 53 : 00 Oh dear , I 've travelled back in time to the seventh of December in the year 2009 .
There 's still time , I have to warn people about Stallman before its too late .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone else notice this?
-&gt; Mikael Ricknäs (IDG News Service) 07/12/2009 07:53:00

Oh dear, I've travelled back in time to the seventh of December in the year 2009.
There's still time, I have to warn people about Stallman before its too late.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349928</id>
	<title>GPL is far worse for your freedom than Microsoft!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260128520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Like Microsoft and other for-profit software companies, the GPL gang uses government-based aggression in order to enforce its so-called "intellectual property rights", but what makes it worse is that using the latest crack from <i>The Pirate Bay</i> nor any amount of money would fix your GPL-related legal problem.  Microsoft is able to invest billions into R&amp;D to protect its market share by actually delivering value and innovation to its customers (not all of whom are software geeks), which is why it has been able to retain its market position for all this time.  Restrictive licenses like GPL discourage free market competition!   The software authors, acting in the context of the competitive environment, should get to decide what they can do with their source code, like include it in a proprietary project some time in the future.</p><p>Just look at how much good the small amount of permissively licensed software (ex. BSD, X, Apache, Xiph codecs, SQLite, PostgreSQL, Lua, etc) have done - pieces of that code are included in feature-competitive commercial products used by millions (or maybe already billions) of people all over the world!  GPL, on the other hand, continues to be a black hole that companies like IBM and Oracle (both, interestingly enough, a part of the Military-Industrial Complex) continue to pour billions into, presumably in an ill-devised effort to hurt Microsoft, but in reality having a crummy-but-free desktop competitor only solidifies Microsoft's market dominance by crippling any serious proprietary competitors before they get a chance to get off the ground.</p><p><b>BSD is free software, GPL isn't!</b></p><p>(I know saying this will further push my karma toward negative infinity, but it is nonetheless true.)</p><p>Falling prices and eventual open-sourcing of software should come as the result of free market competition, not government force!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Like Microsoft and other for-profit software companies , the GPL gang uses government-based aggression in order to enforce its so-called " intellectual property rights " , but what makes it worse is that using the latest crack from The Pirate Bay nor any amount of money would fix your GPL-related legal problem .
Microsoft is able to invest billions into R&amp;D to protect its market share by actually delivering value and innovation to its customers ( not all of whom are software geeks ) , which is why it has been able to retain its market position for all this time .
Restrictive licenses like GPL discourage free market competition !
The software authors , acting in the context of the competitive environment , should get to decide what they can do with their source code , like include it in a proprietary project some time in the future.Just look at how much good the small amount of permissively licensed software ( ex .
BSD , X , Apache , Xiph codecs , SQLite , PostgreSQL , Lua , etc ) have done - pieces of that code are included in feature-competitive commercial products used by millions ( or maybe already billions ) of people all over the world !
GPL , on the other hand , continues to be a black hole that companies like IBM and Oracle ( both , interestingly enough , a part of the Military-Industrial Complex ) continue to pour billions into , presumably in an ill-devised effort to hurt Microsoft , but in reality having a crummy-but-free desktop competitor only solidifies Microsoft 's market dominance by crippling any serious proprietary competitors before they get a chance to get off the ground.BSD is free software , GPL is n't !
( I know saying this will further push my karma toward negative infinity , but it is nonetheless true .
) Falling prices and eventual open-sourcing of software should come as the result of free market competition , not government force !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like Microsoft and other for-profit software companies, the GPL gang uses government-based aggression in order to enforce its so-called "intellectual property rights", but what makes it worse is that using the latest crack from The Pirate Bay nor any amount of money would fix your GPL-related legal problem.
Microsoft is able to invest billions into R&amp;D to protect its market share by actually delivering value and innovation to its customers (not all of whom are software geeks), which is why it has been able to retain its market position for all this time.
Restrictive licenses like GPL discourage free market competition!
The software authors, acting in the context of the competitive environment, should get to decide what they can do with their source code, like include it in a proprietary project some time in the future.Just look at how much good the small amount of permissively licensed software (ex.
BSD, X, Apache, Xiph codecs, SQLite, PostgreSQL, Lua, etc) have done - pieces of that code are included in feature-competitive commercial products used by millions (or maybe already billions) of people all over the world!
GPL, on the other hand, continues to be a black hole that companies like IBM and Oracle (both, interestingly enough, a part of the Military-Industrial Complex) continue to pour billions into, presumably in an ill-devised effort to hurt Microsoft, but in reality having a crummy-but-free desktop competitor only solidifies Microsoft's market dominance by crippling any serious proprietary competitors before they get a chance to get off the ground.BSD is free software, GPL isn't!
(I know saying this will further push my karma toward negative infinity, but it is nonetheless true.
)Falling prices and eventual open-sourcing of software should come as the result of free market competition, not government force!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30360176</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260195060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thanks for pointing out the hypocrisy around here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thanks for pointing out the hypocrisy around here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thanks for pointing out the hypocrisy around here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986</id>
	<title>I'm confused</title>
	<author>bonch</author>
	<datestamp>1260118200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is Slashdot for or against copyrights this week?  You know, since the GPL is a copyright license and relies on copyright law to have any power.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is Slashdot for or against copyrights this week ?
You know , since the GPL is a copyright license and relies on copyright law to have any power .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is Slashdot for or against copyrights this week?
You know, since the GPL is a copyright license and relies on copyright law to have any power.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30351764</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260195540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Slashdot, as well as the Open Source community itself, has NEVER been against copyright.  We RELY on the copyright to ensure that our work remains in the condition the authors demand (i.e., modifiable, open, available).  If you comply with the copyright, be it either commercial or not, then you have nothing to worry about. Failure to comply will often result in lawsuits, if only to ensure that the works are not "lost" into the proprietary world.</p><p>Never mistake "Copyright" for "Proprietary". Taking copyrighted open source material and making it proprietary violates the copyright, which is a basic tenet of all the 160 or so licenses recognized by the OSI as being "open source".</p><p>I hope that this problem with the Pre is merely an oversight, and can be rectified quickly and easily by Palm.  However, I feel pretty sure that the suit would not have been filed had not Palm already been notified of its error and still failed to comply.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot , as well as the Open Source community itself , has NEVER been against copyright .
We RELY on the copyright to ensure that our work remains in the condition the authors demand ( i.e. , modifiable , open , available ) .
If you comply with the copyright , be it either commercial or not , then you have nothing to worry about .
Failure to comply will often result in lawsuits , if only to ensure that the works are not " lost " into the proprietary world.Never mistake " Copyright " for " Proprietary " .
Taking copyrighted open source material and making it proprietary violates the copyright , which is a basic tenet of all the 160 or so licenses recognized by the OSI as being " open source " .I hope that this problem with the Pre is merely an oversight , and can be rectified quickly and easily by Palm .
However , I feel pretty sure that the suit would not have been filed had not Palm already been notified of its error and still failed to comply .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot, as well as the Open Source community itself, has NEVER been against copyright.
We RELY on the copyright to ensure that our work remains in the condition the authors demand (i.e., modifiable, open, available).
If you comply with the copyright, be it either commercial or not, then you have nothing to worry about.
Failure to comply will often result in lawsuits, if only to ensure that the works are not "lost" into the proprietary world.Never mistake "Copyright" for "Proprietary".
Taking copyrighted open source material and making it proprietary violates the copyright, which is a basic tenet of all the 160 or so licenses recognized by the OSI as being "open source".I hope that this problem with the Pre is merely an oversight, and can be rectified quickly and easily by Palm.
However, I feel pretty sure that the suit would not have been filed had not Palm already been notified of its error and still failed to comply.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30351544</id>
	<title>Re:Palm Mentions mupdf on the phone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260193380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They dual license there stuff, releasing new updates and features into the open source world a year or so after their commercial package. Most likely palm made assumptions it was just like all the other code they chose, and took the wrong code base. I find it odd they would react like this, I've dealt with the owner in the past who has been very down to earth. Maybe their business is dying and this is a final payday?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They dual license there stuff , releasing new updates and features into the open source world a year or so after their commercial package .
Most likely palm made assumptions it was just like all the other code they chose , and took the wrong code base .
I find it odd they would react like this , I 've dealt with the owner in the past who has been very down to earth .
Maybe their business is dying and this is a final payday ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They dual license there stuff, releasing new updates and features into the open source world a year or so after their commercial package.
Most likely palm made assumptions it was just like all the other code they chose, and took the wrong code base.
I find it odd they would react like this, I've dealt with the owner in the past who has been very down to earth.
Maybe their business is dying and this is a final payday?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349922</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349112</id>
	<title>Re:Another example of Not Really Free</title>
	<author>xiando</author>
	<datestamp>1260119580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Just another example of why the industry is moving to BSD-style licenses. Face it, the GPL is dead and Stallman's socialist dream along with it.</p></div><p>The LGPL, notice the L, will do just fine in those cases where software authors find that the GPL is too restrictive. And the GPL does a great job at protecting real people, if some corporation has a problem with releasing their code under GPL then that is their problem. The GPL says that you can not take free code and make it non-free, I do not see the lack of being able to take freedom away as a problem. But then again, I am not a evil corporation.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just another example of why the industry is moving to BSD-style licenses .
Face it , the GPL is dead and Stallman 's socialist dream along with it.The LGPL , notice the L , will do just fine in those cases where software authors find that the GPL is too restrictive .
And the GPL does a great job at protecting real people , if some corporation has a problem with releasing their code under GPL then that is their problem .
The GPL says that you can not take free code and make it non-free , I do not see the lack of being able to take freedom away as a problem .
But then again , I am not a evil corporation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just another example of why the industry is moving to BSD-style licenses.
Face it, the GPL is dead and Stallman's socialist dream along with it.The LGPL, notice the L, will do just fine in those cases where software authors find that the GPL is too restrictive.
And the GPL does a great job at protecting real people, if some corporation has a problem with releasing their code under GPL then that is their problem.
The GPL says that you can not take free code and make it non-free, I do not see the lack of being able to take freedom away as a problem.
But then again, I am not a evil corporation.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349342</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it?</title>
	<author>cptdondo</author>
	<datestamp>1260121920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh come on... I can buy a GSM modem and stick it on an embedded board from embeddedarm.com.  I now have a fully programmable open phone that, according to you, I can now use to wreak utter havoc on the cell phone industry.  (I know, I programmed one.  A direct bridge between the GSM network and our wifi network.  Wneee! Hear those towers toppling!)</p><p>Not really.  It's the same bullshit argument you hear about almost anything these days - can't trust the user, have to lock it down, we need DRM, those users are all thieves.</p><p>BULLSHIT!  It only inconveniences the legit users, not those who really want to destroy civilization.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh come on... I can buy a GSM modem and stick it on an embedded board from embeddedarm.com .
I now have a fully programmable open phone that , according to you , I can now use to wreak utter havoc on the cell phone industry .
( I know , I programmed one .
A direct bridge between the GSM network and our wifi network .
Wneee ! Hear those towers toppling !
) Not really .
It 's the same bullshit argument you hear about almost anything these days - ca n't trust the user , have to lock it down , we need DRM , those users are all thieves.BULLSHIT !
It only inconveniences the legit users , not those who really want to destroy civilization .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh come on... I can buy a GSM modem and stick it on an embedded board from embeddedarm.com.
I now have a fully programmable open phone that, according to you, I can now use to wreak utter havoc on the cell phone industry.
(I know, I programmed one.
A direct bridge between the GSM network and our wifi network.
Wneee! Hear those towers toppling!
)Not really.
It's the same bullshit argument you hear about almost anything these days - can't trust the user, have to lock it down, we need DRM, those users are all thieves.BULLSHIT!
It only inconveniences the legit users, not those who really want to destroy civilization.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349024</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349146</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260119880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In Palm's case, they would never sell any phones, not because the software is Open Source but because no <b>US</b> carrier would let it on their network.</p></div><p>fixed that for ya, in EU you can buy any phone (at a higher price) and 3 pay as you go sim cards from different carriers and use whichever card you want when you want. The US is the only country I am aware of with a phone-tied-to-carrier system.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In Palm 's case , they would never sell any phones , not because the software is Open Source but because no US carrier would let it on their network.fixed that for ya , in EU you can buy any phone ( at a higher price ) and 3 pay as you go sim cards from different carriers and use whichever card you want when you want .
The US is the only country I am aware of with a phone-tied-to-carrier system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Palm's case, they would never sell any phones, not because the software is Open Source but because no US carrier would let it on their network.fixed that for ya, in EU you can buy any phone (at a higher price) and 3 pay as you go sim cards from different carriers and use whichever card you want when you want.
The US is the only country I am aware of with a phone-tied-to-carrier system.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349024</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30351440</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it?</title>
	<author>Nursie</author>
	<datestamp>1260191880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Which is of course why my OpenMoko was never allowed on any network!</p><p>Oh wait, FAIL. The only closed part of that was the GSM firmware, which is arguably not even part of the software stack.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Which is of course why my OpenMoko was never allowed on any network ! Oh wait , FAIL .
The only closed part of that was the GSM firmware , which is arguably not even part of the software stack .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which is of course why my OpenMoko was never allowed on any network!Oh wait, FAIL.
The only closed part of that was the GSM firmware, which is arguably not even part of the software stack.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349024</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350382</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>mpe</author>
	<datestamp>1260177960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Uh, no, the GPL isn't a copyright license, it's a procedural use of code that may or may not otherwise be bound by copyright.</i> <br> <br>Actually that's <b>exactly</b> what it is. Copyright law says "You need permission from the copyright holder to do X, Y &amp; Z". The GPL (and anything similar) says "You have permission subject to conditions A, B &amp; C".<br> <br> <i>It's a usage license that defines the procedure under which the code can subsequently be used,</i> <br> <br>The GPL says nothing about how the code can be used, it is only concerned with transfer of copies to other parties. The GPL is most definitly not an EULA, no matter how many people think it is!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh , no , the GPL is n't a copyright license , it 's a procedural use of code that may or may not otherwise be bound by copyright .
Actually that 's exactly what it is .
Copyright law says " You need permission from the copyright holder to do X , Y &amp; Z " .
The GPL ( and anything similar ) says " You have permission subject to conditions A , B &amp; C " .
It 's a usage license that defines the procedure under which the code can subsequently be used , The GPL says nothing about how the code can be used , it is only concerned with transfer of copies to other parties .
The GPL is most definitly not an EULA , no matter how many people think it is !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh, no, the GPL isn't a copyright license, it's a procedural use of code that may or may not otherwise be bound by copyright.
Actually that's exactly what it is.
Copyright law says "You need permission from the copyright holder to do X, Y &amp; Z".
The GPL (and anything similar) says "You have permission subject to conditions A, B &amp; C".
It's a usage license that defines the procedure under which the code can subsequently be used,  The GPL says nothing about how the code can be used, it is only concerned with transfer of copies to other parties.
The GPL is most definitly not an EULA, no matter how many people think it is!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349168</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349130</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it?</title>
	<author>iammani</author>
	<datestamp>1260119760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why not? The GSM/CDMA part can still be implemented separately, say on a separate chip and the all other functions of the phone on an arm processor which can run any compatible OS of your choice, may be even an OSS OS.<br> <br>

This way, the cell tower is safe and you get to run any application/library, add external devices to the phone without  requiring the blessings of the manufacturer or the cell phone providers.<br> <br>

I dont understand why this is not possible. Hell, they could even make a USB based GSM/CDMA card, that could be used with any laptop/palmtop that supports USB. Want to switch providers, just use a new usb card.<br> <br>

The only reason why they dont make these is that, the cell phone providers want *complete* control over any thing related to cell phones.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not ?
The GSM/CDMA part can still be implemented separately , say on a separate chip and the all other functions of the phone on an arm processor which can run any compatible OS of your choice , may be even an OSS OS .
This way , the cell tower is safe and you get to run any application/library , add external devices to the phone without requiring the blessings of the manufacturer or the cell phone providers .
I dont understand why this is not possible .
Hell , they could even make a USB based GSM/CDMA card , that could be used with any laptop/palmtop that supports USB .
Want to switch providers , just use a new usb card .
The only reason why they dont make these is that , the cell phone providers want * complete * control over any thing related to cell phones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not?
The GSM/CDMA part can still be implemented separately, say on a separate chip and the all other functions of the phone on an arm processor which can run any compatible OS of your choice, may be even an OSS OS.
This way, the cell tower is safe and you get to run any application/library, add external devices to the phone without  requiring the blessings of the manufacturer or the cell phone providers.
I dont understand why this is not possible.
Hell, they could even make a USB based GSM/CDMA card, that could be used with any laptop/palmtop that supports USB.
Want to switch providers, just use a new usb card.
The only reason why they dont make these is that, the cell phone providers want *complete* control over any thing related to cell phones.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349024</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350162</id>
	<title>Re:Another example of Not Really Free</title>
	<author>Zey</author>
	<datestamp>1260218280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>pipatron (966506) wrote:<blockquote><div><p>Oh, the industry is moving to BSD-style licenses? When? What industry?</p></div></blockquote><p>A fair point to make, that. Very few successful commercial enterprises have ever used a GPL license for their software. For the few that did, their GPL software ended up acting as loss-leaders for other technologies or for generating support contracts.</p><p>Speaking subjectively, I can't imagine why a commercial company would want GPL software anyway. BSD license code attracts older, more accomplished and experienced developers with a work ethic they've acquired from working in a professional environment. GPL code attracts young cowboys and ideological zealots -- teenagers and students who don't have bills to pay, or a family to support, and have not had to develop those professional skills.</p><blockquote><div><p>Did they actually use GPL-style licenses before?</p></div></blockquote><p>I doubt many companies themselves did, but, most software developers and development managers in those companies would have been exposed to the GPL at various times in their lives -- particularly back when they themselves were students, living cheaply at home.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>pipatron ( 966506 ) wrote : Oh , the industry is moving to BSD-style licenses ?
When ? What industry ? A fair point to make , that .
Very few successful commercial enterprises have ever used a GPL license for their software .
For the few that did , their GPL software ended up acting as loss-leaders for other technologies or for generating support contracts.Speaking subjectively , I ca n't imagine why a commercial company would want GPL software anyway .
BSD license code attracts older , more accomplished and experienced developers with a work ethic they 've acquired from working in a professional environment .
GPL code attracts young cowboys and ideological zealots -- teenagers and students who do n't have bills to pay , or a family to support , and have not had to develop those professional skills.Did they actually use GPL-style licenses before ? I doubt many companies themselves did , but , most software developers and development managers in those companies would have been exposed to the GPL at various times in their lives -- particularly back when they themselves were students , living cheaply at home .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>pipatron (966506) wrote:Oh, the industry is moving to BSD-style licenses?
When? What industry?A fair point to make, that.
Very few successful commercial enterprises have ever used a GPL license for their software.
For the few that did, their GPL software ended up acting as loss-leaders for other technologies or for generating support contracts.Speaking subjectively, I can't imagine why a commercial company would want GPL software anyway.
BSD license code attracts older, more accomplished and experienced developers with a work ethic they've acquired from working in a professional environment.
GPL code attracts young cowboys and ideological zealots -- teenagers and students who don't have bills to pay, or a family to support, and have not had to develop those professional skills.Did they actually use GPL-style licenses before?I doubt many companies themselves did, but, most software developers and development managers in those companies would have been exposed to the GPL at various times in their lives -- particularly back when they themselves were students, living cheaply at home.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30353446</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it?</title>
	<author>James McP</author>
	<datestamp>1260203460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While I'm a little disappointed in Palm, it's only a little.  Stupid stuff happens in large projects and Palm has so far played nicely with the GPL crowd.</p><p>This was a weekend release from Australia.  Palm will need a bit of time to respond.</p><p>Plus there seems to be a difference of opinion  through the GPL community if dynamic linked libraries can be "infectious" or not, at least according to the Wikipedia article on the GPL. If that's accurate, Lawrence Rosen isn't sure that a court would enforce the GPL on dynamic libraries.</p><p>And you might be surprised at how reprogrammable the Pre is.  With a simple code (june062009) you unlock the phone and can then install<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.ipkg files over usb, like on-device terminal access as root.  You're pretty much in charge of the device once you've got root access.</p><p>There are limits based on hardware drivers and the like but you can reconfigure most anything that isn't in a binary driver.  Although as OpenMoko showed, coming up with open source drivers for modern cell hardware is not easy.</p><p>I do not know if it is "tivoized" and will hork under unsigned kernels or if you can install anything you might want.  That'd probably be delimiter for a "completely reprogrammable phone".</p><p>Now I *really* want to know if I can put a different kernel on my Pre....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While I 'm a little disappointed in Palm , it 's only a little .
Stupid stuff happens in large projects and Palm has so far played nicely with the GPL crowd.This was a weekend release from Australia .
Palm will need a bit of time to respond.Plus there seems to be a difference of opinion through the GPL community if dynamic linked libraries can be " infectious " or not , at least according to the Wikipedia article on the GPL .
If that 's accurate , Lawrence Rosen is n't sure that a court would enforce the GPL on dynamic libraries.And you might be surprised at how reprogrammable the Pre is .
With a simple code ( june062009 ) you unlock the phone and can then install .ipkg files over usb , like on-device terminal access as root .
You 're pretty much in charge of the device once you 've got root access.There are limits based on hardware drivers and the like but you can reconfigure most anything that is n't in a binary driver .
Although as OpenMoko showed , coming up with open source drivers for modern cell hardware is not easy.I do not know if it is " tivoized " and will hork under unsigned kernels or if you can install anything you might want .
That 'd probably be delimiter for a " completely reprogrammable phone " .Now I * really * want to know if I can put a different kernel on my Pre... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I'm a little disappointed in Palm, it's only a little.
Stupid stuff happens in large projects and Palm has so far played nicely with the GPL crowd.This was a weekend release from Australia.
Palm will need a bit of time to respond.Plus there seems to be a difference of opinion  through the GPL community if dynamic linked libraries can be "infectious" or not, at least according to the Wikipedia article on the GPL.
If that's accurate, Lawrence Rosen isn't sure that a court would enforce the GPL on dynamic libraries.And you might be surprised at how reprogrammable the Pre is.
With a simple code (june062009) you unlock the phone and can then install .ipkg files over usb, like on-device terminal access as root.
You're pretty much in charge of the device once you've got root access.There are limits based on hardware drivers and the like but you can reconfigure most anything that isn't in a binary driver.
Although as OpenMoko showed, coming up with open source drivers for modern cell hardware is not easy.I do not know if it is "tivoized" and will hork under unsigned kernels or if you can install anything you might want.
That'd probably be delimiter for a "completely reprogrammable phone".Now I *really* want to know if I can put a different kernel on my Pre....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349024</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30354636</id>
	<title>Using open source</title>
	<author>whitedsepdivine</author>
	<datestamp>1260208380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Someone please correct me if I am wrong.

If I completely write an OS, and for the release of that OS I use an open source pdf viewer.  That does not mean the OS has to be open source also.

It seems to me that the pdf viewer would remain open source, and I would have to contribute any code changes I made to the pdf viewer to the project.  But my OS can remain private.

Also, does open source say anything about having the ability to update or install under a private OS.  I would image just because the code is open source, the OS provider doesn't have to provide a way for the community to change or update the code under the OS.  Just provide the source to the code.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone please correct me if I am wrong .
If I completely write an OS , and for the release of that OS I use an open source pdf viewer .
That does not mean the OS has to be open source also .
It seems to me that the pdf viewer would remain open source , and I would have to contribute any code changes I made to the pdf viewer to the project .
But my OS can remain private .
Also , does open source say anything about having the ability to update or install under a private OS .
I would image just because the code is open source , the OS provider does n't have to provide a way for the community to change or update the code under the OS .
Just provide the source to the code .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone please correct me if I am wrong.
If I completely write an OS, and for the release of that OS I use an open source pdf viewer.
That does not mean the OS has to be open source also.
It seems to me that the pdf viewer would remain open source, and I would have to contribute any code changes I made to the pdf viewer to the project.
But my OS can remain private.
Also, does open source say anything about having the ability to update or install under a private OS.
I would image just because the code is open source, the OS provider doesn't have to provide a way for the community to change or update the code under the OS.
Just provide the source to the code.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30351002</id>
	<title>Re:http://opensource.palm.com/ looks like it...</title>
	<author>koiransuklaa</author>
	<datestamp>1260185340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The source to the pdf viewer? Where?

The claim isn't about mupdf sources, but a derived work, the actual PDF viewer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The source to the pdf viewer ?
Where ? The claim is n't about mupdf sources , but a derived work , the actual PDF viewer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The source to the pdf viewer?
Where?

The claim isn't about mupdf sources, but a derived work, the actual PDF viewer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349382</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350334</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260177240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'll say your confused, you seem to be thinking of the corpus of slashdotters as a single entity. Do you even read the comments on stories?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll say your confused , you seem to be thinking of the corpus of slashdotters as a single entity .
Do you even read the comments on stories ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll say your confused, you seem to be thinking of the corpus of slashdotters as a single entity.
Do you even read the comments on stories?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349028</id>
	<title>Re:Another example of Not Really Free</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260118680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Just another example of why the industry is moving to BSD-style licenses.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Your source for this fact?
</p><blockquote><div><p>Face it, the GPL is dead</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
It doesn't matter to me what "the industry" does. "The industry" can do whatever it wants, and it has no effect on my ability to run open-source software on my own machine.
</p><blockquote><div><p>and Stallman's socialist dream along with it.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Extra points for red-baiting.
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just another example of why the industry is moving to BSD-style licenses .
Your source for this fact ?
Face it , the GPL is dead It does n't matter to me what " the industry " does .
" The industry " can do whatever it wants , and it has no effect on my ability to run open-source software on my own machine .
and Stallman 's socialist dream along with it .
Extra points for red-baiting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just another example of why the industry is moving to BSD-style licenses.
Your source for this fact?
Face it, the GPL is dead

It doesn't matter to me what "the industry" does.
"The industry" can do whatever it wants, and it has no effect on my ability to run open-source software on my own machine.
and Stallman's socialist dream along with it.
Extra points for red-baiting.

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30352304</id>
	<title>Re:Settlement is probably inevitable...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260198240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Artifex has no case.</p><p>They're trying to impose terms on GPL licensed software, which they cannot impose. Either software is released under the GPL to everyone or no one. Artifex tries to impose additional conditions: "If your entire application (including its source code) is not licensed to the public under the GNU GPL, you are not authorized to ship GPL Ghostscript or GPL MuPDF with your application under the terms of the GNU GPL". </p><p>What Artifex is trying to do is prohibited by the GPL itself: "If the Program as you received it, or any part of it, contains a notice stating that it is<br>governed by this License along with a term that is a further restriction, you may remove that term." </p><p>The GPL's allowed restrictions (section 7) are very limited in number, quite strict, and Artifex is trying to assert a term which the GPL does not allow them to assert. Palm is quite right that it qualifies for the GPL license despite Artifex's statements to the contrary.</p><p>I predict this case will be dismissed and Palm will collect legal fees from Artifex.</p><p>Disclaimer: IANAL</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Artifex has no case.They 're trying to impose terms on GPL licensed software , which they can not impose .
Either software is released under the GPL to everyone or no one .
Artifex tries to impose additional conditions : " If your entire application ( including its source code ) is not licensed to the public under the GNU GPL , you are not authorized to ship GPL Ghostscript or GPL MuPDF with your application under the terms of the GNU GPL " .
What Artifex is trying to do is prohibited by the GPL itself : " If the Program as you received it , or any part of it , contains a notice stating that it isgoverned by this License along with a term that is a further restriction , you may remove that term .
" The GPL 's allowed restrictions ( section 7 ) are very limited in number , quite strict , and Artifex is trying to assert a term which the GPL does not allow them to assert .
Palm is quite right that it qualifies for the GPL license despite Artifex 's statements to the contrary.I predict this case will be dismissed and Palm will collect legal fees from Artifex.Disclaimer : IANAL</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Artifex has no case.They're trying to impose terms on GPL licensed software, which they cannot impose.
Either software is released under the GPL to everyone or no one.
Artifex tries to impose additional conditions: "If your entire application (including its source code) is not licensed to the public under the GNU GPL, you are not authorized to ship GPL Ghostscript or GPL MuPDF with your application under the terms of the GNU GPL".
What Artifex is trying to do is prohibited by the GPL itself: "If the Program as you received it, or any part of it, contains a notice stating that it isgoverned by this License along with a term that is a further restriction, you may remove that term.
" The GPL's allowed restrictions (section 7) are very limited in number, quite strict, and Artifex is trying to assert a term which the GPL does not allow them to assert.
Palm is quite right that it qualifies for the GPL license despite Artifex's statements to the contrary.I predict this case will be dismissed and Palm will collect legal fees from Artifex.Disclaimer: IANAL</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348704</id>
	<title>Re:Well</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260115320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's why we're very careful that any libraries we use in distributed software are licensed under BSD or MIT style licenses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's why we 're very careful that any libraries we use in distributed software are licensed under BSD or MIT style licenses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's why we're very careful that any libraries we use in distributed software are licensed under BSD or MIT style licenses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348684</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349922</id>
	<title>Re:Palm Mentions mupdf on the phone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260128460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you look at the Artifex license page (http://www.artifex.com/indexlicense.htm) you will actually see that they have a very strange interpretation of the GPL. They basically claim that you can't bundle Ghostscript together with non-GPL programs, or install it with the same installer. If they used the same legal advice for writing their licensing terms as they have used for filing the lawsuit, then it might turn up in the end that the whole case has no merit...</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you look at the Artifex license page ( http : //www.artifex.com/indexlicense.htm ) you will actually see that they have a very strange interpretation of the GPL .
They basically claim that you ca n't bundle Ghostscript together with non-GPL programs , or install it with the same installer .
If they used the same legal advice for writing their licensing terms as they have used for filing the lawsuit , then it might turn up in the end that the whole case has no merit.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you look at the Artifex license page (http://www.artifex.com/indexlicense.htm) you will actually see that they have a very strange interpretation of the GPL.
They basically claim that you can't bundle Ghostscript together with non-GPL programs, or install it with the same installer.
If they used the same legal advice for writing their licensing terms as they have used for filing the lawsuit, then it might turn up in the end that the whole case has no merit...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349448</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349168</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260120000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uh, no, the GPL isn't a copyright license, it's a procedural use of code that may or may not otherwise be bound by copyright. The 'open' side of the license, should a coder be bound by it, doesn't nullify copyright, and never did. It's a usage license that defines the procedure under which the code can subsequently be used, how modifications are treated, and says how the use of the code binds one to the obligations of the license.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh , no , the GPL is n't a copyright license , it 's a procedural use of code that may or may not otherwise be bound by copyright .
The 'open ' side of the license , should a coder be bound by it , does n't nullify copyright , and never did .
It 's a usage license that defines the procedure under which the code can subsequently be used , how modifications are treated , and says how the use of the code binds one to the obligations of the license .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh, no, the GPL isn't a copyright license, it's a procedural use of code that may or may not otherwise be bound by copyright.
The 'open' side of the license, should a coder be bound by it, doesn't nullify copyright, and never did.
It's a usage license that defines the procedure under which the code can subsequently be used, how modifications are treated, and says how the use of the code binds one to the obligations of the license.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348684</id>
	<title>Well</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260115080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, if the GPL wasn't a bullshit license which states that you're subject to the GPL if you even <i>use</i> GPL software in your project, this wouldn't be a problem.</p><p>Honestly, I have some issues with the LGPL, but they're a hell of a lot less because that aspect is gone. The "linking to my code counts as directly using my code" clause in the GPL is complete and utter bullshit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , if the GPL was n't a bullshit license which states that you 're subject to the GPL if you even use GPL software in your project , this would n't be a problem.Honestly , I have some issues with the LGPL , but they 're a hell of a lot less because that aspect is gone .
The " linking to my code counts as directly using my code " clause in the GPL is complete and utter bullshit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, if the GPL wasn't a bullshit license which states that you're subject to the GPL if you even use GPL software in your project, this wouldn't be a problem.Honestly, I have some issues with the LGPL, but they're a hell of a lot less because that aspect is gone.
The "linking to my code counts as directly using my code" clause in the GPL is complete and utter bullshit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350218</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260218940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>People lives can depend on the cell system, they don't depend on the web.</p></div><p>LOLLLL How's life there in the 80's? I kinda miss all those neon lights and wild hairstyles...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>People lives can depend on the cell system , they do n't depend on the web.LOLLLL How 's life there in the 80 's ?
I kinda miss all those neon lights and wild hairstyles.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People lives can depend on the cell system, they don't depend on the web.LOLLLL How's life there in the 80's?
I kinda miss all those neon lights and wild hairstyles...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349024</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30354054</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>jonbryce</author>
	<datestamp>1260206100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We are in favour of the use of copyright to promote the progress of science and useful arts as per the US constitution, but not when it is used by the **AAs to achieve the opposite effect.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We are in favour of the use of copyright to promote the progress of science and useful arts as per the US constitution , but not when it is used by the * * AAs to achieve the opposite effect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We are in favour of the use of copyright to promote the progress of science and useful arts as per the US constitution, but not when it is used by the **AAs to achieve the opposite effect.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348956</id>
	<title>Re:Another example of Not Really Free</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260117960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah right, we live, free no conditions, every day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah right , we live , free no conditions , every day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah right, we live, free no conditions, every day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349538</id>
	<title>Ep'?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260124020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">How is the G)NAA = 36440 FreeBSD</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>How is the G ) NAA = 36440 FreeBSD [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is the G)NAA = 36440 FreeBSD [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349382</id>
	<title>http://opensource.palm.com/ looks like it...</title>
	<author>originalhack</author>
	<datestamp>1260122520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>http://opensource.palm.com/1.3.1/index.html seems to have the source and patches.  Is this the end of it or is something missing?</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //opensource.palm.com/1.3.1/index.html seems to have the source and patches .
Is this the end of it or is something missing ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://opensource.palm.com/1.3.1/index.html seems to have the source and patches.
Is this the end of it or is something missing?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349724</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>SpacePunk</author>
	<datestamp>1260126180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It all depends if the reader thinks of 'free' as in free beer, or free speech.  But, that can be dependent on what the reader personally wants.  Usually people want free beer, they couldn't give less of a shit about free speech.  But, the same people that want everything to be free as in beer probably are downloading Britney Spears, Milty Cyrus, or Jonas Brothers music so what they think really doesn't matter.  They will usually oppose the BSD/MIT license because it is not as viral as the GPL.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It all depends if the reader thinks of 'free ' as in free beer , or free speech .
But , that can be dependent on what the reader personally wants .
Usually people want free beer , they could n't give less of a shit about free speech .
But , the same people that want everything to be free as in beer probably are downloading Britney Spears , Milty Cyrus , or Jonas Brothers music so what they think really does n't matter .
They will usually oppose the BSD/MIT license because it is not as viral as the GPL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It all depends if the reader thinks of 'free' as in free beer, or free speech.
But, that can be dependent on what the reader personally wants.
Usually people want free beer, they couldn't give less of a shit about free speech.
But, the same people that want everything to be free as in beer probably are downloading Britney Spears, Milty Cyrus, or Jonas Brothers music so what they think really doesn't matter.
They will usually oppose the BSD/MIT license because it is not as viral as the GPL.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350576</id>
	<title>Re:http://opensource.palm.com/ looks like it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260180180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess the pdf reader has multiple components and rendering engine is GPL code which causes whole PDF reader to fall under GPL. It doesn't depend on if it is dynamically linked or not (for LGPL it would depend). Now request is to publish whole source for Palm pdf reader under GPL (or possible that palm pays for commercial license).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess the pdf reader has multiple components and rendering engine is GPL code which causes whole PDF reader to fall under GPL .
It does n't depend on if it is dynamically linked or not ( for LGPL it would depend ) .
Now request is to publish whole source for Palm pdf reader under GPL ( or possible that palm pays for commercial license ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess the pdf reader has multiple components and rendering engine is GPL code which causes whole PDF reader to fall under GPL.
It doesn't depend on if it is dynamically linked or not (for LGPL it would depend).
Now request is to publish whole source for Palm pdf reader under GPL (or possible that palm pays for commercial license).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349382</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348712</id>
	<title>Re:Well (parent needs a clue)</title>
	<author>Big Jojo</author>
	<datestamp>1260115380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Well, if the GPL wasn't a bullshit license which states that you're subject to the GPL if you even use GPL software in your project, this wouldn't be a problem.</p></div></blockquote><p>Since it doesn't say that, I'm sure you'll agree that this <b> <em>is</em> a problem</b>.

</p><p>Like all licences, GPL constrains how you may used the licensed thing.  All you have to do is satisfy those terms and conditions and you're fine.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , if the GPL was n't a bullshit license which states that you 're subject to the GPL if you even use GPL software in your project , this would n't be a problem.Since it does n't say that , I 'm sure you 'll agree that this is a problem .
Like all licences , GPL constrains how you may used the licensed thing .
All you have to do is satisfy those terms and conditions and you 're fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, if the GPL wasn't a bullshit license which states that you're subject to the GPL if you even use GPL software in your project, this wouldn't be a problem.Since it doesn't say that, I'm sure you'll agree that this  is a problem.
Like all licences, GPL constrains how you may used the licensed thing.
All you have to do is satisfy those terms and conditions and you're fine.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348684</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348848</id>
	<title>Another example of Not Really Free</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260116460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just another example of why the industry is moving to BSD-style licenses.  Face it, the GPL is dead and Stallman's socialist dream along with it.</p><p>There's no such thing as "Free - with conditions"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just another example of why the industry is moving to BSD-style licenses .
Face it , the GPL is dead and Stallman 's socialist dream along with it.There 's no such thing as " Free - with conditions "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just another example of why the industry is moving to BSD-style licenses.
Face it, the GPL is dead and Stallman's socialist dream along with it.There's no such thing as "Free - with conditions"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348926</id>
	<title>Re:Another example of Not Really Free</title>
	<author>pipatron</author>
	<datestamp>1260117660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh, the industry is moving to BSD-style licenses? When? What industry? Did they actually use GPL-style licenses before? Got anything to back this up? This is one of the most opaque attempt at spreading <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,\_uncertainty\_and\_doubt" title="wikipedia.org">FUD</a> [wikipedia.org] I've  seen here on slashdot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , the industry is moving to BSD-style licenses ?
When ? What industry ?
Did they actually use GPL-style licenses before ?
Got anything to back this up ?
This is one of the most opaque attempt at spreading FUD [ wikipedia.org ] I 've seen here on slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, the industry is moving to BSD-style licenses?
When? What industry?
Did they actually use GPL-style licenses before?
Got anything to back this up?
This is one of the most opaque attempt at spreading FUD [wikipedia.org] I've  seen here on slashdot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349316</id>
	<title>Re:Well</title>
	<author>betterunixthanunix</author>
	<datestamp>1260121680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or, we can distribute our code under the GPL, and thus avoid these situations.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or , we can distribute our code under the GPL , and thus avoid these situations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or, we can distribute our code under the GPL, and thus avoid these situations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348704</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349966</id>
	<title>ZVUE</title>
	<author>Max Threshold</author>
	<datestamp>1260129000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My ZVUE player crashed once, and I swear I saw a Linux console before the screen went blank.  I want the firmware code!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My ZVUE player crashed once , and I swear I saw a Linux console before the screen went blank .
I want the firmware code !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My ZVUE player crashed once, and I swear I saw a Linux console before the screen went blank.
I want the firmware code!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30352950</id>
	<title>Re:Well</title>
	<author>VGPowerlord</author>
	<datestamp>1260201240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If you don't like the GPL, don't use anything covered under it. Go away, nobody's stopping you.</p></div></blockquote><p>On the flip side, if you use the GPL, don't whine because other people write code under licenses that aren't GPL compatible.</p><p>In other words, that door swings both ways.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you do n't like the GPL , do n't use anything covered under it .
Go away , nobody 's stopping you.On the flip side , if you use the GPL , do n't whine because other people write code under licenses that are n't GPL compatible.In other words , that door swings both ways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you don't like the GPL, don't use anything covered under it.
Go away, nobody's stopping you.On the flip side, if you use the GPL, don't whine because other people write code under licenses that aren't GPL compatible.In other words, that door swings both ways.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349910</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260128400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>it is entirely another when you take out a whole cell tower or several cell towers do to either malicious programing or just bad programming</p></div><p>Don't be silly. You drank the Apple FUD coolaid. Anybody can build, or even easier, <a href="http://www.dealextreme.com/search.dx/search.jammer" title="dealextreme.com">buy a GSM scrambler for a small range</a> [dealextreme.com]. Make it a bit more powerful and you can blanket whole blocks. You could have done so for decades.</p><p>And now Apple (and others) are getting comments on their closed ecosystem, and they respond with FUD: "teh evil terr'ists can COMPLETELY jam our phones ZOMG". And you actually believe there isn't a much easier way?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>it is entirely another when you take out a whole cell tower or several cell towers do to either malicious programing or just bad programmingDo n't be silly .
You drank the Apple FUD coolaid .
Anybody can build , or even easier , buy a GSM scrambler for a small range [ dealextreme.com ] .
Make it a bit more powerful and you can blanket whole blocks .
You could have done so for decades.And now Apple ( and others ) are getting comments on their closed ecosystem , and they respond with FUD : " teh evil terr'ists can COMPLETELY jam our phones ZOMG " .
And you actually believe there is n't a much easier way ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it is entirely another when you take out a whole cell tower or several cell towers do to either malicious programing or just bad programmingDon't be silly.
You drank the Apple FUD coolaid.
Anybody can build, or even easier, buy a GSM scrambler for a small range [dealextreme.com].
Make it a bit more powerful and you can blanket whole blocks.
You could have done so for decades.And now Apple (and others) are getting comments on their closed ecosystem, and they respond with FUD: "teh evil terr'ists can COMPLETELY jam our phones ZOMG".
And you actually believe there isn't a much easier way?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349024</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30352972</id>
	<title>Re:Palm Mentions mupdf on the phone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260201300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds to me like this violates the Debian Free Software Guideline #9: License must not contaminate other software.</p><p>One should not force other softwares to be bound to a specific license in order for ones own software to be used. This is poisoning the freedom of other developers to choose the appropriate license for their software. You're not helping users of your code by using your code as a weapon in the campaign against closed-source software.</p><p>muPDF is either non-free and non-GPL (for violating article 6 of the GPLv2 "You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein. You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to this License.") or it's free and GPL (because the license invalidates the imposed further restrictions). Either of these is clearly Artifex's fault and Palm should not be held accountable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds to me like this violates the Debian Free Software Guideline # 9 : License must not contaminate other software.One should not force other softwares to be bound to a specific license in order for ones own software to be used .
This is poisoning the freedom of other developers to choose the appropriate license for their software .
You 're not helping users of your code by using your code as a weapon in the campaign against closed-source software.muPDF is either non-free and non-GPL ( for violating article 6 of the GPLv2 " You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients ' exercise of the rights granted herein .
You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to this License .
" ) or it 's free and GPL ( because the license invalidates the imposed further restrictions ) .
Either of these is clearly Artifex 's fault and Palm should not be held accountable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds to me like this violates the Debian Free Software Guideline #9: License must not contaminate other software.One should not force other softwares to be bound to a specific license in order for ones own software to be used.
This is poisoning the freedom of other developers to choose the appropriate license for their software.
You're not helping users of your code by using your code as a weapon in the campaign against closed-source software.muPDF is either non-free and non-GPL (for violating article 6 of the GPLv2 "You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein.
You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to this License.
") or it's free and GPL (because the license invalidates the imposed further restrictions).
Either of these is clearly Artifex's fault and Palm should not be held accountable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349922</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348896</id>
	<title>How hard is it?</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1260117180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>How hard is it to just release a totally OSS version of your OS with all applications and stuff there and let people modify it and put it on your phone? I really don't see the point of trying to complicate things by closing the OSS. Release everything for free and you can take a lot more free code and not having to worry about paying lots of money when you are caught.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How hard is it to just release a totally OSS version of your OS with all applications and stuff there and let people modify it and put it on your phone ?
I really do n't see the point of trying to complicate things by closing the OSS .
Release everything for free and you can take a lot more free code and not having to worry about paying lots of money when you are caught .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How hard is it to just release a totally OSS version of your OS with all applications and stuff there and let people modify it and put it on your phone?
I really don't see the point of trying to complicate things by closing the OSS.
Release everything for free and you can take a lot more free code and not having to worry about paying lots of money when you are caught.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348818</id>
	<title>Settlement is probably inevitable...</title>
	<author>Chysn</author>
	<datestamp>1260116220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>...since Palm mentions muPDF in their documentation, and they don't have a commercial license for it.  Anyone in the software industry, anyone using libraries they didn't write, should understand that there's a difference between "open source" and "public domain."</htmltext>
<tokenext>...since Palm mentions muPDF in their documentation , and they do n't have a commercial license for it .
Anyone in the software industry , anyone using libraries they did n't write , should understand that there 's a difference between " open source " and " public domain .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...since Palm mentions muPDF in their documentation, and they don't have a commercial license for it.
Anyone in the software industry, anyone using libraries they didn't write, should understand that there's a difference between "open source" and "public domain.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349208</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>T Murphy</author>
	<datestamp>1260120420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In general<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. seems to support the easy spread of information. Slashdot isn't inherently against copyright, just cases where it restricts the flow of information (basically everything but GPL). Of course many people like to over generalize and take sides for or against copyright without boiling it down to the basic issues.<br> <br>

If your comment is taking a stab at those who over generalize, you understand this already. I realize I'm generalizing too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In general / .
seems to support the easy spread of information .
Slashdot is n't inherently against copyright , just cases where it restricts the flow of information ( basically everything but GPL ) .
Of course many people like to over generalize and take sides for or against copyright without boiling it down to the basic issues .
If your comment is taking a stab at those who over generalize , you understand this already .
I realize I 'm generalizing too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In general /.
seems to support the easy spread of information.
Slashdot isn't inherently against copyright, just cases where it restricts the flow of information (basically everything but GPL).
Of course many people like to over generalize and take sides for or against copyright without boiling it down to the basic issues.
If your comment is taking a stab at those who over generalize, you understand this already.
I realize I'm generalizing too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349030</id>
	<title>Fix the Slashdot moderation system</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260118680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>+5 Insightful?  FFS, can we please get something better than "randomly assign mod points to people who never contribute to the site" please?  please?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>+ 5 Insightful ?
FFS , can we please get something better than " randomly assign mod points to people who never contribute to the site " please ?
please ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>+5 Insightful?
FFS, can we please get something better than "randomly assign mod points to people who never contribute to the site" please?
please?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30356940</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>skeeto</author>
	<datestamp>1260219300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You should read up on copyleft sometime before making such foolish posts in the future.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You should read up on copyleft sometime before making such foolish posts in the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You should read up on copyleft sometime before making such foolish posts in the future.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348920</id>
	<title>Re:Another example of Not Really Free</title>
	<author>bieber</author>
	<datestamp>1260117480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The industry is moving to BSD-style licenses because they're just now finding out that they can and will be sued if they blatantly violate the terms of the licenses on other persons' code?  Is this seriously a revelation to anyone, and do you honestly believe that it's changing anything?  I'd really like to see some backing to the statement "The GPL is dead," because last I checked there was a pretty immensely large body of GPL code still in use, and there's no indication of any significant portion of it fading into obscurity because ZOMG IT'S UNDER TEH EVIL GPL.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The industry is moving to BSD-style licenses because they 're just now finding out that they can and will be sued if they blatantly violate the terms of the licenses on other persons ' code ?
Is this seriously a revelation to anyone , and do you honestly believe that it 's changing anything ?
I 'd really like to see some backing to the statement " The GPL is dead , " because last I checked there was a pretty immensely large body of GPL code still in use , and there 's no indication of any significant portion of it fading into obscurity because ZOMG IT 'S UNDER TEH EVIL GPL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The industry is moving to BSD-style licenses because they're just now finding out that they can and will be sued if they blatantly violate the terms of the licenses on other persons' code?
Is this seriously a revelation to anyone, and do you honestly believe that it's changing anything?
I'd really like to see some backing to the statement "The GPL is dead," because last I checked there was a pretty immensely large body of GPL code still in use, and there's no indication of any significant portion of it fading into obscurity because ZOMG IT'S UNDER TEH EVIL GPL.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349184</id>
	<title>Re:Another example of Not Really Free</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260120180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is one hell of a wild-assed assertion.  GPL is far from dead.  BSD licenses guarantee that business and industry will take what they want and give nothing in return.  BSD licensed code begs to be abused and to be used as a means to abuse the very public it came from.  One look at Mac OS or MS Windows should that much easily enough.</p><p>I can't say I fully agree with the whole GPL thing, but I get the general idea and I'm pretty okay with it.  So it comes with strings attached -- strings that guarantee that it remains free.  BSD is very idealistic and optimistic and I appreciate that it is.  But it is clear that it can and will be abused and can and will be used against the public that created it.  It is pretty immoral to take advantage of BSD licensed code in this way, but many people are simply not moral... or at least place profits above morals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is one hell of a wild-assed assertion .
GPL is far from dead .
BSD licenses guarantee that business and industry will take what they want and give nothing in return .
BSD licensed code begs to be abused and to be used as a means to abuse the very public it came from .
One look at Mac OS or MS Windows should that much easily enough.I ca n't say I fully agree with the whole GPL thing , but I get the general idea and I 'm pretty okay with it .
So it comes with strings attached -- strings that guarantee that it remains free .
BSD is very idealistic and optimistic and I appreciate that it is .
But it is clear that it can and will be abused and can and will be used against the public that created it .
It is pretty immoral to take advantage of BSD licensed code in this way , but many people are simply not moral... or at least place profits above morals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is one hell of a wild-assed assertion.
GPL is far from dead.
BSD licenses guarantee that business and industry will take what they want and give nothing in return.
BSD licensed code begs to be abused and to be used as a means to abuse the very public it came from.
One look at Mac OS or MS Windows should that much easily enough.I can't say I fully agree with the whole GPL thing, but I get the general idea and I'm pretty okay with it.
So it comes with strings attached -- strings that guarantee that it remains free.
BSD is very idealistic and optimistic and I appreciate that it is.
But it is clear that it can and will be abused and can and will be used against the public that created it.
It is pretty immoral to take advantage of BSD licensed code in this way, but many people are simply not moral... or at least place profits above morals.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350354</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it?</title>
	<author>mpe</author>
	<datestamp>1260177480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>fixed that for ya, in EU you can buy any phone (at a higher price) and 3 pay as you go sim cards from different carriers and use whichever card you want when you want.</i> <br> <br>You can also take your phone to another country, including those in Africa, Asia or Australasia and have it work. Though it's likely to work out cheaper to buy a local SIM if you intend making much use of your phone.<br> <br> <i>The US is the only country I am aware of with a phone-tied-to-carrier system.</i> <br> <br>The US does have some GSM, but it's on the 1.9GHz waveband, so you need a phone which can handle this.</htmltext>
<tokenext>fixed that for ya , in EU you can buy any phone ( at a higher price ) and 3 pay as you go sim cards from different carriers and use whichever card you want when you want .
You can also take your phone to another country , including those in Africa , Asia or Australasia and have it work .
Though it 's likely to work out cheaper to buy a local SIM if you intend making much use of your phone .
The US is the only country I am aware of with a phone-tied-to-carrier system .
The US does have some GSM , but it 's on the 1.9GHz waveband , so you need a phone which can handle this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>fixed that for ya, in EU you can buy any phone (at a higher price) and 3 pay as you go sim cards from different carriers and use whichever card you want when you want.
You can also take your phone to another country, including those in Africa, Asia or Australasia and have it work.
Though it's likely to work out cheaper to buy a local SIM if you intend making much use of your phone.
The US is the only country I am aware of with a phone-tied-to-carrier system.
The US does have some GSM, but it's on the 1.9GHz waveband, so you need a phone which can handle this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349010</id>
	<title>Re:Another example of Not Really Free</title>
	<author>Random5</author>
	<datestamp>1260118440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So today there's a news story about it being used without permission and suddenly it's dead? If it's good enough to make it into the end product of a company as well known as Palm obviously it's working and there will be more companies who decide to licence GPL code and have an end product out faster that was cheaper to code.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So today there 's a news story about it being used without permission and suddenly it 's dead ?
If it 's good enough to make it into the end product of a company as well known as Palm obviously it 's working and there will be more companies who decide to licence GPL code and have an end product out faster that was cheaper to code .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So today there's a news story about it being used without permission and suddenly it's dead?
If it's good enough to make it into the end product of a company as well known as Palm obviously it's working and there will be more companies who decide to licence GPL code and have an end product out faster that was cheaper to code.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349496</id>
	<title>Isn't Artifix based on Ghostscript?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260123540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>isn't Artifix based on Ghostscript which is GPL, Artifix packages a version of ghoscript with support? Can anyone in the know  clarify the situation with regards to ghostscript?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is n't Artifix based on Ghostscript which is GPL , Artifix packages a version of ghoscript with support ?
Can anyone in the know clarify the situation with regards to ghostscript ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>isn't Artifix based on Ghostscript which is GPL, Artifix packages a version of ghoscript with support?
Can anyone in the know  clarify the situation with regards to ghostscript?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349278</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>Trepidity</author>
	<datestamp>1260121320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A common view on Slashdot (though certainly not held by everyone) is less a position on copyrights than a position on DIY hackability: that it should be 1) possible; and 2) legal.</p><p>From that perspective, the GPL's use of copyright law is good, because it forces companies to both release their code and permit derivative works of it. Other uses of copyright law might be bad, because they attempt to make DIY modifications illegal: either prohibiting sharing your modifications (conventional copyright law) or prohibiting you from even making them at all (DMCA reverse-engineering restrictions). And of course there are non-copyright impediments to DIY modifications as well, like DRM and simple obfuscation, all of which are also sort of unpopular on Slashdot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A common view on Slashdot ( though certainly not held by everyone ) is less a position on copyrights than a position on DIY hackability : that it should be 1 ) possible ; and 2 ) legal.From that perspective , the GPL 's use of copyright law is good , because it forces companies to both release their code and permit derivative works of it .
Other uses of copyright law might be bad , because they attempt to make DIY modifications illegal : either prohibiting sharing your modifications ( conventional copyright law ) or prohibiting you from even making them at all ( DMCA reverse-engineering restrictions ) .
And of course there are non-copyright impediments to DIY modifications as well , like DRM and simple obfuscation , all of which are also sort of unpopular on Slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A common view on Slashdot (though certainly not held by everyone) is less a position on copyrights than a position on DIY hackability: that it should be 1) possible; and 2) legal.From that perspective, the GPL's use of copyright law is good, because it forces companies to both release their code and permit derivative works of it.
Other uses of copyright law might be bad, because they attempt to make DIY modifications illegal: either prohibiting sharing your modifications (conventional copyright law) or prohibiting you from even making them at all (DMCA reverse-engineering restrictions).
And of course there are non-copyright impediments to DIY modifications as well, like DRM and simple obfuscation, all of which are also sort of unpopular on Slashdot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349024</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it?</title>
	<author>FlyingGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1260118680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Palm's case, they would never sell any phones, not because the software is Open Source but because no carrier would let it on their network.</p><p>Just like Android phones, iPhones or any phone for that matter.  The TelCo's will only go so far before they say ( and rightly so ) stop, this has to be locked down, we cannot risk the entire cell ecosystem on a phone that can be completely modified to do <b>anything</b>.  That is why you can write apps for the iPhone the BackBerry, the Android phone, but there are parts of the phone that you just cannot screw around with and so your app runs in a proprietary sandbox.  To allow a <b>completely</b> open source re-programmable phone is to invite disaster.  It is one thing when you are talking about jacking up the web for a few hours it is entirely another when you take out a whole cell tower or several cell towers do to either malicious programing or just bad programming.  People lives can depend on the cell system, they don't depend on the web.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Palm 's case , they would never sell any phones , not because the software is Open Source but because no carrier would let it on their network.Just like Android phones , iPhones or any phone for that matter .
The TelCo 's will only go so far before they say ( and rightly so ) stop , this has to be locked down , we can not risk the entire cell ecosystem on a phone that can be completely modified to do anything .
That is why you can write apps for the iPhone the BackBerry , the Android phone , but there are parts of the phone that you just can not screw around with and so your app runs in a proprietary sandbox .
To allow a completely open source re-programmable phone is to invite disaster .
It is one thing when you are talking about jacking up the web for a few hours it is entirely another when you take out a whole cell tower or several cell towers do to either malicious programing or just bad programming .
People lives can depend on the cell system , they do n't depend on the web .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Palm's case, they would never sell any phones, not because the software is Open Source but because no carrier would let it on their network.Just like Android phones, iPhones or any phone for that matter.
The TelCo's will only go so far before they say ( and rightly so ) stop, this has to be locked down, we cannot risk the entire cell ecosystem on a phone that can be completely modified to do anything.
That is why you can write apps for the iPhone the BackBerry, the Android phone, but there are parts of the phone that you just cannot screw around with and so your app runs in a proprietary sandbox.
To allow a completely open source re-programmable phone is to invite disaster.
It is one thing when you are talking about jacking up the web for a few hours it is entirely another when you take out a whole cell tower or several cell towers do to either malicious programing or just bad programming.
People lives can depend on the cell system, they don't depend on the web.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348896</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30352126</id>
	<title>did you type that BS yourself ?</title>
	<author>viralMeme</author>
	<datestamp>1260197460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>'<i>Like Microsoft and other for-profit software companies, the GPL gang uses government-based aggression in order to enforce its so-called "intellectual property rights"</i>'<br> <br>

What is the name(s) of this government-based, agreesive GPL gang, and did you type this BS yourself ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>'Like Microsoft and other for-profit software companies , the GPL gang uses government-based aggression in order to enforce its so-called " intellectual property rights " ' What is the name ( s ) of this government-based , agreesive GPL gang , and did you type this BS yourself ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'Like Microsoft and other for-profit software companies, the GPL gang uses government-based aggression in order to enforce its so-called "intellectual property rights"' 

What is the name(s) of this government-based, agreesive GPL gang, and did you type this BS yourself ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350448</id>
	<title>If you don't like the license</title>
	<author>OrangeTide</author>
	<datestamp>1260178800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>then write it yourself. I realize that implementing anything significant hurts a product's tight schedule, but if you can't open source most of your product then you'll just have to suffer and do it the hard way like everyone else in the business.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>then write it yourself .
I realize that implementing anything significant hurts a product 's tight schedule , but if you ca n't open source most of your product then you 'll just have to suffer and do it the hard way like everyone else in the business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>then write it yourself.
I realize that implementing anything significant hurts a product's tight schedule, but if you can't open source most of your product then you'll just have to suffer and do it the hard way like everyone else in the business.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350354
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349030
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350384
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350382
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348752
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349184
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30352304
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30353356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30352126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349928
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348704
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30351764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349112
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350980
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348704
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30352972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349448
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30355286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350334
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350008
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30360176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349342
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30351002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30354914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350162
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30354054
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30351544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349448
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350218
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30352950
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350314
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30353446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30354096
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30353430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349448
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30356940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30351440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_0232243_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_0232243.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348848
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349214
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348920
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350980
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349010
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349030
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349028
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348956
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348926
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350162
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349112
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349184
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_0232243.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348818
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350008
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30352304
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_0232243.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349928
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30352126
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_0232243.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349496
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_0232243.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348986
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349208
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350334
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30354914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30354096
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349278
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30355286
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349168
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350382
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349276
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349724
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30360176
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30351764
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350314
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30356940
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349124
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30354054
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_0232243.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350448
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_0232243.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348896
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349024
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30353356
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30351440
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349130
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349342
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350194
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349412
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350218
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349910
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350568
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349146
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350354
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30353446
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350352
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_0232243.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348684
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348730
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350446
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30352950
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348704
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349316
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349196
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30348752
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_0232243.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350384
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_0232243.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349448
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349922
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30352972
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30353430
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30351544
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_0232243.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30349382
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30351002
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350576
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_0232243.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30350800
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_0232243.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_0232243.30354636
</commentlist>
</conversation>
