<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_08_2116205</id>
	<title>Questionable "Best Effort" Copyright Enforcement</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1260270420000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~patrickw/" rel="nofollow">pmdubs</a> writes <i>"Princeton University Professor Michael Freedman, creator of CoralCDN, discusses how he received around 100 pre-settlement letters in one month from various copyright agencies after <a href="http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com.nyud.net/blog/mfreed">invalid BitTorrent tracker requests were issued through CoralCDN's proxies</a>. Interestingly, the participating agencies made no effort whatsoever to verify that the Coral nodes were actually running BitTorrent, which they weren't! He questions just how much effort agencies take to reduce false positives when it comes to DMCA notices. Considering the credence that network operators give to such notices (they'll often cut your service upon receipt), it would seem that the answer is 'not enough.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>pmdubs writes " Princeton University Professor Michael Freedman , creator of CoralCDN , discusses how he received around 100 pre-settlement letters in one month from various copyright agencies after invalid BitTorrent tracker requests were issued through CoralCDN 's proxies .
Interestingly , the participating agencies made no effort whatsoever to verify that the Coral nodes were actually running BitTorrent , which they were n't !
He questions just how much effort agencies take to reduce false positives when it comes to DMCA notices .
Considering the credence that network operators give to such notices ( they 'll often cut your service upon receipt ) , it would seem that the answer is 'not enough .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>pmdubs writes "Princeton University Professor Michael Freedman, creator of CoralCDN, discusses how he received around 100 pre-settlement letters in one month from various copyright agencies after invalid BitTorrent tracker requests were issued through CoralCDN's proxies.
Interestingly, the participating agencies made no effort whatsoever to verify that the Coral nodes were actually running BitTorrent, which they weren't!
He questions just how much effort agencies take to reduce false positives when it comes to DMCA notices.
Considering the credence that network operators give to such notices (they'll often cut your service upon receipt), it would seem that the answer is 'not enough.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372172</id>
	<title>It's not in their interest to make an effort.</title>
	<author>seeker\_1us</author>
	<datestamp>1260276360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Bittorrent allows independent artists/authors/programmers to distribute their works at little to no cost.  This is their competition.  The more people find independent works (for example, creative commons music, independent video clips, Linux distributions, etc), the more business they lose.
</p><p>
False threats may lead to people thinking "well I better not run Bittorrent at all, to protect myself/my organization."
</p><p>
Not to mention that this lets sleazy lawyers "fish" for people willing to pay them off rather than prove they did nothing wrong.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bittorrent allows independent artists/authors/programmers to distribute their works at little to no cost .
This is their competition .
The more people find independent works ( for example , creative commons music , independent video clips , Linux distributions , etc ) , the more business they lose .
False threats may lead to people thinking " well I better not run Bittorrent at all , to protect myself/my organization .
" Not to mention that this lets sleazy lawyers " fish " for people willing to pay them off rather than prove they did nothing wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Bittorrent allows independent artists/authors/programmers to distribute their works at little to no cost.
This is their competition.
The more people find independent works (for example, creative commons music, independent video clips, Linux distributions, etc), the more business they lose.
False threats may lead to people thinking "well I better not run Bittorrent at all, to protect myself/my organization.
"

Not to mention that this lets sleazy lawyers "fish" for people willing to pay them off rather than prove they did nothing wrong.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372728</id>
	<title>Re:The new way to shut ppl down who you don't like</title>
	<author>dbIII</author>
	<datestamp>1260279840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I recall that one of the things built into the DMCA to get it to pass is some fairly harsh penalties for sending out false notices.  There have been many documented false notices now, but has anyone actually been hit with a penalty for issuing a false law?<br>It's not a just law.  It's an extortion racket.  Those using it are not sticking to it themselves when the use it as a blunt instrument.  It will get worse until companies get fined and people get fired for these instances of "demanding money with menaces" which would put private citizens in jail.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I recall that one of the things built into the DMCA to get it to pass is some fairly harsh penalties for sending out false notices .
There have been many documented false notices now , but has anyone actually been hit with a penalty for issuing a false law ? It 's not a just law .
It 's an extortion racket .
Those using it are not sticking to it themselves when the use it as a blunt instrument .
It will get worse until companies get fined and people get fired for these instances of " demanding money with menaces " which would put private citizens in jail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I recall that one of the things built into the DMCA to get it to pass is some fairly harsh penalties for sending out false notices.
There have been many documented false notices now, but has anyone actually been hit with a penalty for issuing a false law?It's not a just law.
It's an extortion racket.
Those using it are not sticking to it themselves when the use it as a blunt instrument.
It will get worse until companies get fined and people get fired for these instances of "demanding money with menaces" which would put private citizens in jail.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372230</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372924</id>
	<title>Re:The new way to shut ppl down who you don't like</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260281280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>From what I understand, the notices are not being sent because of traffic, but because of IP logs (which are not the same). Specifically, they look at the IP logs on the torrent tracker to identify which machines have the content. Any machine is able to register itself with the tracker and say it has any content, regardless of whether it does or not, and regardless of whether it's even running BitTorrent. That's how the guy got his printer DMCA'd - he manually registered his printer's IP address with one or more trackers.</i></p><p>Well, my office has some high-end canon printers. The print rendering engine is a custom linux computer with some dedicated hardware and a full range of software that runs on it. I'm sure with a little work I could get it to run BitTorrent!</p><p>Probably void the warranty though...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From what I understand , the notices are not being sent because of traffic , but because of IP logs ( which are not the same ) .
Specifically , they look at the IP logs on the torrent tracker to identify which machines have the content .
Any machine is able to register itself with the tracker and say it has any content , regardless of whether it does or not , and regardless of whether it 's even running BitTorrent .
That 's how the guy got his printer DMCA 'd - he manually registered his printer 's IP address with one or more trackers.Well , my office has some high-end canon printers .
The print rendering engine is a custom linux computer with some dedicated hardware and a full range of software that runs on it .
I 'm sure with a little work I could get it to run BitTorrent ! Probably void the warranty though.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From what I understand, the notices are not being sent because of traffic, but because of IP logs (which are not the same).
Specifically, they look at the IP logs on the torrent tracker to identify which machines have the content.
Any machine is able to register itself with the tracker and say it has any content, regardless of whether it does or not, and regardless of whether it's even running BitTorrent.
That's how the guy got his printer DMCA'd - he manually registered his printer's IP address with one or more trackers.Well, my office has some high-end canon printers.
The print rendering engine is a custom linux computer with some dedicated hardware and a full range of software that runs on it.
I'm sure with a little work I could get it to run BitTorrent!Probably void the warranty though...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372230</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372704</id>
	<title>False DMCA fee?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260279660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can't recipients of false DMCA claims charge the sender to be fined, or to collect a fee from them?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ca n't recipients of false DMCA claims charge the sender to be fined , or to collect a fee from them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can't recipients of false DMCA claims charge the sender to be fined, or to collect a fee from them?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372050</id>
	<title>Re:First hand experience</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260275580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I should also probably mention that they wanted my roommate to sign the same admission of guilt, even though there was only one accusation. Without both signatures, they refused to restore the Internet access.</p><p>As in the story in the article, there was no proof, just an accusation, which was not digitally signed. IT Services assumed guilt, and shut off my Internet connection immediately (and then sent me the letter I needed to sign, 2 days later).</p><p>It only worked the first 2 times. Marquette has a strange sort of 3-strikes policy. After the third alleged infringement, they said that I couldn't get it turned back on at all, but they still demanded that I sign the admission to guilt. I contacted ITS daily to try to get them to fulfill their contractual obligation (under the dorm's housing agreement) and restore my Internet access, but after about a week of this, the tech support people at ITS started telling me that they were forbidden from speaking to me. Eventually cops came and hinted that if I contacted IT Services again, they would arrest me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I should also probably mention that they wanted my roommate to sign the same admission of guilt , even though there was only one accusation .
Without both signatures , they refused to restore the Internet access.As in the story in the article , there was no proof , just an accusation , which was not digitally signed .
IT Services assumed guilt , and shut off my Internet connection immediately ( and then sent me the letter I needed to sign , 2 days later ) .It only worked the first 2 times .
Marquette has a strange sort of 3-strikes policy .
After the third alleged infringement , they said that I could n't get it turned back on at all , but they still demanded that I sign the admission to guilt .
I contacted ITS daily to try to get them to fulfill their contractual obligation ( under the dorm 's housing agreement ) and restore my Internet access , but after about a week of this , the tech support people at ITS started telling me that they were forbidden from speaking to me .
Eventually cops came and hinted that if I contacted IT Services again , they would arrest me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I should also probably mention that they wanted my roommate to sign the same admission of guilt, even though there was only one accusation.
Without both signatures, they refused to restore the Internet access.As in the story in the article, there was no proof, just an accusation, which was not digitally signed.
IT Services assumed guilt, and shut off my Internet connection immediately (and then sent me the letter I needed to sign, 2 days later).It only worked the first 2 times.
Marquette has a strange sort of 3-strikes policy.
After the third alleged infringement, they said that I couldn't get it turned back on at all, but they still demanded that I sign the admission to guilt.
I contacted ITS daily to try to get them to fulfill their contractual obligation (under the dorm's housing agreement) and restore my Internet access, but after about a week of this, the tech support people at ITS started telling me that they were forbidden from speaking to me.
Eventually cops came and hinted that if I contacted IT Services again, they would arrest me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30377670</id>
	<title>Re:First hand experience</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1259600700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Make it EULA style. By permitting me to move in you signify your agreement to the following:...</p><p>&lt;/EvilThoughts&gt;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Make it EULA style .
By permitting me to move in you signify your agreement to the following : .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Make it EULA style.
By permitting me to move in you signify your agreement to the following:...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371806</id>
	<title>10th</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260274200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>10th</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>10th</tokentext>
<sentencetext>10th</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373360</id>
	<title>Re:First hand experience</title>
	<author>Thinboy00</author>
	<datestamp>1260285000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>At best, the judge would say there was never a contract and you need to GTFO.</p></div><p>Good.  The RIAA relies on the existence of a contract, not the GP.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>At best , the judge would say there was never a contract and you need to GTFO.Good .
The RIAA relies on the existence of a contract , not the GP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At best, the judge would say there was never a contract and you need to GTFO.Good.
The RIAA relies on the existence of a contract, not the GP.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373760</id>
	<title>Re:The new way to shut ppl down who you don't like</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260289080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Better yet, let's create a web site where anyone can submit an IP address for this service. Then, let's post a link to it here on Slashdot.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Better yet , let 's create a web site where anyone can submit an IP address for this service .
Then , let 's post a link to it here on Slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Better yet, let's create a web site where anyone can submit an IP address for this service.
Then, let's post a link to it here on Slashdot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372230</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30374068</id>
	<title>Re:False DMCA fee?</title>
	<author>pipedwho</author>
	<datestamp>1260292740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, it's more along the lines of fraud; akin to mailing out an invoice to a company for a service (or item) that was never provided.</p><p>What the RIAA is doing is similar to a fraudster sending out invoices to everyone in the local business directory knowing that only a small number of those businesses were ever provided with his/her service.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , it 's more along the lines of fraud ; akin to mailing out an invoice to a company for a service ( or item ) that was never provided.What the RIAA is doing is similar to a fraudster sending out invoices to everyone in the local business directory knowing that only a small number of those businesses were ever provided with his/her service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, it's more along the lines of fraud; akin to mailing out an invoice to a company for a service (or item) that was never provided.What the RIAA is doing is similar to a fraudster sending out invoices to everyone in the local business directory knowing that only a small number of those businesses were ever provided with his/her service.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373536</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372544</id>
	<title>Re:The new way to shut ppl down who you don't like</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260278520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I like the way you think!  Maybe we should wait for the 3 strikes laws so we can take the government and every major corporation of the net for good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like the way you think !
Maybe we should wait for the 3 strikes laws so we can take the government and every major corporation of the net for good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like the way you think!
Maybe we should wait for the 3 strikes laws so we can take the government and every major corporation of the net for good.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372230</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30374512</id>
	<title>Helooo? That argument is old and solved!</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1260299100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>He questions just how much effort agencies take to reduce false positives when it comes to DMCA notices.</p></div><p>Hasn&rsquo;t he got the memo? Doesn&rsquo;t he get anything at all?<br>I didn&rsquo;t think that there still are people out there, who are so incredibly naive, to believe, that the point of those DMCA notices is, to stop you from copying the music!<br>No. Everybody realized for a looong time, that the whole point is solely, to make money!<br>I mean, if you realized it, it&rsquo;s so obvious! The whole point of a business is to make money. Since when does it matter, how and by which means? At the end of the day, the most successful strategy of making money, is what will be done. That&rsquo;s natural selection... kinda.</p><p>How can he call himself an expert, and not know that?? Seriously! It boggles the mind!</p><p>I&rsquo;ve seen it twice: Even if you started to pay money, but stop right in the middle... you&rsquo;ll never hear something from them again. It already was profitable. Now the effort would be bigger than the profit. So they won&rsquo;t take any further actions.</p><p>From practical experience, I know that the best experience is, to simply tell them to get lost, that you are an expert in the area, *know* that they got shit, and will kick their ass to hell and back if they ever contact you again.<br>Sometimes, they will not stop at a letter from a lawyer, but try some pseudo-scary shit. Like a letter from court and such. Just send a letter back that you completely disagree with all claims. Because then they have to come up with some proof. Which they can&rsquo;t. 99\% of the time, that&rsquo;s it. In rare cases, they come up with fake &ldquo;proof&rdquo;. Only in these cases, hope that your judge is not a total backwards retard.</p><p>But I don&rsquo;t have to tell you that it&rsquo;s better to live in a country with competent courts, do I? ^^</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>He questions just how much effort agencies take to reduce false positives when it comes to DMCA notices.Hasn    t he got the memo ?
Doesn    t he get anything at all ? I didn    t think that there still are people out there , who are so incredibly naive , to believe , that the point of those DMCA notices is , to stop you from copying the music ! No .
Everybody realized for a looong time , that the whole point is solely , to make money ! I mean , if you realized it , it    s so obvious !
The whole point of a business is to make money .
Since when does it matter , how and by which means ?
At the end of the day , the most successful strategy of making money , is what will be done .
That    s natural selection... kinda.How can he call himself an expert , and not know that ? ?
Seriously ! It boggles the mind ! I    ve seen it twice : Even if you started to pay money , but stop right in the middle... you    ll never hear something from them again .
It already was profitable .
Now the effort would be bigger than the profit .
So they won    t take any further actions.From practical experience , I know that the best experience is , to simply tell them to get lost , that you are an expert in the area , * know * that they got shit , and will kick their ass to hell and back if they ever contact you again.Sometimes , they will not stop at a letter from a lawyer , but try some pseudo-scary shit .
Like a letter from court and such .
Just send a letter back that you completely disagree with all claims .
Because then they have to come up with some proof .
Which they can    t .
99 \ % of the time , that    s it .
In rare cases , they come up with fake    proof    .
Only in these cases , hope that your judge is not a total backwards retard.But I don    t have to tell you that it    s better to live in a country with competent courts , do I ?
^ ^</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He questions just how much effort agencies take to reduce false positives when it comes to DMCA notices.Hasn’t he got the memo?
Doesn’t he get anything at all?I didn’t think that there still are people out there, who are so incredibly naive, to believe, that the point of those DMCA notices is, to stop you from copying the music!No.
Everybody realized for a looong time, that the whole point is solely, to make money!I mean, if you realized it, it’s so obvious!
The whole point of a business is to make money.
Since when does it matter, how and by which means?
At the end of the day, the most successful strategy of making money, is what will be done.
That’s natural selection... kinda.How can he call himself an expert, and not know that??
Seriously! It boggles the mind!I’ve seen it twice: Even if you started to pay money, but stop right in the middle... you’ll never hear something from them again.
It already was profitable.
Now the effort would be bigger than the profit.
So they won’t take any further actions.From practical experience, I know that the best experience is, to simply tell them to get lost, that you are an expert in the area, *know* that they got shit, and will kick their ass to hell and back if they ever contact you again.Sometimes, they will not stop at a letter from a lawyer, but try some pseudo-scary shit.
Like a letter from court and such.
Just send a letter back that you completely disagree with all claims.
Because then they have to come up with some proof.
Which they can’t.
99\% of the time, that’s it.
In rare cases, they come up with fake “proof”.
Only in these cases, hope that your judge is not a total backwards retard.But I don’t have to tell you that it’s better to live in a country with competent courts, do I?
^^
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30376404</id>
	<title>Re:False DMCA fee?</title>
	<author>Gravitron 5000</author>
	<datestamp>1259592420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually, it <b>is</b> extortion.  There is no service being offered, just a statement that says "Do as we say, or we will make your life unpleasant".</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , it is extortion .
There is no service being offered , just a statement that says " Do as we say , or we will make your life unpleasant " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, it is extortion.
There is no service being offered, just a statement that says "Do as we say, or we will make your life unpleasant".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30374068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30507316</id>
	<title>File chunks</title>
	<author>kenshin33</author>
	<datestamp>1261309800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>does downloading/uploading files chunks  (not having the whole file) hold as copyright infringement ???
or in other words the copyright is on the a file as a whole (??)
<br>
Participating in a torrent swarm that prohibits getting 100\% of any file from one unique source, if one reasons in 1:1 nodes relations. that gives exchanging  random bits of data not belonging to any one that IF assembled correctly may give you a file u can use.
would the exchange of those random bits/bytes constitute a copyright infringement.</htmltext>
<tokenext>does downloading/uploading files chunks ( not having the whole file ) hold as copyright infringement ? ? ?
or in other words the copyright is on the a file as a whole ( ? ?
) Participating in a torrent swarm that prohibits getting 100 \ % of any file from one unique source , if one reasons in 1 : 1 nodes relations .
that gives exchanging random bits of data not belonging to any one that IF assembled correctly may give you a file u can use .
would the exchange of those random bits/bytes constitute a copyright infringement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>does downloading/uploading files chunks  (not having the whole file) hold as copyright infringement ???
or in other words the copyright is on the a file as a whole (??
)

Participating in a torrent swarm that prohibits getting 100\% of any file from one unique source, if one reasons in 1:1 nodes relations.
that gives exchanging  random bits of data not belonging to any one that IF assembled correctly may give you a file u can use.
would the exchange of those random bits/bytes constitute a copyright infringement.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371902</id>
	<title>Re:First hand experience</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260274680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like a good plan to me.<br>I'll try this the next time I have to sign something.</p><p>Simply edit it slightly to my advantage, film myself doing so (in case they then do the same, and in court, it'll be a question of which is the original), sign it, turn it in, and let them sign it / approve it.</p><p>$16.7500 / month for rent?  2 year lease?  Sweet!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like a good plan to me.I 'll try this the next time I have to sign something.Simply edit it slightly to my advantage , film myself doing so ( in case they then do the same , and in court , it 'll be a question of which is the original ) , sign it , turn it in , and let them sign it / approve it. $ 16.7500 / month for rent ?
2 year lease ?
Sweet !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like a good plan to me.I'll try this the next time I have to sign something.Simply edit it slightly to my advantage, film myself doing so (in case they then do the same, and in court, it'll be a question of which is the original), sign it, turn it in, and let them sign it / approve it.$16.7500 / month for rent?
2 year lease?
Sweet!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30375514</id>
	<title>Re:The new way to shut ppl down who you don't like</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259580120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>or thieves like you could stop leeching music from everyone else who pays for it.<br>Scumbag...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>or thieves like you could stop leeching music from everyone else who pays for it.Scumbag.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or thieves like you could stop leeching music from everyone else who pays for it.Scumbag...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372230</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30377912</id>
	<title>Re:DMCA notices sent out totally indiscriminately</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1259602200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Send a letter. Send copies to your congressman, the EFF, and any interested press.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Send a letter .
Send copies to your congressman , the EFF , and any interested press .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Send a letter.
Send copies to your congressman, the EFF, and any interested press.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372802</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373064</id>
	<title>Lopsided incentives</title>
	<author>horatio</author>
	<datestamp>1260282600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The incentives for sending the takedown notice are multiple, and there are no consequences when you're wrong.  At least, none that anyone pursues.<br> <br>

Hate me for the comparison, but this is exactly what happened to Gov. Palin during and after the 2008 presidential race. A handful of people filed baseless ethics complaints based on an Alaska law she helped pass to bring sunlight to government corruption.  They filed complaints, and filed more of them.  Sometimes for really stupid stuff (read the book).  I mean, why not?  There are no consequences and no costs (other than your own time) for doing so, even if you're just making shit up.  The result was that the Alaska state government was virtually brought to a halt by the paperwork.  Yes, "good" whatever.  That isn't the point.<br> <br>

The point is that if filing DMCA take-down notices, ethics complaints, or lawsuits without merit or basis have no consequences then our legal system is a joke. If you're an asshole, trying to use the legal system to bully someone either negligently or maliciously, then you should face your own medicine.  If you file a patently ridiculous lawsuit and lose, you pay damages.  No more of this BS of tying up individuals and businesses for years in legal wrangling until the "defendant" cries uncle.  This also includes the extortion "settlement" letters by RIAA, MPAA, and the BSA.  If you don't make your case, you pay.  If you've filed a claim you know to be false, then you pay double.  Simple.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The incentives for sending the takedown notice are multiple , and there are no consequences when you 're wrong .
At least , none that anyone pursues .
Hate me for the comparison , but this is exactly what happened to Gov .
Palin during and after the 2008 presidential race .
A handful of people filed baseless ethics complaints based on an Alaska law she helped pass to bring sunlight to government corruption .
They filed complaints , and filed more of them .
Sometimes for really stupid stuff ( read the book ) .
I mean , why not ?
There are no consequences and no costs ( other than your own time ) for doing so , even if you 're just making shit up .
The result was that the Alaska state government was virtually brought to a halt by the paperwork .
Yes , " good " whatever .
That is n't the point .
The point is that if filing DMCA take-down notices , ethics complaints , or lawsuits without merit or basis have no consequences then our legal system is a joke .
If you 're an asshole , trying to use the legal system to bully someone either negligently or maliciously , then you should face your own medicine .
If you file a patently ridiculous lawsuit and lose , you pay damages .
No more of this BS of tying up individuals and businesses for years in legal wrangling until the " defendant " cries uncle .
This also includes the extortion " settlement " letters by RIAA , MPAA , and the BSA .
If you do n't make your case , you pay .
If you 've filed a claim you know to be false , then you pay double .
Simple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The incentives for sending the takedown notice are multiple, and there are no consequences when you're wrong.
At least, none that anyone pursues.
Hate me for the comparison, but this is exactly what happened to Gov.
Palin during and after the 2008 presidential race.
A handful of people filed baseless ethics complaints based on an Alaska law she helped pass to bring sunlight to government corruption.
They filed complaints, and filed more of them.
Sometimes for really stupid stuff (read the book).
I mean, why not?
There are no consequences and no costs (other than your own time) for doing so, even if you're just making shit up.
The result was that the Alaska state government was virtually brought to a halt by the paperwork.
Yes, "good" whatever.
That isn't the point.
The point is that if filing DMCA take-down notices, ethics complaints, or lawsuits without merit or basis have no consequences then our legal system is a joke.
If you're an asshole, trying to use the legal system to bully someone either negligently or maliciously, then you should face your own medicine.
If you file a patently ridiculous lawsuit and lose, you pay damages.
No more of this BS of tying up individuals and businesses for years in legal wrangling until the "defendant" cries uncle.
This also includes the extortion "settlement" letters by RIAA, MPAA, and the BSA.
If you don't make your case, you pay.
If you've filed a claim you know to be false, then you pay double.
Simple.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372556</id>
	<title>Re:The new way to shut ppl down who you don't like</title>
	<author>lul\_wat</author>
	<datestamp>1260278580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Might I suggest the IRS as the first govt IP addresses to get added</htmltext>
<tokenext>Might I suggest the IRS as the first govt IP addresses to get added</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Might I suggest the IRS as the first govt IP addresses to get added</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372230</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373536</id>
	<title>Re:False DMCA fee?</title>
	<author>TaoPhoenix</author>
	<datestamp>1260286800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't this Libel?</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libel" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libel</a> [wikipedia.org]<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...libel (for written or otherwise published words)--is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government or nation a negative image. It is usually,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... a requirement that this claim be false...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and that the publication is communicated to someone other than the person defamed (the claimant).</p><p>-----</p><p>Not sure which interesecting law hits first if they give it to you in the bogus letter, but the second one to the ISP would hopefully be.</p><p>We have a decision matrix gang. If the attack wins 1.2 million and a penalty = "oops sorry" it's pretty obvious.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't this Libel ? http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libel [ wikipedia.org ] ...libel ( for written or otherwise published words ) --is the communication of a statement that makes a claim , expressly stated or implied to be factual , that may give an individual , business , product , group , government or nation a negative image .
It is usually , ... a requirement that this claim be false... ...and that the publication is communicated to someone other than the person defamed ( the claimant ) .-----Not sure which interesecting law hits first if they give it to you in the bogus letter , but the second one to the ISP would hopefully be.We have a decision matrix gang .
If the attack wins 1.2 million and a penalty = " oops sorry " it 's pretty obvious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't this Libel?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libel [wikipedia.org] ...libel (for written or otherwise published words)--is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government or nation a negative image.
It is usually, ... a requirement that this claim be false... ...and that the publication is communicated to someone other than the person defamed (the claimant).-----Not sure which interesecting law hits first if they give it to you in the bogus letter, but the second one to the ISP would hopefully be.We have a decision matrix gang.
If the attack wins 1.2 million and a penalty = "oops sorry" it's pretty obvious.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372704</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372434</id>
	<title>Which is cheaper?</title>
	<author>mikep554</author>
	<datestamp>1260277920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They are effectively shifting the work of verification to the recipient of the letter. If you are guilty, they found their mark. If you haven't done what they accuse you of, and you will probably be indignant enough to go through some effort to correct their "error". Sending out the letters without verification requires almost no work from them, has no risk, and sometimes gets them money. Verification would only add more work with no payback in reduction of risk or increase in monetary return.</p><p>I am surprised more people don't see this as a shakedown racket. Also, since the RIAA gets money in return for the cost of a trained monkey running mailmerge in Microsoft Word, I don't see why they haven't purchased an electronic copy of the phone book so they can simply send out letters to everyone in the country.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are effectively shifting the work of verification to the recipient of the letter .
If you are guilty , they found their mark .
If you have n't done what they accuse you of , and you will probably be indignant enough to go through some effort to correct their " error " .
Sending out the letters without verification requires almost no work from them , has no risk , and sometimes gets them money .
Verification would only add more work with no payback in reduction of risk or increase in monetary return.I am surprised more people do n't see this as a shakedown racket .
Also , since the RIAA gets money in return for the cost of a trained monkey running mailmerge in Microsoft Word , I do n't see why they have n't purchased an electronic copy of the phone book so they can simply send out letters to everyone in the country .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are effectively shifting the work of verification to the recipient of the letter.
If you are guilty, they found their mark.
If you haven't done what they accuse you of, and you will probably be indignant enough to go through some effort to correct their "error".
Sending out the letters without verification requires almost no work from them, has no risk, and sometimes gets them money.
Verification would only add more work with no payback in reduction of risk or increase in monetary return.I am surprised more people don't see this as a shakedown racket.
Also, since the RIAA gets money in return for the cost of a trained monkey running mailmerge in Microsoft Word, I don't see why they haven't purchased an electronic copy of the phone book so they can simply send out letters to everyone in the country.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30376402</id>
	<title>Re:The new way to shut ppl down who you don't like</title>
	<author>Xest</author>
	<datestamp>1259592420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People keep bringing up the idea of using Senator's IP addresses and so forth to get them caught, but the reason this doesn't happen is simple, even if you did, big media would let a Senator get away with it for exactly the reason they want to keep abusing these laws.</p><p>When they ask the ISP for the IP address and are given "Senator Joe Bloggs, 1 Senator Street, Senatorville" they will just discard it and allow the Senator's kids to keep infringing.</p><p>The laws doesn't treat everyone equally unfortunately, and in civil cases like copyright infringement it's down to the accuser to decide how and to who the law should be applied. Even in criminal cases this is the case- why do you think pop stars can consistently get away with taking hard drugs like cocaine in front the cameras without so much as a slap on the wrist, whilst the guy on the street gets busted for a few grams of weed?</p><p>The fact is, the law barely even applies to the rich and famous.</p><p>If you want to make an impact, the real key is to get someone to put up content you have produced and put the IPs of music industry execs and so forth on that, so that you are in control of who does and doesn't get punished. In this scenario you'll probably still lose because of the afformentioned problem that the law is never applied fairly, but at least you've created a precedent that a case based on such data is not proof of any actual infringement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People keep bringing up the idea of using Senator 's IP addresses and so forth to get them caught , but the reason this does n't happen is simple , even if you did , big media would let a Senator get away with it for exactly the reason they want to keep abusing these laws.When they ask the ISP for the IP address and are given " Senator Joe Bloggs , 1 Senator Street , Senatorville " they will just discard it and allow the Senator 's kids to keep infringing.The laws does n't treat everyone equally unfortunately , and in civil cases like copyright infringement it 's down to the accuser to decide how and to who the law should be applied .
Even in criminal cases this is the case- why do you think pop stars can consistently get away with taking hard drugs like cocaine in front the cameras without so much as a slap on the wrist , whilst the guy on the street gets busted for a few grams of weed ? The fact is , the law barely even applies to the rich and famous.If you want to make an impact , the real key is to get someone to put up content you have produced and put the IPs of music industry execs and so forth on that , so that you are in control of who does and does n't get punished .
In this scenario you 'll probably still lose because of the afformentioned problem that the law is never applied fairly , but at least you 've created a precedent that a case based on such data is not proof of any actual infringement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People keep bringing up the idea of using Senator's IP addresses and so forth to get them caught, but the reason this doesn't happen is simple, even if you did, big media would let a Senator get away with it for exactly the reason they want to keep abusing these laws.When they ask the ISP for the IP address and are given "Senator Joe Bloggs, 1 Senator Street, Senatorville" they will just discard it and allow the Senator's kids to keep infringing.The laws doesn't treat everyone equally unfortunately, and in civil cases like copyright infringement it's down to the accuser to decide how and to who the law should be applied.
Even in criminal cases this is the case- why do you think pop stars can consistently get away with taking hard drugs like cocaine in front the cameras without so much as a slap on the wrist, whilst the guy on the street gets busted for a few grams of weed?The fact is, the law barely even applies to the rich and famous.If you want to make an impact, the real key is to get someone to put up content you have produced and put the IPs of music industry execs and so forth on that, so that you are in control of who does and doesn't get punished.
In this scenario you'll probably still lose because of the afformentioned problem that the law is never applied fairly, but at least you've created a precedent that a case based on such data is not proof of any actual infringement.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372230</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30374422</id>
	<title>Re:DMCA notices sent out totally indiscriminately</title>
	<author>Krishnoid</author>
	<datestamp>1260297960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So theoretically they've exposed themselves to prosecution for perjury. If I called the DA in San Francisco or in my own jurisdiction and asked them to prosecute, what do you think the chances are that they'd do it? Zero, I'd guess.</p></div><p>
IANAL, but I remember <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/04/15/MNGN5I9OUC1.DTL" title="sfgate.com">reading</a> [sfgate.com] that it's particularly rare to prosecute for perjury in general.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So theoretically they 've exposed themselves to prosecution for perjury .
If I called the DA in San Francisco or in my own jurisdiction and asked them to prosecute , what do you think the chances are that they 'd do it ?
Zero , I 'd guess .
IANAL , but I remember reading [ sfgate.com ] that it 's particularly rare to prosecute for perjury in general .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So theoretically they've exposed themselves to prosecution for perjury.
If I called the DA in San Francisco or in my own jurisdiction and asked them to prosecute, what do you think the chances are that they'd do it?
Zero, I'd guess.
IANAL, but I remember reading [sfgate.com] that it's particularly rare to prosecute for perjury in general.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372802</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373004</id>
	<title>Re:First hand experience</title>
	<author>shermo</author>
	<datestamp>1260281940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I do this every time I'm asked to sign that my baggage is fragile/unsuitably packed.</p><p>I travel with somewhat fragile sporting equipment, so this happens most flights. I delete the 'unsuitably packed' section and any disclaimers of liability, initial it, and sign at the bottom. So I'm just signing that my item is fragile, which seems honest. But I'm not saying it's alright for the baggage handlers to ride it up the conveyor belt (I've seen this happen).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do this every time I 'm asked to sign that my baggage is fragile/unsuitably packed.I travel with somewhat fragile sporting equipment , so this happens most flights .
I delete the 'unsuitably packed ' section and any disclaimers of liability , initial it , and sign at the bottom .
So I 'm just signing that my item is fragile , which seems honest .
But I 'm not saying it 's alright for the baggage handlers to ride it up the conveyor belt ( I 've seen this happen ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do this every time I'm asked to sign that my baggage is fragile/unsuitably packed.I travel with somewhat fragile sporting equipment, so this happens most flights.
I delete the 'unsuitably packed' section and any disclaimers of liability, initial it, and sign at the bottom.
So I'm just signing that my item is fragile, which seems honest.
But I'm not saying it's alright for the baggage handlers to ride it up the conveyor belt (I've seen this happen).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373904</id>
	<title>Re:The new way to shut ppl down who you don't like</title>
	<author>slashqwerty</author>
	<datestamp>1260290820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Considering the fact that it's possible to do that, I am completely confused as to how it is possible that every single IP address that the RIAA, MPAA, Congress, or Senate uses has not been registered with as many trackers as possible. Sure, it would degrade BitTorrent performance on those trackers, but it would be worth it to have the RIAA flood the house or senate with takedown notices when no illegal activity has taken place.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>And how would congress react to that?  Outlaw the use of software that isn't internet approved!  Increased penalties for forging IP numbers!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering the fact that it 's possible to do that , I am completely confused as to how it is possible that every single IP address that the RIAA , MPAA , Congress , or Senate uses has not been registered with as many trackers as possible .
Sure , it would degrade BitTorrent performance on those trackers , but it would be worth it to have the RIAA flood the house or senate with takedown notices when no illegal activity has taken place .
And how would congress react to that ?
Outlaw the use of software that is n't internet approved !
Increased penalties for forging IP numbers !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering the fact that it's possible to do that, I am completely confused as to how it is possible that every single IP address that the RIAA, MPAA, Congress, or Senate uses has not been registered with as many trackers as possible.
Sure, it would degrade BitTorrent performance on those trackers, but it would be worth it to have the RIAA flood the house or senate with takedown notices when no illegal activity has taken place.
And how would congress react to that?
Outlaw the use of software that isn't internet approved!
Increased penalties for forging IP numbers!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372230</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372378</id>
	<title>Re:The new way to shut ppl down who you don't like</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260277620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Can you really register someone else's IP address? Why not modify the trackers to only allow registration of the IP address that is the source of the request? (Or am I misunderstanding how the nodes communicate with the tracker? If it's UDP I suppose you could forge the headers; why not require a confirmation message with a unique hash code be sent to and echoed back by each registered node?)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can you really register someone else 's IP address ?
Why not modify the trackers to only allow registration of the IP address that is the source of the request ?
( Or am I misunderstanding how the nodes communicate with the tracker ?
If it 's UDP I suppose you could forge the headers ; why not require a confirmation message with a unique hash code be sent to and echoed back by each registered node ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can you really register someone else's IP address?
Why not modify the trackers to only allow registration of the IP address that is the source of the request?
(Or am I misunderstanding how the nodes communicate with the tracker?
If it's UDP I suppose you could forge the headers; why not require a confirmation message with a unique hash code be sent to and echoed back by each registered node?
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372230</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372644</id>
	<title>I  aworkld where</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260279180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>guilt is assumed, it's up to to to prove your innocence.</p><p>That is why the DMCA and current copyright enforcement laws are a complete slap in the face to our most important rights.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>guilt is assumed , it 's up to to to prove your innocence.That is why the DMCA and current copyright enforcement laws are a complete slap in the face to our most important rights .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>guilt is assumed, it's up to to to prove your innocence.That is why the DMCA and current copyright enforcement laws are a complete slap in the face to our most important rights.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372410</id>
	<title>Of course they aren't making an effort</title>
	<author>Vyse of Arcadia</author>
	<datestamp>1260277800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It costs more money to actually do any double-checking than it does to send a DMCA notice to anyone who might  possibly perhaps maybe be violating a copyright.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It costs more money to actually do any double-checking than it does to send a DMCA notice to anyone who might possibly perhaps maybe be violating a copyright .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It costs more money to actually do any double-checking than it does to send a DMCA notice to anyone who might  possibly perhaps maybe be violating a copyright.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372802</id>
	<title>DMCA notices sent out totally indiscriminately</title>
	<author>bcrowell</author>
	<datestamp>1260280500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>He questions just how much effort agencies take to reduce false positives when it comes to DMCA notices.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
I think the answer is absolutely no effort at all. <a href="http://www.boingboing.net/2007/08/30/science-fiction-writ-1.html" title="boingboing.net">Here</a> [boingboing.net] is a notorious example where a busybody associated with a professional writes' association sent out a slew of automated DMCA notices, including some totally erroneous ones that caused authors' work to be taken down after they had intentionally put it up. Actually, they appeared to the service providers to be DMCA notices, but the guy who sent them out now claims that they weren't; this is because a real DMCA notice is supposed to be sent under penalty of perjury.
</p><p>
I experienced one of these myself recently. I've written some books that are under CC licenses, and various people have (totally legally) posted copies of them on Scribd. I got an email from Scribd saying that they got a DMCA takedown notice from a publisher for one of my books. Turns out that some contracted in SF hired by the publisher issued the notice without checking carefully. Apparently the title was similar to one of their books. They didn't bother checking the name of the author. So they're going after me for violating the copyright on my own book. Great. I called the contractor in SF, and they said, "Oops, never mind." So theoretically they've exposed themselves to prosecution for perjury. If I called the DA in San Francisco or in my own jurisdiction and asked them to prosecute, what do you think the chances are that they'd do it? Zero, I'd guess.
</p><p>
I wonder if anything the EFF can do about this in the courts. It really sucks.
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>He questions just how much effort agencies take to reduce false positives when it comes to DMCA notices .
I think the answer is absolutely no effort at all .
Here [ boingboing.net ] is a notorious example where a busybody associated with a professional writes ' association sent out a slew of automated DMCA notices , including some totally erroneous ones that caused authors ' work to be taken down after they had intentionally put it up .
Actually , they appeared to the service providers to be DMCA notices , but the guy who sent them out now claims that they were n't ; this is because a real DMCA notice is supposed to be sent under penalty of perjury .
I experienced one of these myself recently .
I 've written some books that are under CC licenses , and various people have ( totally legally ) posted copies of them on Scribd .
I got an email from Scribd saying that they got a DMCA takedown notice from a publisher for one of my books .
Turns out that some contracted in SF hired by the publisher issued the notice without checking carefully .
Apparently the title was similar to one of their books .
They did n't bother checking the name of the author .
So they 're going after me for violating the copyright on my own book .
Great. I called the contractor in SF , and they said , " Oops , never mind .
" So theoretically they 've exposed themselves to prosecution for perjury .
If I called the DA in San Francisco or in my own jurisdiction and asked them to prosecute , what do you think the chances are that they 'd do it ?
Zero , I 'd guess .
I wonder if anything the EFF can do about this in the courts .
It really sucks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He questions just how much effort agencies take to reduce false positives when it comes to DMCA notices.
I think the answer is absolutely no effort at all.
Here [boingboing.net] is a notorious example where a busybody associated with a professional writes' association sent out a slew of automated DMCA notices, including some totally erroneous ones that caused authors' work to be taken down after they had intentionally put it up.
Actually, they appeared to the service providers to be DMCA notices, but the guy who sent them out now claims that they weren't; this is because a real DMCA notice is supposed to be sent under penalty of perjury.
I experienced one of these myself recently.
I've written some books that are under CC licenses, and various people have (totally legally) posted copies of them on Scribd.
I got an email from Scribd saying that they got a DMCA takedown notice from a publisher for one of my books.
Turns out that some contracted in SF hired by the publisher issued the notice without checking carefully.
Apparently the title was similar to one of their books.
They didn't bother checking the name of the author.
So they're going after me for violating the copyright on my own book.
Great. I called the contractor in SF, and they said, "Oops, never mind.
" So theoretically they've exposed themselves to prosecution for perjury.
If I called the DA in San Francisco or in my own jurisdiction and asked them to prosecute, what do you think the chances are that they'd do it?
Zero, I'd guess.
I wonder if anything the EFF can do about this in the courts.
It really sucks.

	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373124</id>
	<title>Re:First hand experience</title>
	<author>Mr. Freeman</author>
	<datestamp>1260283140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Except that this isn't necessarily signed by both parties.  The letter isn't ever signed by the school.  Even if this was the case, he couldn't be held to the first contract because he never agreed to it in any matter (verbal or otherwise).<br><br>Now, the entire point of submitting a different letter is to void the "contract".  You give them some bullshit, they give you internet access.  I can't see how this is fraud.  He returns a signed letter.  He's not being deceptive with poor wording, or trying to obfuscate something.  Everything is right there in plain English.  If the university doesn't bother to read the letter he sent, that's their loss.<br><br>Think about it.  If the university doesn't have to read the signed letters they receive, then they could just as easily claim that their junk mail is letters admitting copyright infringement.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Except that this is n't necessarily signed by both parties .
The letter is n't ever signed by the school .
Even if this was the case , he could n't be held to the first contract because he never agreed to it in any matter ( verbal or otherwise ) .Now , the entire point of submitting a different letter is to void the " contract " .
You give them some bullshit , they give you internet access .
I ca n't see how this is fraud .
He returns a signed letter .
He 's not being deceptive with poor wording , or trying to obfuscate something .
Everything is right there in plain English .
If the university does n't bother to read the letter he sent , that 's their loss.Think about it .
If the university does n't have to read the signed letters they receive , then they could just as easily claim that their junk mail is letters admitting copyright infringement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except that this isn't necessarily signed by both parties.
The letter isn't ever signed by the school.
Even if this was the case, he couldn't be held to the first contract because he never agreed to it in any matter (verbal or otherwise).Now, the entire point of submitting a different letter is to void the "contract".
You give them some bullshit, they give you internet access.
I can't see how this is fraud.
He returns a signed letter.
He's not being deceptive with poor wording, or trying to obfuscate something.
Everything is right there in plain English.
If the university doesn't bother to read the letter he sent, that's their loss.Think about it.
If the university doesn't have to read the signed letters they receive, then they could just as easily claim that their junk mail is letters admitting copyright infringement.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372446</id>
	<title>Re:First hand experience</title>
	<author>TubeSteak</author>
	<datestamp>1260277980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sounds like a good plan to me.<br>I'll try this the next time I have to sign something.</p><p>Simply edit it slightly to my advantage, film myself doing so (in case they then do the same, and in court, it'll be a question of which is the original), sign it, turn it in, and let them sign it / approve it.</p></div><p>Changes to a contract (especially for property) have to be agreed upon by both parties so that there is a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meeting\_of\_the\_minds" title="wikipedia.org">meeting of the minds</a> [wikipedia.org].<br>It's one of the foundations of our common law.</p><p>Suffice it to say that your plan would <i>never</i> fly in front of a judge.<br>At best, the judge would say there was never a contract and you need to GTFO.<br>At worst, you could end up getting charged with fraud.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like a good plan to me.I 'll try this the next time I have to sign something.Simply edit it slightly to my advantage , film myself doing so ( in case they then do the same , and in court , it 'll be a question of which is the original ) , sign it , turn it in , and let them sign it / approve it.Changes to a contract ( especially for property ) have to be agreed upon by both parties so that there is a meeting of the minds [ wikipedia.org ] .It 's one of the foundations of our common law.Suffice it to say that your plan would never fly in front of a judge.At best , the judge would say there was never a contract and you need to GTFO.At worst , you could end up getting charged with fraud .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like a good plan to me.I'll try this the next time I have to sign something.Simply edit it slightly to my advantage, film myself doing so (in case they then do the same, and in court, it'll be a question of which is the original), sign it, turn it in, and let them sign it / approve it.Changes to a contract (especially for property) have to be agreed upon by both parties so that there is a meeting of the minds [wikipedia.org].It's one of the foundations of our common law.Suffice it to say that your plan would never fly in front of a judge.At best, the judge would say there was never a contract and you need to GTFO.At worst, you could end up getting charged with fraud.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30374574</id>
	<title>Re:The new way to shut ppl down who you don't like</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1260299880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I predict some politicians with huge loads of torrented child porn (with sound tracks out of commercial music) on their PCs. ^^</p><p>The best way to get to their computers, is to become the technician, and make it a time capsule which goes off some random time when you&rsquo;ve left and are forgotten. Don&rsquo;t try any office computer shit. Their *private* computers are where you should do it. The security there is basically zero.<br>Get yourself and a friend invited there. The friend distracts them, you stick in the USB stick, run autostart, pull it out, and done.<br>Because of the incubation delay, you&rsquo;re out of the question.</p><p>Now all you need is social engineering to get him to invite you. ^^<br>Think about what he wants. Learn to understand him. Fulfill his greed. Has he prostitutes coming over? Does he buy drugs? Those are sure shots. But really, any weird thing that he really wants, will make him open up. Easy peasy.</p><p>No, I am not a special agent, and I have better things to do than such stuff.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)<br>I recommend reading some leaked CIA manuals though, so they can&rsquo;t pull this shit on you. ^^</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I predict some politicians with huge loads of torrented child porn ( with sound tracks out of commercial music ) on their PCs .
^ ^ The best way to get to their computers , is to become the technician , and make it a time capsule which goes off some random time when you    ve left and are forgotten .
Don    t try any office computer shit .
Their * private * computers are where you should do it .
The security there is basically zero.Get yourself and a friend invited there .
The friend distracts them , you stick in the USB stick , run autostart , pull it out , and done.Because of the incubation delay , you    re out of the question.Now all you need is social engineering to get him to invite you .
^ ^ Think about what he wants .
Learn to understand him .
Fulfill his greed .
Has he prostitutes coming over ?
Does he buy drugs ?
Those are sure shots .
But really , any weird thing that he really wants , will make him open up .
Easy peasy.No , I am not a special agent , and I have better things to do than such stuff .
: ) I recommend reading some leaked CIA manuals though , so they can    t pull this shit on you .
^ ^</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I predict some politicians with huge loads of torrented child porn (with sound tracks out of commercial music) on their PCs.
^^The best way to get to their computers, is to become the technician, and make it a time capsule which goes off some random time when you’ve left and are forgotten.
Don’t try any office computer shit.
Their *private* computers are where you should do it.
The security there is basically zero.Get yourself and a friend invited there.
The friend distracts them, you stick in the USB stick, run autostart, pull it out, and done.Because of the incubation delay, you’re out of the question.Now all you need is social engineering to get him to invite you.
^^Think about what he wants.
Learn to understand him.
Fulfill his greed.
Has he prostitutes coming over?
Does he buy drugs?
Those are sure shots.
But really, any weird thing that he really wants, will make him open up.
Easy peasy.No, I am not a special agent, and I have better things to do than such stuff.
:)I recommend reading some leaked CIA manuals though, so they can’t pull this shit on you.
^^</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371846</id>
	<title>First hand experience</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260274440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I ran a Tor exit node for a semester at Marquette University. I got DMCA takedown notices all the time, for copyrighted Britney Spears music that was apparently being downloaded through my exit node. Each time, they made me sign a letter admitting guilt to get my Internet turned back on. Fortunately, I was able to make a slightly modified letter that <i>looked</i> the same as the one they had sent me, but didn't actually admit anything, and they would still turn it back on.</p><p>I was following all the rules with my exit node. It was completely permitted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ran a Tor exit node for a semester at Marquette University .
I got DMCA takedown notices all the time , for copyrighted Britney Spears music that was apparently being downloaded through my exit node .
Each time , they made me sign a letter admitting guilt to get my Internet turned back on .
Fortunately , I was able to make a slightly modified letter that looked the same as the one they had sent me , but did n't actually admit anything , and they would still turn it back on.I was following all the rules with my exit node .
It was completely permitted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I ran a Tor exit node for a semester at Marquette University.
I got DMCA takedown notices all the time, for copyrighted Britney Spears music that was apparently being downloaded through my exit node.
Each time, they made me sign a letter admitting guilt to get my Internet turned back on.
Fortunately, I was able to make a slightly modified letter that looked the same as the one they had sent me, but didn't actually admit anything, and they would still turn it back on.I was following all the rules with my exit node.
It was completely permitted.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30512594</id>
	<title>Re:The new way to shut ppl down who you don't like</title>
	<author>AndersOSU</author>
	<datestamp>1261413900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know that's what I was wondering too.</p><p>The guy who wrote the article seems to have about as clear a case as one could imagine that the copyright owners are perjuring themselves - AND and interest in the rule of law AND (maybe) a university to foot his legal bills.  Can an individual pursue perjury charges, or do they have to be brought by the state?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know that 's what I was wondering too.The guy who wrote the article seems to have about as clear a case as one could imagine that the copyright owners are perjuring themselves - AND and interest in the rule of law AND ( maybe ) a university to foot his legal bills .
Can an individual pursue perjury charges , or do they have to be brought by the state ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know that's what I was wondering too.The guy who wrote the article seems to have about as clear a case as one could imagine that the copyright owners are perjuring themselves - AND and interest in the rule of law AND (maybe) a university to foot his legal bills.
Can an individual pursue perjury charges, or do they have to be brought by the state?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372728</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371896</id>
	<title>Pft... evidence is for losers.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260274680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>It would be kinda nice if they where required to get the sign off of a judge before submitting a pre-settlement offer. But thats just not how civil cases work. More's the pity, but often the defendant in a civil case needs to go to court and ask for a dismissal if the person leveling the suite has no actual grounds. Just doing so can cost a fair amount, so it boils down to "pay us or we'll sue you can it'll cost more".</htmltext>
<tokenext>It would be kinda nice if they where required to get the sign off of a judge before submitting a pre-settlement offer .
But thats just not how civil cases work .
More 's the pity , but often the defendant in a civil case needs to go to court and ask for a dismissal if the person leveling the suite has no actual grounds .
Just doing so can cost a fair amount , so it boils down to " pay us or we 'll sue you can it 'll cost more " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would be kinda nice if they where required to get the sign off of a judge before submitting a pre-settlement offer.
But thats just not how civil cases work.
More's the pity, but often the defendant in a civil case needs to go to court and ask for a dismissal if the person leveling the suite has no actual grounds.
Just doing so can cost a fair amount, so it boils down to "pay us or we'll sue you can it'll cost more".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371872</id>
	<title>The new way to shut ppl down who you don't like.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260274560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sneaking some bitTorrent traffic onto someone's network is the new, legitimized DDOS?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sneaking some bitTorrent traffic onto someone 's network is the new , legitimized DDOS ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sneaking some bitTorrent traffic onto someone's network is the new, legitimized DDOS?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371968</id>
	<title>I misread Coral ...</title>
	<author>neonprimetime</author>
	<datestamp>1260275040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... as Corel<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and it got me reminiscing about the Penguin that came with the Corel WordPerfect&#174; Office 2000 Deluxe for Linux.  <a href="http://sites.google.com/site/tranter/interests/penguins" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">Enjoy!</a> [google.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>... as Corel ... and it got me reminiscing about the Penguin that came with the Corel WordPerfect   Office 2000 Deluxe for Linux .
Enjoy ! [ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... as Corel ... and it got me reminiscing about the Penguin that came with the Corel WordPerfect® Office 2000 Deluxe for Linux.
Enjoy! [google.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372230</id>
	<title>Re:The new way to shut ppl down who you don't like</title>
	<author>amicusNYCL</author>
	<datestamp>1260276720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From what I understand, the notices are not being sent because of traffic, but because of IP logs (which are not the same).  Specifically, they look at the IP logs on the torrent tracker to identify which machines have the content.  Any machine is able to register itself with the tracker and say it has any content, regardless of whether it does or not, and regardless of whether it's even running BitTorrent.  That's how the guy got his printer DMCA'd - he manually registered his printer's IP address with one or more trackers.</p><p>Considering the fact that it's possible to do that, I am completely confused as to how it is possible that every single IP address that the RIAA, MPAA, Congress, or Senate uses has not been registered with as many trackers as possible.  Sure, it would degrade BitTorrent performance on those trackers, but it would be worth it to have the RIAA flood the house or senate with takedown notices when no illegal activity has taken place.  Then we might start to see that "under the penalty of perjury" clause get enforced.</p><p>If they aren't actually connecting to those machines and verifying that 1) they are receiving traffic and 2) they are distributing content, then they haven't exactly made a good-faith effort.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From what I understand , the notices are not being sent because of traffic , but because of IP logs ( which are not the same ) .
Specifically , they look at the IP logs on the torrent tracker to identify which machines have the content .
Any machine is able to register itself with the tracker and say it has any content , regardless of whether it does or not , and regardless of whether it 's even running BitTorrent .
That 's how the guy got his printer DMCA 'd - he manually registered his printer 's IP address with one or more trackers.Considering the fact that it 's possible to do that , I am completely confused as to how it is possible that every single IP address that the RIAA , MPAA , Congress , or Senate uses has not been registered with as many trackers as possible .
Sure , it would degrade BitTorrent performance on those trackers , but it would be worth it to have the RIAA flood the house or senate with takedown notices when no illegal activity has taken place .
Then we might start to see that " under the penalty of perjury " clause get enforced.If they are n't actually connecting to those machines and verifying that 1 ) they are receiving traffic and 2 ) they are distributing content , then they have n't exactly made a good-faith effort .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From what I understand, the notices are not being sent because of traffic, but because of IP logs (which are not the same).
Specifically, they look at the IP logs on the torrent tracker to identify which machines have the content.
Any machine is able to register itself with the tracker and say it has any content, regardless of whether it does or not, and regardless of whether it's even running BitTorrent.
That's how the guy got his printer DMCA'd - he manually registered his printer's IP address with one or more trackers.Considering the fact that it's possible to do that, I am completely confused as to how it is possible that every single IP address that the RIAA, MPAA, Congress, or Senate uses has not been registered with as many trackers as possible.
Sure, it would degrade BitTorrent performance on those trackers, but it would be worth it to have the RIAA flood the house or senate with takedown notices when no illegal activity has taken place.
Then we might start to see that "under the penalty of perjury" clause get enforced.If they aren't actually connecting to those machines and verifying that 1) they are receiving traffic and 2) they are distributing content, then they haven't exactly made a good-faith effort.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372020</id>
	<title>Please helP!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260275400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My toilet is exploding, how do I stop it? Everywhere...shit! Everywhere...urine! Everywhere...faeces! If only my toilet was OSS, and its users could have inspected its source, this would never have happened.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My toilet is exploding , how do I stop it ?
Everywhere...shit ! Everywhere...urine !
Everywhere...faeces ! If only my toilet was OSS , and its users could have inspected its source , this would never have happened .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My toilet is exploding, how do I stop it?
Everywhere...shit! Everywhere...urine!
Everywhere...faeces! If only my toilet was OSS, and its users could have inspected its source, this would never have happened.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373388</id>
	<title>Re:First hand experience</title>
	<author>Thinboy00</author>
	<datestamp>1260285300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It only worked the first 2 times. Marquette has a strange sort of 3-strikes policy. After the third alleged infringement, they said that I couldn't get it turned back on at all, but they still demanded that I sign the admission to guilt. I contacted ITS daily to try to get them to fulfill their contractual obligation (under the dorm's housing agreement) and restore my Internet access, but after about a week of this, the tech support people at ITS started telling me that they were forbidden from speaking to me. Eventually cops came and hinted that if I contacted IT Services again, they would arrest me.</p></div><p>If I was in that situation, I'd "hint" to ITS/the cops/whomever that I had a lawyer.</p><p>This post is not legal advice of any kind.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It only worked the first 2 times .
Marquette has a strange sort of 3-strikes policy .
After the third alleged infringement , they said that I could n't get it turned back on at all , but they still demanded that I sign the admission to guilt .
I contacted ITS daily to try to get them to fulfill their contractual obligation ( under the dorm 's housing agreement ) and restore my Internet access , but after about a week of this , the tech support people at ITS started telling me that they were forbidden from speaking to me .
Eventually cops came and hinted that if I contacted IT Services again , they would arrest me.If I was in that situation , I 'd " hint " to ITS/the cops/whomever that I had a lawyer.This post is not legal advice of any kind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It only worked the first 2 times.
Marquette has a strange sort of 3-strikes policy.
After the third alleged infringement, they said that I couldn't get it turned back on at all, but they still demanded that I sign the admission to guilt.
I contacted ITS daily to try to get them to fulfill their contractual obligation (under the dorm's housing agreement) and restore my Internet access, but after about a week of this, the tech support people at ITS started telling me that they were forbidden from speaking to me.
Eventually cops came and hinted that if I contacted IT Services again, they would arrest me.If I was in that situation, I'd "hint" to ITS/the cops/whomever that I had a lawyer.This post is not legal advice of any kind.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372486</id>
	<title>Re:First hand experience</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260278160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So how did the story end? Did you eventually start admitting guilt, or did you live without Internet access? Or something else?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So how did the story end ?
Did you eventually start admitting guilt , or did you live without Internet access ?
Or something else ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So how did the story end?
Did you eventually start admitting guilt, or did you live without Internet access?
Or something else?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373742</id>
	<title>Re:DMCA notices sent out totally indiscriminately</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260288960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can "press charges".  You're going to have to provide some evidence to convince them, but your letter and "whoops never mind" ought to be enough.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can " press charges " .
You 're going to have to provide some evidence to convince them , but your letter and " whoops never mind " ought to be enough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can "press charges".
You're going to have to provide some evidence to convince them, but your letter and "whoops never mind" ought to be enough.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372802</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373072</id>
	<title>Hmm</title>
	<author>Malenx</author>
	<datestamp>1260282660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://torrentfreak.com/automated-legal-threats-turn-piracy-into-profit-090628/" title="torrentfreak.com" rel="nofollow">http://torrentfreak.com/automated-legal-threats-turn-piracy-into-profit-090628/</a> [torrentfreak.com]</p><p>The company that sent those notices is very gray at best, quite illegal at worst.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //torrentfreak.com/automated-legal-threats-turn-piracy-into-profit-090628/ [ torrentfreak.com ] The company that sent those notices is very gray at best , quite illegal at worst .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://torrentfreak.com/automated-legal-threats-turn-piracy-into-profit-090628/ [torrentfreak.com]The company that sent those notices is very gray at best, quite illegal at worst.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373750</id>
	<title>Free Speech Bunch Of B.S.</title>
	<author>AnonymousPinhead2</author>
	<datestamp>1260289020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I love proxies,unlimited emails and the fact i can even change my mac id, good things you say. Not for Slashdot who has indeed proved the free speech thing wrong and it is all saved. want proof i'll show you,ive got it. I might even take it to my lawyer's office, hay i need the money who doesnt, i wonder how serious this Free Speech thing is you denied it to me, Btw you need to put were everyone can see all comments and even articles Are Not Fact and we are not giving you information all the time that is "Fact" Fact is thats not what slashdot is about, just suggestion. I already know that but it should be seen on every page. And it seems everyone loves windows here, put a windows section here it might get results. Put this Offtopic btw it had nothing to do with the topic</htmltext>
<tokenext>I love proxies,unlimited emails and the fact i can even change my mac id , good things you say .
Not for Slashdot who has indeed proved the free speech thing wrong and it is all saved .
want proof i 'll show you,ive got it .
I might even take it to my lawyer 's office , hay i need the money who doesnt , i wonder how serious this Free Speech thing is you denied it to me , Btw you need to put were everyone can see all comments and even articles Are Not Fact and we are not giving you information all the time that is " Fact " Fact is thats not what slashdot is about , just suggestion .
I already know that but it should be seen on every page .
And it seems everyone loves windows here , put a windows section here it might get results .
Put this Offtopic btw it had nothing to do with the topic</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love proxies,unlimited emails and the fact i can even change my mac id, good things you say.
Not for Slashdot who has indeed proved the free speech thing wrong and it is all saved.
want proof i'll show you,ive got it.
I might even take it to my lawyer's office, hay i need the money who doesnt, i wonder how serious this Free Speech thing is you denied it to me, Btw you need to put were everyone can see all comments and even articles Are Not Fact and we are not giving you information all the time that is "Fact" Fact is thats not what slashdot is about, just suggestion.
I already know that but it should be seen on every page.
And it seems everyone loves windows here, put a windows section here it might get results.
Put this Offtopic btw it had nothing to do with the topic</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373176</id>
	<title>Re:First hand experience</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260283500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am not a lawyer, and you do not have deep pockets to fight it but....If you've given the entire story they may be violating the DMCA by refusing to reconnect you if you respond to the accusation by saying you were not doing it. Next, it could be defamation to tell other people you were doing something illegal if you were not. It could also be considered coercion to pressure someone to admit to a crime they did not commit. I'd be getting legal advice, preferably pro bono if you can find it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am not a lawyer , and you do not have deep pockets to fight it but....If you 've given the entire story they may be violating the DMCA by refusing to reconnect you if you respond to the accusation by saying you were not doing it .
Next , it could be defamation to tell other people you were doing something illegal if you were not .
It could also be considered coercion to pressure someone to admit to a crime they did not commit .
I 'd be getting legal advice , preferably pro bono if you can find it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am not a lawyer, and you do not have deep pockets to fight it but....If you've given the entire story they may be violating the DMCA by refusing to reconnect you if you respond to the accusation by saying you were not doing it.
Next, it could be defamation to tell other people you were doing something illegal if you were not.
It could also be considered coercion to pressure someone to admit to a crime they did not commit.
I'd be getting legal advice, preferably pro bono if you can find it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373152</id>
	<title>Isn't this defamation?</title>
	<author>syousef</author>
	<datestamp>1260283320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems to me it ought to be defamation to accuse someone of a crime without making an effort to check that it's true, and run around telling his access provider.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems to me it ought to be defamation to accuse someone of a crime without making an effort to check that it 's true , and run around telling his access provider .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems to me it ought to be defamation to accuse someone of a crime without making an effort to check that it's true, and run around telling his access provider.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30379824</id>
	<title>Re:The new way to shut ppl down who you don't like</title>
	<author>fulldecent</author>
	<datestamp>1259612760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People are doing this. Log in to your favorite tracker and find peers that "have the content" but will send it to you.</p><p>As for the filtering, yes there is an obvious "dont send hatemail to D.C." rule which is manually instituted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People are doing this .
Log in to your favorite tracker and find peers that " have the content " but will send it to you.As for the filtering , yes there is an obvious " dont send hatemail to D.C. " rule which is manually instituted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People are doing this.
Log in to your favorite tracker and find peers that "have the content" but will send it to you.As for the filtering, yes there is an obvious "dont send hatemail to D.C." rule which is manually instituted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372230</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373256</id>
	<title>Shows a continuing lack of standards</title>
	<author>CSEMike</author>
	<datestamp>1260284100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As the article points out, these practices are identical to the <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/08/06/05/1723225/How-To-Frame-a-Printer-For-Copyright-Infringement" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">lax enforcement practices described last year on slashdot</a> [slashdot.org] and elsewhere.<br>
<br>
The use of indirect evidence as "proof" of downloads is known, the interesting bit here is that in spite of pushback from ISPs and users, industry practices have not changed. <br>
<br>
Perhaps this (and the widespread lack of privacy in cloud-based services generally) will drive more users to privacy-preserving data sharing options, such as <a href="http://oneswarm.cs.washington.edu/" title="washington.edu" rel="nofollow">OneSwarm</a> [washington.edu].</htmltext>
<tokenext>As the article points out , these practices are identical to the lax enforcement practices described last year on slashdot [ slashdot.org ] and elsewhere .
The use of indirect evidence as " proof " of downloads is known , the interesting bit here is that in spite of pushback from ISPs and users , industry practices have not changed .
Perhaps this ( and the widespread lack of privacy in cloud-based services generally ) will drive more users to privacy-preserving data sharing options , such as OneSwarm [ washington.edu ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As the article points out, these practices are identical to the lax enforcement practices described last year on slashdot [slashdot.org] and elsewhere.
The use of indirect evidence as "proof" of downloads is known, the interesting bit here is that in spite of pushback from ISPs and users, industry practices have not changed.
Perhaps this (and the widespread lack of privacy in cloud-based services generally) will drive more users to privacy-preserving data sharing options, such as OneSwarm [washington.edu].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373142</id>
	<title>Re:First hand experience</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260283260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Detecting and finding changes in contracts as it gets passed around and finalized is one of the reasons law firms use document compare tools.<br>One example is <a href="http://www.workshare.com/products/" title="workshare.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.workshare.com/products/</a> [workshare.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Detecting and finding changes in contracts as it gets passed around and finalized is one of the reasons law firms use document compare tools.One example is http : //www.workshare.com/products/ [ workshare.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Detecting and finding changes in contracts as it gets passed around and finalized is one of the reasons law firms use document compare tools.One example is http://www.workshare.com/products/ [workshare.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372690</id>
	<title>Re:The new way to shut ppl down who you don't like</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260279540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, you can: the UDP tracker protocol.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , you can : the UDP tracker protocol .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, you can: the UDP tracker protocol.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372378</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373728</id>
	<title>biznat3h</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260288840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">WhethEr you and its long term</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>WhethEr you and its long term [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WhethEr you and its long term [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30383092</id>
	<title>I Disagree</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259586360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It looks to me that copyright enforcement is going quite well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It looks to me that copyright enforcement is going quite well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It looks to me that copyright enforcement is going quite well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30379824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30512594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372728
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30375514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30377912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372802
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373742
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372802
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30377670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30374574
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373360
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30374422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372802
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30376404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30374068
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373536
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30376402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_2116205_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_2116205.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372434
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_2116205.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372704
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373536
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30374068
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30376404
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_2116205.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373152
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_2116205.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30507316
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_2116205.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373064
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_2116205.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30374512
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_2116205.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372644
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_2116205.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373256
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_2116205.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372172
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_2116205.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371896
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_2116205.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30374574
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372230
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30376402
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372556
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372728
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30512594
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372378
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372690
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30379824
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372544
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373760
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373904
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372924
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30375514
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_2116205.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372802
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30374422
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30377912
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373742
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_2116205.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373176
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373750
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372020
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30371902
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373004
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372446
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373124
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30377670
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373360
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373142
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372050
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30373388
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_2116205.30372486
</commentlist>
</conversation>
