<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_12_0114248</id>
	<title>$860 Million In Fines Handed Out For LCD Price-Fixing</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1260629700000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>eldavojohn writes <i>"Six companies have <a href="http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/press\_releases/2009/252936.htm">pleaded guilty to worldwide price fixing of Thin-Film Transistor Liquid Crystal Displays</a> from Sept. 14, 2001, to Dec. 1, 2006.  For violating the Sherman Act, the companies have agreed to pay criminal fines of over $860 Million.  In addition, nine executives have been charged in the scandal. The pricing scam affected some of the largest companies at the time, including Apple, HP and Dell. (If you bought a TFT-LCD from them in that time frame, you may be one of the victimized consumers.)  From the DOJ release, 'According to the charge, Chi Mei carried out the conspiracy by agreeing during meetings, conversations and communications to charge prices of TFT-LCD panels at certain pre-determined levels and issuing price quotations in accordance with the agreements reached. As a part of the conspiracy, Chi Mei exchanged information on sales of TFT-LCD panels for the purpose of monitoring and enforcing adherence to the agreed-upon prices.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>eldavojohn writes " Six companies have pleaded guilty to worldwide price fixing of Thin-Film Transistor Liquid Crystal Displays from Sept. 14 , 2001 , to Dec. 1 , 2006 .
For violating the Sherman Act , the companies have agreed to pay criminal fines of over $ 860 Million .
In addition , nine executives have been charged in the scandal .
The pricing scam affected some of the largest companies at the time , including Apple , HP and Dell .
( If you bought a TFT-LCD from them in that time frame , you may be one of the victimized consumers .
) From the DOJ release , 'According to the charge , Chi Mei carried out the conspiracy by agreeing during meetings , conversations and communications to charge prices of TFT-LCD panels at certain pre-determined levels and issuing price quotations in accordance with the agreements reached .
As a part of the conspiracy , Chi Mei exchanged information on sales of TFT-LCD panels for the purpose of monitoring and enforcing adherence to the agreed-upon prices .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>eldavojohn writes "Six companies have pleaded guilty to worldwide price fixing of Thin-Film Transistor Liquid Crystal Displays from Sept. 14, 2001, to Dec. 1, 2006.
For violating the Sherman Act, the companies have agreed to pay criminal fines of over $860 Million.
In addition, nine executives have been charged in the scandal.
The pricing scam affected some of the largest companies at the time, including Apple, HP and Dell.
(If you bought a TFT-LCD from them in that time frame, you may be one of the victimized consumers.
)  From the DOJ release, 'According to the charge, Chi Mei carried out the conspiracy by agreeing during meetings, conversations and communications to charge prices of TFT-LCD panels at certain pre-determined levels and issuing price quotations in accordance with the agreements reached.
As a part of the conspiracy, Chi Mei exchanged information on sales of TFT-LCD panels for the purpose of monitoring and enforcing adherence to the agreed-upon prices.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410732</id>
	<title>Savings</title>
	<author>jecowa</author>
	<datestamp>1260550800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>So how much should LCDs really cost? I want some savings on my next purchase.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So how much should LCDs really cost ?
I want some savings on my next purchase .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So how much should LCDs really cost?
I want some savings on my next purchase.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411104</id>
	<title>Victimized?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260554040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, price fixing is bad, but seriously "victimized" consumers? Yeah, they overpaid for an LCD, but they -chose- to pay that amount for an LCD. No one made them choose an LCD monitor/TV, its possible to watch TV/use a computer without an LCD display (CRT, Plasma, etc) and such. Once patents expired (or if hopefully patents are either abolished or weakened) theres nothing stopping a full-on price war where the people price fixing will lose big time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , price fixing is bad , but seriously " victimized " consumers ?
Yeah , they overpaid for an LCD , but they -chose- to pay that amount for an LCD .
No one made them choose an LCD monitor/TV , its possible to watch TV/use a computer without an LCD display ( CRT , Plasma , etc ) and such .
Once patents expired ( or if hopefully patents are either abolished or weakened ) theres nothing stopping a full-on price war where the people price fixing will lose big time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, price fixing is bad, but seriously "victimized" consumers?
Yeah, they overpaid for an LCD, but they -chose- to pay that amount for an LCD.
No one made them choose an LCD monitor/TV, its possible to watch TV/use a computer without an LCD display (CRT, Plasma, etc) and such.
Once patents expired (or if hopefully patents are either abolished or weakened) theres nothing stopping a full-on price war where the people price fixing will lose big time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410386</id>
	<title>Cut a deal</title>
	<author>ksemlerK</author>
	<datestamp>1260547980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>and sell me a $50 24" wide screen monitor with a 5ms response time, and then we'll talk.</htmltext>
<tokenext>and sell me a $ 50 24 " wide screen monitor with a 5ms response time , and then we 'll talk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and sell me a $50 24" wide screen monitor with a 5ms response time, and then we'll talk.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30414024</id>
	<title>Re:Cut a deal</title>
	<author>springbox</author>
	<datestamp>1260634080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would rather see the prices on the nicer non-TN panels drop sometime</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would rather see the prices on the nicer non-TN panels drop sometime</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would rather see the prices on the nicer non-TN panels drop sometime</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410536</id>
	<title>let me guess</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260549240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As someone who bought a Dell flat panel (for well over $100 IIRC) during that time period, all I need to do is submit my name and address, email address, two phone numbers, and other identifying information, to be entered in a database administered by only-God-knows so I'll eventually receive a check for my share of the proceeds which works out to $13.62 USD.  Meanwhile plaintiff attorneys Dewey Cheatem and Howe LLP will receive 40 percent of the settlement, or $90 million.   Apple, HP, Dell, and the others neither admit nor deny guilt or responsibility in the matter.</p><p>No thanks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone who bought a Dell flat panel ( for well over $ 100 IIRC ) during that time period , all I need to do is submit my name and address , email address , two phone numbers , and other identifying information , to be entered in a database administered by only-God-knows so I 'll eventually receive a check for my share of the proceeds which works out to $ 13.62 USD .
Meanwhile plaintiff attorneys Dewey Cheatem and Howe LLP will receive 40 percent of the settlement , or $ 90 million .
Apple , HP , Dell , and the others neither admit nor deny guilt or responsibility in the matter.No thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone who bought a Dell flat panel (for well over $100 IIRC) during that time period, all I need to do is submit my name and address, email address, two phone numbers, and other identifying information, to be entered in a database administered by only-God-knows so I'll eventually receive a check for my share of the proceeds which works out to $13.62 USD.
Meanwhile plaintiff attorneys Dewey Cheatem and Howe LLP will receive 40 percent of the settlement, or $90 million.
Apple, HP, Dell, and the others neither admit nor deny guilt or responsibility in the matter.No thanks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411880</id>
	<title>Re:Ugh</title>
	<author>YesIAmAScript</author>
	<datestamp>1260650100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Chi Mei Optoelectronics is owned by Foxconn, who owns a ton of other stuff. They control a ton of manufacturing business and a lot of the electronic subassembly business.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Chi Mei Optoelectronics is owned by Foxconn , who owns a ton of other stuff .
They control a ton of manufacturing business and a lot of the electronic subassembly business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chi Mei Optoelectronics is owned by Foxconn, who owns a ton of other stuff.
They control a ton of manufacturing business and a lot of the electronic subassembly business.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30413646</id>
	<title>Dirty Industry</title>
	<author>shaymon</author>
	<datestamp>1260630840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>These are the same people who decided to completely cease the production of 4:3 lcd panels so that they could instead make 16:9 panels with the same diagonal size but LESS PIXELS so they could drop their production costs and make consumers think they're still getting the same thing.

It's too bad I can't sue them for that; widescreen laptops are a plague.</htmltext>
<tokenext>These are the same people who decided to completely cease the production of 4 : 3 lcd panels so that they could instead make 16 : 9 panels with the same diagonal size but LESS PIXELS so they could drop their production costs and make consumers think they 're still getting the same thing .
It 's too bad I ca n't sue them for that ; widescreen laptops are a plague .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These are the same people who decided to completely cease the production of 4:3 lcd panels so that they could instead make 16:9 panels with the same diagonal size but LESS PIXELS so they could drop their production costs and make consumers think they're still getting the same thing.
It's too bad I can't sue them for that; widescreen laptops are a plague.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411782</id>
	<title>Re:Oh great</title>
	<author>KonoWatakushi</author>
	<datestamp>1260648660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly.  There is no use in fining corporations, as it only hurts their customers.  The fines are nothing but a cash grab by the government, and the settlements benefit no one but the lawyers.</p><p>There need to be serious consequences for this type of thing.  They should tear the responsible people limb from limb, literally.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly .
There is no use in fining corporations , as it only hurts their customers .
The fines are nothing but a cash grab by the government , and the settlements benefit no one but the lawyers.There need to be serious consequences for this type of thing .
They should tear the responsible people limb from limb , literally .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.
There is no use in fining corporations, as it only hurts their customers.
The fines are nothing but a cash grab by the government, and the settlements benefit no one but the lawyers.There need to be serious consequences for this type of thing.
They should tear the responsible people limb from limb, literally.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412616</id>
	<title>Re:Victimized?</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1260619140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They were denied the ability to get a cheaper one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They were denied the ability to get a cheaper one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They were denied the ability to get a cheaper one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410798</id>
	<title>Re:They are always doing this.  Better way  is to</title>
	<author>mysidia</author>
	<datestamp>1260551340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Can you imagine what would happen to prices if they did that?
</p><p>
First of all, in a conspiracy like this... the TFT part might no longer be available.. that would mean nobody could manufacture new monitors.
</p><p>
How do you feel about paying $10000  to get a 12" LCD  display,  due to all the main manufacturers' TFT screen material being banned?
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can you imagine what would happen to prices if they did that ?
First of all , in a conspiracy like this... the TFT part might no longer be available.. that would mean nobody could manufacture new monitors .
How do you feel about paying $ 10000 to get a 12 " LCD display , due to all the main manufacturers ' TFT screen material being banned ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Can you imagine what would happen to prices if they did that?
First of all, in a conspiracy like this... the TFT part might no longer be available.. that would mean nobody could manufacture new monitors.
How do you feel about paying $10000  to get a 12" LCD  display,  due to all the main manufacturers' TFT screen material being banned?
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410616</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410852</id>
	<title>Re:ok what?</title>
	<author>ArsonSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1260551760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>something about being held at gun point to buy an LCD monitor against your will or something like that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>something about being held at gun point to buy an LCD monitor against your will or something like that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>something about being held at gun point to buy an LCD monitor against your will or something like that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410906</id>
	<title>Re:Note to conspiracy theorists...</title>
	<author>AHuxley</author>
	<datestamp>1260552120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Price fixing would be great for the CIA.  All that ongoing tech/price chatter would open many to long term blackmail.  The NSA could then compromise other digital products by the same firms for sale around the world.<br>
The masons would just spike the plastics to slowly give off a cancer  trigger and a nice electronic hum to keep the bottom 90\% of the world in their place.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Price fixing would be great for the CIA .
All that ongoing tech/price chatter would open many to long term blackmail .
The NSA could then compromise other digital products by the same firms for sale around the world .
The masons would just spike the plastics to slowly give off a cancer trigger and a nice electronic hum to keep the bottom 90 \ % of the world in their place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Price fixing would be great for the CIA.
All that ongoing tech/price chatter would open many to long term blackmail.
The NSA could then compromise other digital products by the same firms for sale around the world.
The masons would just spike the plastics to slowly give off a cancer  trigger and a nice electronic hum to keep the bottom 90\% of the world in their place.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410420</id>
	<title>Victimized consumers may contact the DOJ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260548220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...if they wish to receive a tiny American flag pin*</p><p>*shipping and handling charges may apply.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...if they wish to receive a tiny American flag pin * * shipping and handling charges may apply .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...if they wish to receive a tiny American flag pin**shipping and handling charges may apply.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30413290</id>
	<title>id bet that 860million...</title>
	<author>trum4n</author>
	<datestamp>1260627420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>that they claim it as an operating expense, so then its LEGAL to keep the prices high, to pay it off.</htmltext>
<tokenext>that they claim it as an operating expense , so then its LEGAL to keep the prices high , to pay it off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that they claim it as an operating expense, so then its LEGAL to keep the prices high, to pay it off.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410606</id>
	<title>Note to conspiracy theorists...</title>
	<author>onyxruby</author>
	<datestamp>1260549720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is what real conspiracies look like. Note the distinct lack of "CIA", "Masons", "NSA" or other such favorites.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is what real conspiracies look like .
Note the distinct lack of " CIA " , " Masons " , " NSA " or other such favorites .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is what real conspiracies look like.
Note the distinct lack of "CIA", "Masons", "NSA" or other such favorites.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30414924</id>
	<title>Jail</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260640380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Send them all to Jail</htmltext>
<tokenext>Send them all to Jail</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Send them all to Jail</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410870</id>
	<title>Re:ok what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260551880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>*150 billion new Taiwan dollards equals about 4 billion dollars<br>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New\_Taiwan\_dollar</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>* 150 billion new Taiwan dollards equals about 4 billion dollarshttp : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New \ _Taiwan \ _dollar</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*150 billion new Taiwan dollards equals about 4 billion dollarshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New\_Taiwan\_dollar</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410524</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30413042</id>
	<title>When paid in file downloads...</title>
	<author>Errol backfiring</author>
	<datestamp>1260624480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How many files should they download to get the same fine?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How many files should they download to get the same fine ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many files should they download to get the same fine?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410524</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410964</id>
	<title>Re:let me guess</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260552420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>$13.62?  You've never actually been on the consumer end of one of these things, have you?

<br> <br>No, the lawyers will get 100\% of the actual cash that changes hands.  The "victimized consumer class" will get some bullshit "settlement" like a voucher for $50 off the list price of the next monitor they buy from the companies that did this in the first place.  Of course that will work out to a much higher price than you could buy it for without said voucher...  so, in effect, you get dick.

<br> <br>Again.</htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 13.62 ?
You 've never actually been on the consumer end of one of these things , have you ?
No , the lawyers will get 100 \ % of the actual cash that changes hands .
The " victimized consumer class " will get some bullshit " settlement " like a voucher for $ 50 off the list price of the next monitor they buy from the companies that did this in the first place .
Of course that will work out to a much higher price than you could buy it for without said voucher... so , in effect , you get dick .
Again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$13.62?
You've never actually been on the consumer end of one of these things, have you?
No, the lawyers will get 100\% of the actual cash that changes hands.
The "victimized consumer class" will get some bullshit "settlement" like a voucher for $50 off the list price of the next monitor they buy from the companies that did this in the first place.
Of course that will work out to a much higher price than you could buy it for without said voucher...  so, in effect, you get dick.
Again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410536</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30413742</id>
	<title>Re:ok what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260631680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>*150 billion new Taiwan dollards equals about 4 billion dollars</p></div><p>Not for long.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>* 150 billion new Taiwan dollards equals about 4 billion dollarsNot for long .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*150 billion new Taiwan dollards equals about 4 billion dollarsNot for long.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410524</id>
	<title>Re:ok what?</title>
	<author>eihab</author>
	<datestamp>1260549120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well let's see. The Taiwanese LCD producer Chi Mei Optoelectronics (CMO) agreed to pay $220 million for violations over 5 years (2001-2006) which comes up to $44 million per year of violations.</p><p>CMO is a publicly traded company, for 2009 their net sales up to November has been almost <a href="http://www.cmo.com.tw/opencms/cmo/media\_center/News/index.html?news\_no=1&amp;\_\_locale=en" title="cmo.com.tw">$30 <strong>b</strong>illion dollars</a> [cmo.com.tw].</p><p>CMO's <a href="http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/overview?symbol=3009.TW" title="reuters.com">market cap</a> [reuters.com] is $150 <strong>b</strong>illion dollars.</p><p>I think it's safe to say that $44 million dollars a year is a drop in the bucket for them.</p><p>The other $640 million is divided across 5 other companies so far, which sets them about $128 million dollars each, or $25.6 million dollars a year.</p><p>Justice is served!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well let 's see .
The Taiwanese LCD producer Chi Mei Optoelectronics ( CMO ) agreed to pay $ 220 million for violations over 5 years ( 2001-2006 ) which comes up to $ 44 million per year of violations.CMO is a publicly traded company , for 2009 their net sales up to November has been almost $ 30 billion dollars [ cmo.com.tw ] .CMO 's market cap [ reuters.com ] is $ 150 billion dollars.I think it 's safe to say that $ 44 million dollars a year is a drop in the bucket for them.The other $ 640 million is divided across 5 other companies so far , which sets them about $ 128 million dollars each , or $ 25.6 million dollars a year.Justice is served !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well let's see.
The Taiwanese LCD producer Chi Mei Optoelectronics (CMO) agreed to pay $220 million for violations over 5 years (2001-2006) which comes up to $44 million per year of violations.CMO is a publicly traded company, for 2009 their net sales up to November has been almost $30 billion dollars [cmo.com.tw].CMO's market cap [reuters.com] is $150 billion dollars.I think it's safe to say that $44 million dollars a year is a drop in the bucket for them.The other $640 million is divided across 5 other companies so far, which sets them about $128 million dollars each, or $25.6 million dollars a year.Justice is served!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410278</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410268</id>
	<title>ok what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260547140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>so what exactly happened? the article is long on confusion and short on explanations.</htmltext>
<tokenext>so what exactly happened ?
the article is long on confusion and short on explanations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so what exactly happened?
the article is long on confusion and short on explanations.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412070</id>
	<title>Re:Victimized?</title>
	<author>bzipitidoo</author>
	<datestamp>1260610560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, we were victimized.  There's the cost of continuing to use CRTs, which was considerable.  I bought my first LCD, a 1280x1024, several years ago, for $99 after a $70 rebate.  And I waited for prices to go down like they do with every other consumer electronic item, and they didn't.  I was baffled, but I kept waiting, knowing it had to give some time.  That there was price fixing explains much.  Was 2 years before I begin to see deals equivalent to the one I got.

</p><p>Meantime, I paid for owning CRTs.  They use more power.  They took way more room in my car, forcing me to ship more of my possessions whenever I moved.  I regret having paid UPS $85 to ship a 17" CRT back in 2003.  I've learned a few things about moving.  Best to sell your bulky possessions cheap if you can, or even abandon them if you can't.  CRTs are definitely bulky.  Had there been cheap LCDs in 2003, I could have saved quite a bit of money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , we were victimized .
There 's the cost of continuing to use CRTs , which was considerable .
I bought my first LCD , a 1280x1024 , several years ago , for $ 99 after a $ 70 rebate .
And I waited for prices to go down like they do with every other consumer electronic item , and they did n't .
I was baffled , but I kept waiting , knowing it had to give some time .
That there was price fixing explains much .
Was 2 years before I begin to see deals equivalent to the one I got .
Meantime , I paid for owning CRTs .
They use more power .
They took way more room in my car , forcing me to ship more of my possessions whenever I moved .
I regret having paid UPS $ 85 to ship a 17 " CRT back in 2003 .
I 've learned a few things about moving .
Best to sell your bulky possessions cheap if you can , or even abandon them if you ca n't .
CRTs are definitely bulky .
Had there been cheap LCDs in 2003 , I could have saved quite a bit of money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, we were victimized.
There's the cost of continuing to use CRTs, which was considerable.
I bought my first LCD, a 1280x1024, several years ago, for $99 after a $70 rebate.
And I waited for prices to go down like they do with every other consumer electronic item, and they didn't.
I was baffled, but I kept waiting, knowing it had to give some time.
That there was price fixing explains much.
Was 2 years before I begin to see deals equivalent to the one I got.
Meantime, I paid for owning CRTs.
They use more power.
They took way more room in my car, forcing me to ship more of my possessions whenever I moved.
I regret having paid UPS $85 to ship a 17" CRT back in 2003.
I've learned a few things about moving.
Best to sell your bulky possessions cheap if you can, or even abandon them if you can't.
CRTs are definitely bulky.
Had there been cheap LCDs in 2003, I could have saved quite a bit of money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412016</id>
	<title>Re:I just wonder</title>
	<author>MrMr</author>
	<datestamp>1260609300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For a recent list see:
<a href="http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/cases/index.html" title="europa.eu">http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/cases/index.html</a> [europa.eu]</htmltext>
<tokenext>For a recent list see : http : //ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/cases/index.html [ europa.eu ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For a recent list see:
http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/cases/index.html [europa.eu]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411572</id>
	<title>Re:Victimized?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260559080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How did anyone overpay? These companies grouped together to raise bargaining power... no different from labor unions, co-ops, etc. As you correctly said the purchasers voluntarily *chose* to pay those prices. The LCDs were the property of those manufactures and as such can charge whatever prices they like.</p><p>If people dislike the prices... don't pay them. The prices come down of they don't sell and competition will come in to fill that gap. If competition is unable to do so then blame government. It's its intervention in the market process that allows these companies to create cartels or gain other advantages over customers. Patents to factory regulation limits competition, limiting choices for the consumer. Ultimately government intervention changes the consumers natural power over businesses on its head leading to such abuses. An market regulated (rather then government regulated) market place empowers the consumer rather then the businesses.</p><p>Besides... in this particular case such a fine is pointless. None of those who were affected will see any of that money. The government is just looking to cash in... further destroying the market with awful intervention.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How did anyone overpay ?
These companies grouped together to raise bargaining power... no different from labor unions , co-ops , etc .
As you correctly said the purchasers voluntarily * chose * to pay those prices .
The LCDs were the property of those manufactures and as such can charge whatever prices they like.If people dislike the prices... do n't pay them .
The prices come down of they do n't sell and competition will come in to fill that gap .
If competition is unable to do so then blame government .
It 's its intervention in the market process that allows these companies to create cartels or gain other advantages over customers .
Patents to factory regulation limits competition , limiting choices for the consumer .
Ultimately government intervention changes the consumers natural power over businesses on its head leading to such abuses .
An market regulated ( rather then government regulated ) market place empowers the consumer rather then the businesses.Besides... in this particular case such a fine is pointless .
None of those who were affected will see any of that money .
The government is just looking to cash in... further destroying the market with awful intervention .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How did anyone overpay?
These companies grouped together to raise bargaining power... no different from labor unions, co-ops, etc.
As you correctly said the purchasers voluntarily *chose* to pay those prices.
The LCDs were the property of those manufactures and as such can charge whatever prices they like.If people dislike the prices... don't pay them.
The prices come down of they don't sell and competition will come in to fill that gap.
If competition is unable to do so then blame government.
It's its intervention in the market process that allows these companies to create cartels or gain other advantages over customers.
Patents to factory regulation limits competition, limiting choices for the consumer.
Ultimately government intervention changes the consumers natural power over businesses on its head leading to such abuses.
An market regulated (rather then government regulated) market place empowers the consumer rather then the businesses.Besides... in this particular case such a fine is pointless.
None of those who were affected will see any of that money.
The government is just looking to cash in... further destroying the market with awful intervention.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411736</id>
	<title>hows the math work?</title>
	<author>joocemann</author>
	<datestamp>1260648000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is 860M more or less than the excess profits taken by collusion on a worldwide sales scale, for 6 years.</p><p>I have a feeling they think it was worth it.  This is why business will always risk it.  We don't take whats really due.  All of it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is 860M more or less than the excess profits taken by collusion on a worldwide sales scale , for 6 years.I have a feeling they think it was worth it .
This is why business will always risk it .
We do n't take whats really due .
All of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is 860M more or less than the excess profits taken by collusion on a worldwide sales scale, for 6 years.I have a feeling they think it was worth it.
This is why business will always risk it.
We don't take whats really due.
All of it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410936</id>
	<title>Re:Note to conspiracy theorists...</title>
	<author>ArsonSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1260552240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Wikipedia, the concept that persistent opinions represent facts"</p><p>Can you prove that idea wrong?  There is no fact, just expected consistent observation (persistent opinion)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Wikipedia , the concept that persistent opinions represent facts " Can you prove that idea wrong ?
There is no fact , just expected consistent observation ( persistent opinion )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Wikipedia, the concept that persistent opinions represent facts"Can you prove that idea wrong?
There is no fact, just expected consistent observation (persistent opinion)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411288</id>
	<title>Re:ok what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260556020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Well let's see. The Taiwanese LCD producer Chi Mei Optoelectronics (CMO) agreed to pay $220 million for violations over 5 years (2001-2006) which comes up to $44 million per year of violations.</p><p>CMO is a publicly traded company, for 2009 their net sales up to November has been almost <a href="http://www.cmo.com.tw/opencms/cmo/media\_center/News/index.html?news\_no=1&amp;\_\_locale=en" title="cmo.com.tw" rel="nofollow">$30 <strong>b</strong>illion dollars</a> [cmo.com.tw].</p><p>CMO's <a href="http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/overview?symbol=3009.TW" title="reuters.com" rel="nofollow">market cap</a> [reuters.com] is $150 <strong>b</strong>illion dollars.</p><p>I think it's safe to say that $44 million dollars a year is a drop in the bucket for them.</p><p>The other $640 million is divided across 5 other companies so far, which sets them about $128 million dollars each, or $25.6 million dollars a year.</p><p>Justice is served!</p></div><p>Who cares?<br>Honestly I'm not sure I like this ruling. If the entire market can collude to get it done, then there's probably more than just a little reason for it to happen. IE, ALL producers of panels had sunk capital costs with the hope of recouping them, but weren't going to be able to.<br>My concern: going forward, they won't be as bold in researching, investing in, and bringing to market new technologies.<br>My 24" $300 8-bit P-MVA (aka NOT TN) panel I bought at least a year ago from ChiMei...is still an awesome deal and I'd buy it again.<br>I think there are bigger guys we should be going after than LCD Panel makers...I mean seriously. Pick on someone your own size. Like Microsoft.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well let 's see .
The Taiwanese LCD producer Chi Mei Optoelectronics ( CMO ) agreed to pay $ 220 million for violations over 5 years ( 2001-2006 ) which comes up to $ 44 million per year of violations.CMO is a publicly traded company , for 2009 their net sales up to November has been almost $ 30 billion dollars [ cmo.com.tw ] .CMO 's market cap [ reuters.com ] is $ 150 billion dollars.I think it 's safe to say that $ 44 million dollars a year is a drop in the bucket for them.The other $ 640 million is divided across 5 other companies so far , which sets them about $ 128 million dollars each , or $ 25.6 million dollars a year.Justice is served ! Who cares ? Honestly I 'm not sure I like this ruling .
If the entire market can collude to get it done , then there 's probably more than just a little reason for it to happen .
IE , ALL producers of panels had sunk capital costs with the hope of recouping them , but were n't going to be able to.My concern : going forward , they wo n't be as bold in researching , investing in , and bringing to market new technologies.My 24 " $ 300 8-bit P-MVA ( aka NOT TN ) panel I bought at least a year ago from ChiMei...is still an awesome deal and I 'd buy it again.I think there are bigger guys we should be going after than LCD Panel makers...I mean seriously .
Pick on someone your own size .
Like Microsoft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well let's see.
The Taiwanese LCD producer Chi Mei Optoelectronics (CMO) agreed to pay $220 million for violations over 5 years (2001-2006) which comes up to $44 million per year of violations.CMO is a publicly traded company, for 2009 their net sales up to November has been almost $30 billion dollars [cmo.com.tw].CMO's market cap [reuters.com] is $150 billion dollars.I think it's safe to say that $44 million dollars a year is a drop in the bucket for them.The other $640 million is divided across 5 other companies so far, which sets them about $128 million dollars each, or $25.6 million dollars a year.Justice is served!Who cares?Honestly I'm not sure I like this ruling.
If the entire market can collude to get it done, then there's probably more than just a little reason for it to happen.
IE, ALL producers of panels had sunk capital costs with the hope of recouping them, but weren't going to be able to.My concern: going forward, they won't be as bold in researching, investing in, and bringing to market new technologies.My 24" $300 8-bit P-MVA (aka NOT TN) panel I bought at least a year ago from ChiMei...is still an awesome deal and I'd buy it again.I think there are bigger guys we should be going after than LCD Panel makers...I mean seriously.
Pick on someone your own size.
Like Microsoft.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410524</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412690</id>
	<title>Re:Cheaper than what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260620220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>what a stupid comment, just because they're cheaper than buying a big screen years ago doesn't mean they shouldn't be cheaper still.

why would you be happy paying $200 for a good display when it should have been, say, $150 for the same thing, or $200 still but for something a lot better.</htmltext>
<tokenext>what a stupid comment , just because they 're cheaper than buying a big screen years ago does n't mean they should n't be cheaper still .
why would you be happy paying $ 200 for a good display when it should have been , say , $ 150 for the same thing , or $ 200 still but for something a lot better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>what a stupid comment, just because they're cheaper than buying a big screen years ago doesn't mean they shouldn't be cheaper still.
why would you be happy paying $200 for a good display when it should have been, say, $150 for the same thing, or $200 still but for something a lot better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410912</id>
	<title>Re:I just wonder</title>
	<author>ArsonSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1260552120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's all political spin.</p><p>If all prices are the same then it's <b>collusion</b> and <b>price fixing</b><br>If one company has a higher price then they're <b>gouging</b><br>If one company lowers their price then they're <b>undercutting</b></p><p>You really can't win.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's all political spin.If all prices are the same then it 's collusion and price fixingIf one company has a higher price then they 're gougingIf one company lowers their price then they 're undercuttingYou really ca n't win .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's all political spin.If all prices are the same then it's collusion and price fixingIf one company has a higher price then they're gougingIf one company lowers their price then they're undercuttingYou really can't win.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411018</id>
	<title>Re:ok what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260552900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uh on Reuters that market cap is NT$, which a quick google shows as New Taiwan Dollars which are approximately 32 to 1 US dollar, making the company's market cap around $4.5b US. I'm guessing all your other numbers need to be revised downwards as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh on Reuters that market cap is NT $ , which a quick google shows as New Taiwan Dollars which are approximately 32 to 1 US dollar , making the company 's market cap around $ 4.5b US .
I 'm guessing all your other numbers need to be revised downwards as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh on Reuters that market cap is NT$, which a quick google shows as New Taiwan Dollars which are approximately 32 to 1 US dollar, making the company's market cap around $4.5b US.
I'm guessing all your other numbers need to be revised downwards as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410524</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411456</id>
	<title>Cheaper than what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260557760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>LCDs are already dirt cheap. Displays now are cheaper than I've ever seen them with any technology. I remember getting a 17" CRT monitor in 1999, and not even a high grade one, for about $200. Now that gets you a 24" LCD. That's not inflation adjusted either, tack on another $50 if you want to look at it in terms of buying power.</p><p>I fail to see what you are complaining about here. They got nailed for doing something against the law, but it isn't as though we are all sitting here desperately needing lower display prices. You can get a cheap screen, no problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>LCDs are already dirt cheap .
Displays now are cheaper than I 've ever seen them with any technology .
I remember getting a 17 " CRT monitor in 1999 , and not even a high grade one , for about $ 200 .
Now that gets you a 24 " LCD .
That 's not inflation adjusted either , tack on another $ 50 if you want to look at it in terms of buying power.I fail to see what you are complaining about here .
They got nailed for doing something against the law , but it is n't as though we are all sitting here desperately needing lower display prices .
You can get a cheap screen , no problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LCDs are already dirt cheap.
Displays now are cheaper than I've ever seen them with any technology.
I remember getting a 17" CRT monitor in 1999, and not even a high grade one, for about $200.
Now that gets you a 24" LCD.
That's not inflation adjusted either, tack on another $50 if you want to look at it in terms of buying power.I fail to see what you are complaining about here.
They got nailed for doing something against the law, but it isn't as though we are all sitting here desperately needing lower display prices.
You can get a cheap screen, no problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30413508</id>
	<title>Yeah, but the reject rate you know</title>
	<author>smchris</author>
	<datestamp>1260629880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Like CDs.  They are \_so\_ much more expensive to produce than vinyl.</p><p>Which is to say, bad luck for the LCD manufacturers.  The music industry did and does continue to get away with that scam.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Like CDs .
They are \ _so \ _ much more expensive to produce than vinyl.Which is to say , bad luck for the LCD manufacturers .
The music industry did and does continue to get away with that scam .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like CDs.
They are \_so\_ much more expensive to produce than vinyl.Which is to say, bad luck for the LCD manufacturers.
The music industry did and does continue to get away with that scam.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410716</id>
	<title>Re:I just wonder</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260550740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, let's see, in the US, officially-government-sanctioned price-fixing oligopolies include oranges, almonds, cranberries, and raisins.  Then of course there is anything covered by a patent.  Or any resource that is mined from government leases.  And then there's other industries that supply the military, such as airplanes, car companies, steel and weapons manufacturers, which are all protected and subsidized.  Then you have licensed trades, electricians, plumbers, construction workers, truck-drivers and hair-stylists.  And of course finally there are licensed professionals such as doctors, lawyers, nurses, and engineers.  I probably missed somebody.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , let 's see , in the US , officially-government-sanctioned price-fixing oligopolies include oranges , almonds , cranberries , and raisins .
Then of course there is anything covered by a patent .
Or any resource that is mined from government leases .
And then there 's other industries that supply the military , such as airplanes , car companies , steel and weapons manufacturers , which are all protected and subsidized .
Then you have licensed trades , electricians , plumbers , construction workers , truck-drivers and hair-stylists .
And of course finally there are licensed professionals such as doctors , lawyers , nurses , and engineers .
I probably missed somebody .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, let's see, in the US, officially-government-sanctioned price-fixing oligopolies include oranges, almonds, cranberries, and raisins.
Then of course there is anything covered by a patent.
Or any resource that is mined from government leases.
And then there's other industries that supply the military, such as airplanes, car companies, steel and weapons manufacturers, which are all protected and subsidized.
Then you have licensed trades, electricians, plumbers, construction workers, truck-drivers and hair-stylists.
And of course finally there are licensed professionals such as doctors, lawyers, nurses, and engineers.
I probably missed somebody.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410616</id>
	<title>They are always doing this.   Better way   is to</title>
	<author>zymano</author>
	<datestamp>1260549840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The better way to handle this is to drop the stupid ineffective fines and threaten that their products wont be allowed to sell in the USA.</p><p>Then they wouldn't even dare try to fix prices.</p><p>5 year ban.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The better way to handle this is to drop the stupid ineffective fines and threaten that their products wont be allowed to sell in the USA.Then they would n't even dare try to fix prices.5 year ban .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The better way to handle this is to drop the stupid ineffective fines and threaten that their products wont be allowed to sell in the USA.Then they wouldn't even dare try to fix prices.5 year ban.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410346</id>
	<title>Apple's Price Fixing</title>
	<author>ireallylovelinux</author>
	<datestamp>1260547740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>We are just going to sell displays at a higher price than everyone else.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We are just going to sell displays at a higher price than everyone else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We are just going to sell displays at a higher price than everyone else.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411720</id>
	<title>Re:Victimized?</title>
	<author>currently\_awake</author>
	<datestamp>1260561360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>yes, cellphone price fixing is bad.  but consumers -chose- to pay sky high cellphone rates.  no one made them...
It's easier to see the crime in relation to products you think about as over priced.</htmltext>
<tokenext>yes , cellphone price fixing is bad .
but consumers -chose- to pay sky high cellphone rates .
no one made them.. . It 's easier to see the crime in relation to products you think about as over priced .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yes, cellphone price fixing is bad.
but consumers -chose- to pay sky high cellphone rates.
no one made them...
It's easier to see the crime in relation to products you think about as over priced.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412462</id>
	<title>Re:Oh great</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260617580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly.</p><p>This is one point that people often miss in "company has to pay" announcements.<br>When it a company is fined, money ultimately comes out of customers' pockets, so this does not benefit customers who are paying the second time for the same mistake! Now guess who collects the fine? Governement, as a form of a hidden tax.</p><p>It is not companies who have conspired, it is actual people working in these companies! These people (probably executive level) should pay that fine, otherwise they would not care - "company" gets all the blame, not them. Good that in that case these people are prosecuted, too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly.This is one point that people often miss in " company has to pay " announcements.When it a company is fined , money ultimately comes out of customers ' pockets , so this does not benefit customers who are paying the second time for the same mistake !
Now guess who collects the fine ?
Governement , as a form of a hidden tax.It is not companies who have conspired , it is actual people working in these companies !
These people ( probably executive level ) should pay that fine , otherwise they would not care - " company " gets all the blame , not them .
Good that in that case these people are prosecuted , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.This is one point that people often miss in "company has to pay" announcements.When it a company is fined, money ultimately comes out of customers' pockets, so this does not benefit customers who are paying the second time for the same mistake!
Now guess who collects the fine?
Governement, as a form of a hidden tax.It is not companies who have conspired, it is actual people working in these companies!
These people (probably executive level) should pay that fine, otherwise they would not care - "company" gets all the blame, not them.
Good that in that case these people are prosecuted, too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412608</id>
	<title>Timing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260619080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone else notice this started just 3 days after 9/11?  Makes me wonder if evil (read: morally challenged) people tend to think "Hey, here's a great idea for a scam... now... if only there were a perfect time for a diversion to cover my tracks..."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone else notice this started just 3 days after 9/11 ?
Makes me wonder if evil ( read : morally challenged ) people tend to think " Hey , here 's a great idea for a scam... now... if only there were a perfect time for a diversion to cover my tracks... "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone else notice this started just 3 days after 9/11?
Makes me wonder if evil (read: morally challenged) people tend to think "Hey, here's a great idea for a scam... now... if only there were a perfect time for a diversion to cover my tracks..."</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410728</id>
	<title>Re:I just wonder</title>
	<author>mysidia</author>
	<datestamp>1260550800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Going out on a limb... DRAM chips, SSDs,  Flash memory.
</p><p>
I for one find it odd that old 1gb PC2700 modules are still over $30.   And the price seems to be the same no matter which manufacturer you look at.
</p><p>
Meanwhile 8gb compact flash cards, which are oh so more expensive to manufacture than SDRAM, are $30, that is unless you want "true" compact flash which faithfully implements the true IDE standard (I.E. to use them with an IDE-CF adapter, instead of in a digital camera)...  those got rebadged as "Industrial CF" and cost like $200.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Going out on a limb... DRAM chips , SSDs , Flash memory .
I for one find it odd that old 1gb PC2700 modules are still over $ 30 .
And the price seems to be the same no matter which manufacturer you look at .
Meanwhile 8gb compact flash cards , which are oh so more expensive to manufacture than SDRAM , are $ 30 , that is unless you want " true " compact flash which faithfully implements the true IDE standard ( I.E .
to use them with an IDE-CF adapter , instead of in a digital camera ) ... those got rebadged as " Industrial CF " and cost like $ 200 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Going out on a limb... DRAM chips, SSDs,  Flash memory.
I for one find it odd that old 1gb PC2700 modules are still over $30.
And the price seems to be the same no matter which manufacturer you look at.
Meanwhile 8gb compact flash cards, which are oh so more expensive to manufacture than SDRAM, are $30, that is unless you want "true" compact flash which faithfully implements the true IDE standard (I.E.
to use them with an IDE-CF adapter, instead of in a digital camera)...  those got rebadged as "Industrial CF" and cost like $200.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30415642</id>
	<title>Re:They are always doing this.  Better way  is to</title>
	<author>TheSync</author>
	<datestamp>1260645000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The better way to handle this is to drop the stupid ineffective fines and threaten that their products wont be allowed to sell in the USA.</i></p><p>Or maybe another company should have started up and underpriced them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The better way to handle this is to drop the stupid ineffective fines and threaten that their products wont be allowed to sell in the USA.Or maybe another company should have started up and underpriced them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The better way to handle this is to drop the stupid ineffective fines and threaten that their products wont be allowed to sell in the USA.Or maybe another company should have started up and underpriced them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410616</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412676</id>
	<title>Re:ok what?</title>
	<author>Sulphur</author>
	<datestamp>1260620100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shhh.  Modzilla the fifteen point mod may be nearby.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shhh .
Modzilla the fifteen point mod may be nearby .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shhh.
Modzilla the fifteen point mod may be nearby.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410524</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410948</id>
	<title>Re:Note to conspiracy theorists...</title>
	<author>RobVB</author>
	<datestamp>1260552360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The CIA is only successful if you don't know they're involved. This was a pretty successful conspiracy, and therefore you can be sure that the CIA was indeed involved!</p><p>Clearly, you have a lot to learn about conspiracies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The CIA is only successful if you do n't know they 're involved .
This was a pretty successful conspiracy , and therefore you can be sure that the CIA was indeed involved ! Clearly , you have a lot to learn about conspiracies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The CIA is only successful if you don't know they're involved.
This was a pretty successful conspiracy, and therefore you can be sure that the CIA was indeed involved!Clearly, you have a lot to learn about conspiracies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30421776</id>
	<title>Re:Say it ain't so</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260707160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple would never shaft their customers. Their customers would demand to be ovecharged for the smug satisfaction it gave them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple would never shaft their customers .
Their customers would demand to be ovecharged for the smug satisfaction it gave them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple would never shaft their customers.
Their customers would demand to be ovecharged for the smug satisfaction it gave them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412390</id>
	<title>Re:Note to conspiracy theorists...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260616860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh shut the fuck up you moron! Your mama got a conspiracy to put it in your butt.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh shut the fuck up you moron !
Your mama got a conspiracy to put it in your butt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh shut the fuck up you moron!
Your mama got a conspiracy to put it in your butt.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411828</id>
	<title>Re:Note to conspiracy theorists...</title>
	<author>interkin3tic</author>
	<datestamp>1260649380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is what real conspiracies look like. Note the distinct lack of "CIA", "Masons", "NSA" or other such favorites.</p></div><p>That's only because the illuminati killed their contacts in those organizations to hide the truth.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is what real conspiracies look like .
Note the distinct lack of " CIA " , " Masons " , " NSA " or other such favorites.That 's only because the illuminati killed their contacts in those organizations to hide the truth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is what real conspiracies look like.
Note the distinct lack of "CIA", "Masons", "NSA" or other such favorites.That's only because the illuminati killed their contacts in those organizations to hide the truth.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411242</id>
	<title>"price fixing" on an optional item?</title>
	<author>NotQuiteReal</author>
	<datestamp>1260555720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>pfft.
<br>
<br>
There's a sucker born every minute, and a lawyer willing to take a fee for anything.
<br>
<br>
Seriously, how can you fix the price of something nobody has to buy? Sooner or later the price will come down to where it is a fair deal for the buyer.
<br>
<br>
I remember the first laptop I "wanted" was $4K USD. I didn't buy it, I didn't "need" it. The last laptop I bought was 10X better and only $400 USD, not even counting inflation. It was cheap enough to buy as a "toy".</htmltext>
<tokenext>pfft .
There 's a sucker born every minute , and a lawyer willing to take a fee for anything .
Seriously , how can you fix the price of something nobody has to buy ?
Sooner or later the price will come down to where it is a fair deal for the buyer .
I remember the first laptop I " wanted " was $ 4K USD .
I did n't buy it , I did n't " need " it .
The last laptop I bought was 10X better and only $ 400 USD , not even counting inflation .
It was cheap enough to buy as a " toy " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>pfft.
There's a sucker born every minute, and a lawyer willing to take a fee for anything.
Seriously, how can you fix the price of something nobody has to buy?
Sooner or later the price will come down to where it is a fair deal for the buyer.
I remember the first laptop I "wanted" was $4K USD.
I didn't buy it, I didn't "need" it.
The last laptop I bought was 10X better and only $400 USD, not even counting inflation.
It was cheap enough to buy as a "toy".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410400</id>
	<title>Say it ain't so</title>
	<author>future assassin</author>
	<datestamp>1260548100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Corporations doing shyster deals to gain profits for share holders while braking laws and shafting the consumers? Good god whats next, corporation changing laws to punish consumers for using products in ways there were not designed to be used?</p><p>Hey hey there kid. That baseball is designed to be hit with our authorized bats. Using any unauthorized bat is prohibited and will be enforced by our "Good Consumer Police"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Corporations doing shyster deals to gain profits for share holders while braking laws and shafting the consumers ?
Good god whats next , corporation changing laws to punish consumers for using products in ways there were not designed to be used ? Hey hey there kid .
That baseball is designed to be hit with our authorized bats .
Using any unauthorized bat is prohibited and will be enforced by our " Good Consumer Police "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Corporations doing shyster deals to gain profits for share holders while braking laws and shafting the consumers?
Good god whats next, corporation changing laws to punish consumers for using products in ways there were not designed to be used?Hey hey there kid.
That baseball is designed to be hit with our authorized bats.
Using any unauthorized bat is prohibited and will be enforced by our "Good Consumer Police"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410278</id>
	<title>Re:ok what?</title>
	<author>Dyinobal</author>
	<datestamp>1260547260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>860mill fine for how many millions in profits? Guess everything is fine so long as big brother gets a cut.</htmltext>
<tokenext>860mill fine for how many millions in profits ?
Guess everything is fine so long as big brother gets a cut .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>860mill fine for how many millions in profits?
Guess everything is fine so long as big brother gets a cut.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410564</id>
	<title>Oh great</title>
	<author>ArchieBunker</author>
	<datestamp>1260549420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Guess who is going to pay the $860 million. Don't look forward to cheaper LCD prices anytime soon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Guess who is going to pay the $ 860 million .
Do n't look forward to cheaper LCD prices anytime soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Guess who is going to pay the $860 million.
Don't look forward to cheaper LCD prices anytime soon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411688</id>
	<title>Re:I just wonder</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260561000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yay for ridiculous over simplification of the economics.</p><p>This is painfully simple to understand yet you seem to believe they're just magical terms to take away corporations' god given right to fleece every penny out of the community.</p><p><b>Undercutting</b>: A company spends $200 on parts and labor, sells the product for $150; or they can employ people for minimum wage and sacrifice quality standards to actually make that price sustainable. If all the other competitors can't beat that price without sacrificing quality or features then they have been undercut. [This term is somewhat nebulous as it can be abused as an emotive response]</p><p><b>Gouging</b>: Company spends $200 on parts and labor, sells at $400+. Obviously, no one in their right mind, who <em>understands the specifications</em>, is going to pay that so you just drown out the competition or trick customers using marketing (eg. DVDs will only look 'right' on an official Apple Cinema Display with panorama vision[TM]). In electronics, special plugs that are only available on other products that you sell are also a good way to do this, same with cars.</p><p><b>Price Fixing</b>: Two or more companies spend $200 on parts and labor, they compete on price until they only sell the product at, say, $205 which isn't very profitable so they join forces to simultaneously raise their prices to $250 so you can't get out of paying the inflated price unless you just go without. It's also a great way to terminate competition since you are no longer competing with someone who operates on your terms, the MAFIAA are very big on this with the price of CDs for example.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yay for ridiculous over simplification of the economics.This is painfully simple to understand yet you seem to believe they 're just magical terms to take away corporations ' god given right to fleece every penny out of the community.Undercutting : A company spends $ 200 on parts and labor , sells the product for $ 150 ; or they can employ people for minimum wage and sacrifice quality standards to actually make that price sustainable .
If all the other competitors ca n't beat that price without sacrificing quality or features then they have been undercut .
[ This term is somewhat nebulous as it can be abused as an emotive response ] Gouging : Company spends $ 200 on parts and labor , sells at $ 400 + .
Obviously , no one in their right mind , who understands the specifications , is going to pay that so you just drown out the competition or trick customers using marketing ( eg .
DVDs will only look 'right ' on an official Apple Cinema Display with panorama vision [ TM ] ) .
In electronics , special plugs that are only available on other products that you sell are also a good way to do this , same with cars.Price Fixing : Two or more companies spend $ 200 on parts and labor , they compete on price until they only sell the product at , say , $ 205 which is n't very profitable so they join forces to simultaneously raise their prices to $ 250 so you ca n't get out of paying the inflated price unless you just go without .
It 's also a great way to terminate competition since you are no longer competing with someone who operates on your terms , the MAFIAA are very big on this with the price of CDs for example .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yay for ridiculous over simplification of the economics.This is painfully simple to understand yet you seem to believe they're just magical terms to take away corporations' god given right to fleece every penny out of the community.Undercutting: A company spends $200 on parts and labor, sells the product for $150; or they can employ people for minimum wage and sacrifice quality standards to actually make that price sustainable.
If all the other competitors can't beat that price without sacrificing quality or features then they have been undercut.
[This term is somewhat nebulous as it can be abused as an emotive response]Gouging: Company spends $200 on parts and labor, sells at $400+.
Obviously, no one in their right mind, who understands the specifications, is going to pay that so you just drown out the competition or trick customers using marketing (eg.
DVDs will only look 'right' on an official Apple Cinema Display with panorama vision[TM]).
In electronics, special plugs that are only available on other products that you sell are also a good way to do this, same with cars.Price Fixing: Two or more companies spend $200 on parts and labor, they compete on price until they only sell the product at, say, $205 which isn't very profitable so they join forces to simultaneously raise their prices to $250 so you can't get out of paying the inflated price unless you just go without.
It's also a great way to terminate competition since you are no longer competing with someone who operates on your terms, the MAFIAA are very big on this with the price of CDs for example.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30413354</id>
	<title>Re:I just wonder</title>
	<author>ihavnoid</author>
	<datestamp>1260628140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I for one find it odd that old 1gb PC2700 modules are still over $30.   And the price seems to be the same no matter which manufacturer you look at.</p></div><p>That probably would be because nobody manufactures 1GB PC2700 modules anymore.<br>Low demand -&gt; lower supply -&gt; even higher cost.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I for one find it odd that old 1gb PC2700 modules are still over $ 30 .
And the price seems to be the same no matter which manufacturer you look at.That probably would be because nobody manufactures 1GB PC2700 modules anymore.Low demand - &gt; lower supply - &gt; even higher cost .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I for one find it odd that old 1gb PC2700 modules are still over $30.
And the price seems to be the same no matter which manufacturer you look at.That probably would be because nobody manufactures 1GB PC2700 modules anymore.Low demand -&gt; lower supply -&gt; even higher cost.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410728</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30413538</id>
	<title>Free market!</title>
	<author>Goaway</author>
	<datestamp>1260630060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good old free market, always making things better for the consumer!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good old free market , always making things better for the consumer !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good old free market, always making things better for the consumer!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410474</id>
	<title>Apple selling same LCDs FOREVER.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260548760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is this at all related to Apple selling the <a href="http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#Apple\_Cinema\_Displays" title="macrumors.com" rel="nofollow">same model Cinema Displays</a> [macrumors.com] since April, 2007?  982 days without a refresh, following an average of 230.  What's going on there?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this at all related to Apple selling the same model Cinema Displays [ macrumors.com ] since April , 2007 ?
982 days without a refresh , following an average of 230 .
What 's going on there ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this at all related to Apple selling the same model Cinema Displays [macrumors.com] since April, 2007?
982 days without a refresh, following an average of 230.
What's going on there?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30413574</id>
	<title>Re:I just wonder</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260630420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I probably missed somebody</i></p><p>Politicians?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I probably missed somebodyPoliticians ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I probably missed somebodyPoliticians?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410716</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410884</id>
	<title>Re:Ugh</title>
	<author>mysidia</author>
	<datestamp>1260551940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
However, you can definitely be charged and found guilty of conspiring, even if 'other alleged parties' to the conspiracy have not yet been charged, or are still under investigation.
</p><p>
The companies involved will most likely all be overseas companies you don't care much about.
Most of the manufacturers of the TFT screens are overseas.
</p><p>
The companies the average US person has heard of (such as Dell, HP, etc) who sell monitors, are OEMs.   That is, the manufacturers (such as the ones who do the price fixing) supply the screen. OEMs design and build an actual monitor using the OEM'd TFT, other OEM'd parts  (and parts designed by the OEM), and ship the final product.
</p><p>
The TFT is just one of many components required to build an LCD monitor.
Another manufacturer (very possibly) makes the backlight.  And yet another company might make the plastic body.
</p><p>
From TFA, however:</p><blockquote><div><p> Including today's charges, as a result of this investigation, six companies have pleaded guilty or have agreed to plead guilty and have been sentenced to pay or have agreed to pay criminal fines totaling more than $860 million. Additionally, nine executives have been charged to date in the department's ongoing investigation.</p></div> </blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>However , you can definitely be charged and found guilty of conspiring , even if 'other alleged parties ' to the conspiracy have not yet been charged , or are still under investigation .
The companies involved will most likely all be overseas companies you do n't care much about .
Most of the manufacturers of the TFT screens are overseas .
The companies the average US person has heard of ( such as Dell , HP , etc ) who sell monitors , are OEMs .
That is , the manufacturers ( such as the ones who do the price fixing ) supply the screen .
OEMs design and build an actual monitor using the OEM 'd TFT , other OEM 'd parts ( and parts designed by the OEM ) , and ship the final product .
The TFT is just one of many components required to build an LCD monitor .
Another manufacturer ( very possibly ) makes the backlight .
And yet another company might make the plastic body .
From TFA , however : Including today 's charges , as a result of this investigation , six companies have pleaded guilty or have agreed to plead guilty and have been sentenced to pay or have agreed to pay criminal fines totaling more than $ 860 million .
Additionally , nine executives have been charged to date in the department 's ongoing investigation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
However, you can definitely be charged and found guilty of conspiring, even if 'other alleged parties' to the conspiracy have not yet been charged, or are still under investigation.
The companies involved will most likely all be overseas companies you don't care much about.
Most of the manufacturers of the TFT screens are overseas.
The companies the average US person has heard of (such as Dell, HP, etc) who sell monitors, are OEMs.
That is, the manufacturers (such as the ones who do the price fixing) supply the screen.
OEMs design and build an actual monitor using the OEM'd TFT, other OEM'd parts  (and parts designed by the OEM), and ship the final product.
The TFT is just one of many components required to build an LCD monitor.
Another manufacturer (very possibly) makes the backlight.
And yet another company might make the plastic body.
From TFA, however: Including today's charges, as a result of this investigation, six companies have pleaded guilty or have agreed to plead guilty and have been sentenced to pay or have agreed to pay criminal fines totaling more than $860 million.
Additionally, nine executives have been charged to date in the department's ongoing investigation. 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410562</id>
	<title>Ugh</title>
	<author>benjamindees</author>
	<datestamp>1260549420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Summary worthless as usual.  A conspiracy usually requires more than one conspirator.  The company mentioned in the linked press release doesn't even seem to produce LCD screens.  What are the real companies involved that I might actually care about?</p><p>In fact, that's an interesting topic of criminal law.  "Conspiracy" by itself is a "group" crime (price-fixing especially).  Multiple people must work together for a crime to have even occurred.  One party cannot conspire by itself.  We would call that "thought crime".  I know the press release says otherwise, but if only one company pleads guilty to conspiracy, is it really a conspiracy?  Wouldn't a judge have to reject the plea unless or until more companies were found guilty as well?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Summary worthless as usual .
A conspiracy usually requires more than one conspirator .
The company mentioned in the linked press release does n't even seem to produce LCD screens .
What are the real companies involved that I might actually care about ? In fact , that 's an interesting topic of criminal law .
" Conspiracy " by itself is a " group " crime ( price-fixing especially ) .
Multiple people must work together for a crime to have even occurred .
One party can not conspire by itself .
We would call that " thought crime " .
I know the press release says otherwise , but if only one company pleads guilty to conspiracy , is it really a conspiracy ?
Would n't a judge have to reject the plea unless or until more companies were found guilty as well ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Summary worthless as usual.
A conspiracy usually requires more than one conspirator.
The company mentioned in the linked press release doesn't even seem to produce LCD screens.
What are the real companies involved that I might actually care about?In fact, that's an interesting topic of criminal law.
"Conspiracy" by itself is a "group" crime (price-fixing especially).
Multiple people must work together for a crime to have even occurred.
One party cannot conspire by itself.
We would call that "thought crime".
I know the press release says otherwise, but if only one company pleads guilty to conspiracy, is it really a conspiracy?
Wouldn't a judge have to reject the plea unless or until more companies were found guilty as well?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30415726</id>
	<title>Re:Oh great</title>
	<author>ShakaUVM</author>
	<datestamp>1260645600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;The fines are nothing but a cash grab by the government, and the settlements benefit no one but the lawyers.</p><p>Pshaw. I'm sure the government will use its $800m or so to locate all the people that bought LCD screens during this time period and give them all $50 refunds.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; The fines are nothing but a cash grab by the government , and the settlements benefit no one but the lawyers.Pshaw .
I 'm sure the government will use its $ 800m or so to locate all the people that bought LCD screens during this time period and give them all $ 50 refunds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;The fines are nothing but a cash grab by the government, and the settlements benefit no one but the lawyers.Pshaw.
I'm sure the government will use its $800m or so to locate all the people that bought LCD screens during this time period and give them all $50 refunds.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30420098</id>
	<title>Re:ok -- so where's my rebate?</title>
	<author>lpq</author>
	<datestamp>1260640320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Screw the what and whyfor -- where do we who bought monitors during that period get our refunds...I assume the DOJ will be distributing the fines to those in in the affected class, I mean they are our government and they were representing us, right?</p><p>-;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Screw the what and whyfor -- where do we who bought monitors during that period get our refunds...I assume the DOJ will be distributing the fines to those in in the affected class , I mean they are our government and they were representing us , right ? - ;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Screw the what and whyfor -- where do we who bought monitors during that period get our refunds...I assume the DOJ will be distributing the fines to those in in the affected class, I mean they are our government and they were representing us, right?-;</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411950</id>
	<title>You'd not believe how CHEAP it is...</title>
	<author>MindPrison</author>
	<datestamp>1260651360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Manufacturing a flat-screen, be it Plasma or LCD is so cheap - you probably wouldn't believe me if I told you.<br>But picture this:</p><p>Rewind a few years, remember when you paid 1000-3000 dollars for your 28 inch Sony Vega television set?</p><p>Today, you can grab a tv - 50 inches, way better than any projection screen or projector ever could be, for less than 800 dollars!<br>Back in the days, I couldn't even get a decent 26" incher for that price, why is even that possible today? Simple...look at the materials.</p><p>Your tv - is essentially not much more than 2 glass plates with small cells with either gases or liquid crystals in them, and 2 plastic plates to cover it all,<br>and then one graphics chip cpu-fpu-memory and all in one, plus a chip for digital tv-decoding and a tuner. These SMD components cost so little<br>that you could buy a burger for what it actually cost to manufacture.</p><p>The temptation to earn HEAPS of money comes from your old "hard-dying-habits" of paying a fortune for a technology that was relatively<br>expensive to manufacture, they where weighty, big glass screen using a lot of glass (Crt), old-school DIP/DIL discretes that takes up a lot of space.</p><p>Look at the inside of your latest flatscreen, there's a small mainboard that fills up 10 percent of the tv's size, and perhaps a PSU that fills up the next 10 percent, and the<br>rest is a glass surface, that's it - really. These TVs could cost 100 bucks, but they won't - as long as YOU the consumer - are used to paying 1000's of dollars, it's a no-brainer that - THAT kind of money could just land in someones pocket anyway, because - you will pay anyway.</p><p>But lets not kid ourselves - we're buying screens cheaper than ever. I'm enjoying my 800 dollar 50" incher, and 200 dollar 24" inch 1920x1200 computer screen, wow...I remember paying 1000 bucks for a screen back in the days...22 inches and "only" 1280x1024 crt...and THAT was considered discount.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Manufacturing a flat-screen , be it Plasma or LCD is so cheap - you probably would n't believe me if I told you.But picture this : Rewind a few years , remember when you paid 1000-3000 dollars for your 28 inch Sony Vega television set ? Today , you can grab a tv - 50 inches , way better than any projection screen or projector ever could be , for less than 800 dollars ! Back in the days , I could n't even get a decent 26 " incher for that price , why is even that possible today ?
Simple...look at the materials.Your tv - is essentially not much more than 2 glass plates with small cells with either gases or liquid crystals in them , and 2 plastic plates to cover it all,and then one graphics chip cpu-fpu-memory and all in one , plus a chip for digital tv-decoding and a tuner .
These SMD components cost so littlethat you could buy a burger for what it actually cost to manufacture.The temptation to earn HEAPS of money comes from your old " hard-dying-habits " of paying a fortune for a technology that was relativelyexpensive to manufacture , they where weighty , big glass screen using a lot of glass ( Crt ) , old-school DIP/DIL discretes that takes up a lot of space.Look at the inside of your latest flatscreen , there 's a small mainboard that fills up 10 percent of the tv 's size , and perhaps a PSU that fills up the next 10 percent , and therest is a glass surface , that 's it - really .
These TVs could cost 100 bucks , but they wo n't - as long as YOU the consumer - are used to paying 1000 's of dollars , it 's a no-brainer that - THAT kind of money could just land in someones pocket anyway , because - you will pay anyway.But lets not kid ourselves - we 're buying screens cheaper than ever .
I 'm enjoying my 800 dollar 50 " incher , and 200 dollar 24 " inch 1920x1200 computer screen , wow...I remember paying 1000 bucks for a screen back in the days...22 inches and " only " 1280x1024 crt...and THAT was considered discount .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Manufacturing a flat-screen, be it Plasma or LCD is so cheap - you probably wouldn't believe me if I told you.But picture this:Rewind a few years, remember when you paid 1000-3000 dollars for your 28 inch Sony Vega television set?Today, you can grab a tv - 50 inches, way better than any projection screen or projector ever could be, for less than 800 dollars!Back in the days, I couldn't even get a decent 26" incher for that price, why is even that possible today?
Simple...look at the materials.Your tv - is essentially not much more than 2 glass plates with small cells with either gases or liquid crystals in them, and 2 plastic plates to cover it all,and then one graphics chip cpu-fpu-memory and all in one, plus a chip for digital tv-decoding and a tuner.
These SMD components cost so littlethat you could buy a burger for what it actually cost to manufacture.The temptation to earn HEAPS of money comes from your old "hard-dying-habits" of paying a fortune for a technology that was relativelyexpensive to manufacture, they where weighty, big glass screen using a lot of glass (Crt), old-school DIP/DIL discretes that takes up a lot of space.Look at the inside of your latest flatscreen, there's a small mainboard that fills up 10 percent of the tv's size, and perhaps a PSU that fills up the next 10 percent, and therest is a glass surface, that's it - really.
These TVs could cost 100 bucks, but they won't - as long as YOU the consumer - are used to paying 1000's of dollars, it's a no-brainer that - THAT kind of money could just land in someones pocket anyway, because - you will pay anyway.But lets not kid ourselves - we're buying screens cheaper than ever.
I'm enjoying my 800 dollar 50" incher, and 200 dollar 24" inch 1920x1200 computer screen, wow...I remember paying 1000 bucks for a screen back in the days...22 inches and "only" 1280x1024 crt...and THAT was considered discount.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30415716</id>
	<title>The problem</title>
	<author>TheSync</author>
	<datestamp>1260645540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have personally seen threats of anti-competitive lawsuits used to limit competition.</p><p>Several companies come together to try to set a file standard for interoperation.  A vendor to some of these companies threatens an anti-competitive lawsuit, after all they are meeting in a room discussing how to work together.  The vendor was trying to maintain lock-in to its proprietary file format for its customers.  The standard is stuck in limbo for years until the companies working on the standard can form a corporation with enough legal support to fend off a potential lawsuit.</p><p>If you think patents reduce innovation by creating IP mine fields, anti-competitive laws are just like that.</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have personally seen threats of anti-competitive lawsuits used to limit competition.Several companies come together to try to set a file standard for interoperation .
A vendor to some of these companies threatens an anti-competitive lawsuit , after all they are meeting in a room discussing how to work together .
The vendor was trying to maintain lock-in to its proprietary file format for its customers .
The standard is stuck in limbo for years until the companies working on the standard can form a corporation with enough legal support to fend off a potential lawsuit.If you think patents reduce innovation by creating IP mine fields , anti-competitive laws are just like that .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have personally seen threats of anti-competitive lawsuits used to limit competition.Several companies come together to try to set a file standard for interoperation.
A vendor to some of these companies threatens an anti-competitive lawsuit, after all they are meeting in a room discussing how to work together.
The vendor was trying to maintain lock-in to its proprietary file format for its customers.
The standard is stuck in limbo for years until the companies working on the standard can form a corporation with enough legal support to fend off a potential lawsuit.If you think patents reduce innovation by creating IP mine fields, anti-competitive laws are just like that.
 </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412618</id>
	<title>Re:Victimized?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260619140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Yes, price fixing is bad, but seriously "victimized" consumers? Yeah, they overpaid for an LCD, but they -chose- to pay that amount for an LCD.</p></div><p>
You're missing some basic knowledge of economics here. The victims are not the consumers who actually overpaid for an LCD. The victims are the potential consumers who would have bought an LCD had they been fairly priced, but who couldn't afford to pay the inflated price. This category of "lost potential purchases" is known as "deadweight loss" in economics.
</p><p>
Unfortunately, our legal system provides no way for the true victimized class to receive compensation.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , price fixing is bad , but seriously " victimized " consumers ?
Yeah , they overpaid for an LCD , but they -chose- to pay that amount for an LCD .
You 're missing some basic knowledge of economics here .
The victims are not the consumers who actually overpaid for an LCD .
The victims are the potential consumers who would have bought an LCD had they been fairly priced , but who could n't afford to pay the inflated price .
This category of " lost potential purchases " is known as " deadweight loss " in economics .
Unfortunately , our legal system provides no way for the true victimized class to receive compensation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, price fixing is bad, but seriously "victimized" consumers?
Yeah, they overpaid for an LCD, but they -chose- to pay that amount for an LCD.
You're missing some basic knowledge of economics here.
The victims are not the consumers who actually overpaid for an LCD.
The victims are the potential consumers who would have bought an LCD had they been fairly priced, but who couldn't afford to pay the inflated price.
This category of "lost potential purchases" is known as "deadweight loss" in economics.
Unfortunately, our legal system provides no way for the true victimized class to receive compensation.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410446</id>
	<title>I just wonder</title>
	<author>crazybit</author>
	<datestamp>1260548460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Which other products might have their prices controlled the same way right now?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Which other products might have their prices controlled the same way right now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which other products might have their prices controlled the same way right now?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412870</id>
	<title>Re:Cut a deal</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260622500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't forget color fidelity. Good response time is easy. Decent colors, now that is hard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't forget color fidelity .
Good response time is easy .
Decent colors , now that is hard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't forget color fidelity.
Good response time is easy.
Decent colors, now that is hard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30415472</id>
	<title>Re:let me guess</title>
	<author>RandomUsername99</author>
	<datestamp>1260644040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a criminal case, not a class action settlement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a criminal case , not a class action settlement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a criminal case, not a class action settlement.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410536</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411094</id>
	<title>Other co-conspirators will pay more?</title>
	<author>nsushkin</author>
	<datestamp>1260553920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's interesting who Chi-Mei conspired WITH. Chi-Mei is not the best LCD manufacturer and they agreed to cooperate with DOJ. There must be other companies who Chi-Mei will bust and who will pay more. Certain Koreans, perhaps?</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's interesting who Chi-Mei conspired WITH .
Chi-Mei is not the best LCD manufacturer and they agreed to cooperate with DOJ .
There must be other companies who Chi-Mei will bust and who will pay more .
Certain Koreans , perhaps ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's interesting who Chi-Mei conspired WITH.
Chi-Mei is not the best LCD manufacturer and they agreed to cooperate with DOJ.
There must be other companies who Chi-Mei will bust and who will pay more.
Certain Koreans, perhaps?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30414850</id>
	<title>AGAIN?</title>
	<author>Neuroelectronic</author>
	<datestamp>1260639720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is becoming a yearly tradition for LCD companies.  Perhaps the fines are low enough that it's still financially viable even if you get caught.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is becoming a yearly tradition for LCD companies .
Perhaps the fines are low enough that it 's still financially viable even if you get caught .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is becoming a yearly tradition for LCD companies.
Perhaps the fines are low enough that it's still financially viable even if you get caught.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411242
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410564
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412676
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410524
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410524
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412462
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410564
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412616
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410564
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410562
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411720
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410446
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411688
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410446
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30413574
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410716
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410446
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30413354
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410728
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410446
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412618
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30413742
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410524
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30415642
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410616
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410524
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30414024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410386
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30421776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410400
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410616
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30413042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410524
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30415472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410562
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30420098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410386
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_0114248_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30415726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410564
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_12_0114248.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410536
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30415472
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410964
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_12_0114248.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410562
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411880
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410884
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_12_0114248.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410732
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_12_0114248.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410346
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_12_0114248.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410616
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410798
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30415642
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_12_0114248.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30414024
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412870
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_12_0114248.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410564
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411456
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412690
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412462
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411782
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30415726
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411242
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_12_0114248.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410400
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30421776
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_12_0114248.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411104
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412618
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411572
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412616
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411720
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_12_0114248.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410474
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_12_0114248.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411950
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_12_0114248.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410446
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412016
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410728
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30413354
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410716
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30413574
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410912
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411688
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_12_0114248.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410852
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410278
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410524
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411288
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411018
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30413042
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410870
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30413742
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412676
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30420098
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_12_0114248.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410606
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410936
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410948
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30411828
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30412390
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_0114248.30410906
</commentlist>
</conversation>
