<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_14_1441252</id>
	<title>Secret Copyright Treaty Timeline Shows Global DMCA</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1260806460000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"Michael Geist, a <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/">leading critic</a>
of the ACTA secret copyright treaty, has produced a new <a href="http://www.dipity.com/michaelgeist/personal">interactive timeline</a>
that traces its development. The timeline includes links to
leaked documents, videos, and public interest group letters that should generate
increasing concern with a deal that could lead to a global
three-strikes and you're out policy."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " Michael Geist , a leading critic of the ACTA secret copyright treaty , has produced a new interactive timeline that traces its development .
The timeline includes links to leaked documents , videos , and public interest group letters that should generate increasing concern with a deal that could lead to a global three-strikes and you 're out policy .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "Michael Geist, a leading critic
of the ACTA secret copyright treaty, has produced a new interactive timeline
that traces its development.
The timeline includes links to
leaked documents, videos, and public interest group letters that should generate
increasing concern with a deal that could lead to a global
three-strikes and you're out policy.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30441342</id>
	<title>Short-sighted pipe dreamer yourself...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260909600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's trivially easy for the authorities to remove your "pirate" radio station equipment using existing legislation - what makes you think it's so difficult to send the coppers around and take your "pirate" wlan broadcasting equipment?<br>The war against weed is lost in some jurisdictions because you can grow it in your basement with virtually no external visibility - you can't have an effective wifi or wlan network without being deliberately visible - you're busted before you even start.<br>There are thousands of imprisoned inhalers who will testify that your war against weed is not "lost" by any means by the pharmaceutical, petrochemical and farm-ag industrials.</p><p>"Because inside, everybody knows what is right and wrong" - such sophistry is tagged +5 insightful ? Right and wrong do not exist, except in the individual's mind, and oddly enough, your mind is not the same as mine, therefore our appreciation of right and wrong are forcibly different. My "right" weed is my neighbour's "wrong" weed - or hadn't you noticed that in your private purple haze?</p><p>The war against the police-state-fascist-corporate-thieves is not a foregone conclusion - humans are easily swayed to act against their own interests. Your message sounds like you suggest we just chill out and let them die off naturally - sorry, buddy, you're going to have to get off your ass on this one, and make sure everyone else does as well. And it's a hard sell, explaining to the average non-techie why some invisible, amorphous secret treaty "to stop pirates" is that critical first step to an evil world police state.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's trivially easy for the authorities to remove your " pirate " radio station equipment using existing legislation - what makes you think it 's so difficult to send the coppers around and take your " pirate " wlan broadcasting equipment ? The war against weed is lost in some jurisdictions because you can grow it in your basement with virtually no external visibility - you ca n't have an effective wifi or wlan network without being deliberately visible - you 're busted before you even start.There are thousands of imprisoned inhalers who will testify that your war against weed is not " lost " by any means by the pharmaceutical , petrochemical and farm-ag industrials .
" Because inside , everybody knows what is right and wrong " - such sophistry is tagged + 5 insightful ?
Right and wrong do not exist , except in the individual 's mind , and oddly enough , your mind is not the same as mine , therefore our appreciation of right and wrong are forcibly different .
My " right " weed is my neighbour 's " wrong " weed - or had n't you noticed that in your private purple haze ? The war against the police-state-fascist-corporate-thieves is not a foregone conclusion - humans are easily swayed to act against their own interests .
Your message sounds like you suggest we just chill out and let them die off naturally - sorry , buddy , you 're going to have to get off your ass on this one , and make sure everyone else does as well .
And it 's a hard sell , explaining to the average non-techie why some invisible , amorphous secret treaty " to stop pirates " is that critical first step to an evil world police state .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's trivially easy for the authorities to remove your "pirate" radio station equipment using existing legislation - what makes you think it's so difficult to send the coppers around and take your "pirate" wlan broadcasting equipment?The war against weed is lost in some jurisdictions because you can grow it in your basement with virtually no external visibility - you can't have an effective wifi or wlan network without being deliberately visible - you're busted before you even start.There are thousands of imprisoned inhalers who will testify that your war against weed is not "lost" by any means by the pharmaceutical, petrochemical and farm-ag industrials.
"Because inside, everybody knows what is right and wrong" - such sophistry is tagged +5 insightful ?
Right and wrong do not exist, except in the individual's mind, and oddly enough, your mind is not the same as mine, therefore our appreciation of right and wrong are forcibly different.
My "right" weed is my neighbour's "wrong" weed - or hadn't you noticed that in your private purple haze?The war against the police-state-fascist-corporate-thieves is not a foregone conclusion - humans are easily swayed to act against their own interests.
Your message sounds like you suggest we just chill out and let them die off naturally - sorry, buddy, you're going to have to get off your ass on this one, and make sure everyone else does as well.
And it's a hard sell, explaining to the average non-techie why some invisible, amorphous secret treaty "to stop pirates" is that critical first step to an evil world police state.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434130</id>
	<title>Re:and this changes what?</title>
	<author>bmajik</author>
	<datestamp>1260821220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Government is created to try and preserve the rights men were born with.</p><p>I happen to think that I own the toil of my hands and the ingenuity of my mind.  What does it mean to own something?  Exclusive control of that thing.</p><p>On a desert island, I certainly own the work of my hands and mind.  Why should I give up that control just because someone thinks themself my neighbor?</p><p>I shouldn't, and in the United States, at least originally, you weren't asked to.</p><p>It turns out that a large part of the law deals with preserving the intrinsic property rights of individuals -- as the idea of ownership is the most fundamental concept of a free man [certainly, a man must be allowed to own himself!  another idea that is unique amongst world governments to the US constitution...]</p><p>Now, unlike the misguided collectivists who beleive that "the workers" produce and therefore should "own" the wealth of the world, hands are of marginal importance compared to minds.  My hands are no stronger or more durable than were the first entites that could be rightly called human hands thousands of years ago.  The difference between me and them is the foundation of \_mental\_ output.</p><p>Ideas are what matter.  Ideas are what have value.  Ideas -- and nothing more than ideas -- are the difference between a humanity full of sky scrapers, planes, a lifespan longer than 40 years, and the cavemen who didn't know how to make fire.</p><p>Intellectual Property is the basic realization that ideas are the most valuable things in human history, and that a man ought to be free to own his ideas -- just like he is when he's alone on an island.</p><p>Creating the appropriate legal protections of a mind's inventions requires much legal anquish and debate.  But it is a debate and process that must continue.  Attempting to dismiss IP as some fundmentally invalid or non-existant concept shows great contempt for humanity.  Not "humanity, the pool of humans", but "humanity -- the essence of what a man is".</p><p>Who is John Galt?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Government is created to try and preserve the rights men were born with.I happen to think that I own the toil of my hands and the ingenuity of my mind .
What does it mean to own something ?
Exclusive control of that thing.On a desert island , I certainly own the work of my hands and mind .
Why should I give up that control just because someone thinks themself my neighbor ? I should n't , and in the United States , at least originally , you were n't asked to.It turns out that a large part of the law deals with preserving the intrinsic property rights of individuals -- as the idea of ownership is the most fundamental concept of a free man [ certainly , a man must be allowed to own himself !
another idea that is unique amongst world governments to the US constitution... ] Now , unlike the misguided collectivists who beleive that " the workers " produce and therefore should " own " the wealth of the world , hands are of marginal importance compared to minds .
My hands are no stronger or more durable than were the first entites that could be rightly called human hands thousands of years ago .
The difference between me and them is the foundation of \ _mental \ _ output.Ideas are what matter .
Ideas are what have value .
Ideas -- and nothing more than ideas -- are the difference between a humanity full of sky scrapers , planes , a lifespan longer than 40 years , and the cavemen who did n't know how to make fire.Intellectual Property is the basic realization that ideas are the most valuable things in human history , and that a man ought to be free to own his ideas -- just like he is when he 's alone on an island.Creating the appropriate legal protections of a mind 's inventions requires much legal anquish and debate .
But it is a debate and process that must continue .
Attempting to dismiss IP as some fundmentally invalid or non-existant concept shows great contempt for humanity .
Not " humanity , the pool of humans " , but " humanity -- the essence of what a man is " .Who is John Galt ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Government is created to try and preserve the rights men were born with.I happen to think that I own the toil of my hands and the ingenuity of my mind.
What does it mean to own something?
Exclusive control of that thing.On a desert island, I certainly own the work of my hands and mind.
Why should I give up that control just because someone thinks themself my neighbor?I shouldn't, and in the United States, at least originally, you weren't asked to.It turns out that a large part of the law deals with preserving the intrinsic property rights of individuals -- as the idea of ownership is the most fundamental concept of a free man [certainly, a man must be allowed to own himself!
another idea that is unique amongst world governments to the US constitution...]Now, unlike the misguided collectivists who beleive that "the workers" produce and therefore should "own" the wealth of the world, hands are of marginal importance compared to minds.
My hands are no stronger or more durable than were the first entites that could be rightly called human hands thousands of years ago.
The difference between me and them is the foundation of \_mental\_ output.Ideas are what matter.
Ideas are what have value.
Ideas -- and nothing more than ideas -- are the difference between a humanity full of sky scrapers, planes, a lifespan longer than 40 years, and the cavemen who didn't know how to make fire.Intellectual Property is the basic realization that ideas are the most valuable things in human history, and that a man ought to be free to own his ideas -- just like he is when he's alone on an island.Creating the appropriate legal protections of a mind's inventions requires much legal anquish and debate.
But it is a debate and process that must continue.
Attempting to dismiss IP as some fundmentally invalid or non-existant concept shows great contempt for humanity.
Not "humanity, the pool of humans", but "humanity -- the essence of what a man is".Who is John Galt?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432226</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432388</id>
	<title>Re:Pro-ACTA arguments are disingenuous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260812760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So what do you propose to do about it? Are you going to lead the revolution that brings down the corrupt government and forces them to be accountable to the people that voted them in and not to the corporations that line their pockets?</p><p>The problem with politicians is they have the police and military on their side. The problem with people is we have the freedom to speak out, but won't. I'd join a group so my voice could be heard anonymously, but I'm not going to jail because the government knows I disagreed with them.</p><p>Get Mad, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNxoLJy3m3s" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNxoLJy3m3s</a> [youtube.com] </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So what do you propose to do about it ?
Are you going to lead the revolution that brings down the corrupt government and forces them to be accountable to the people that voted them in and not to the corporations that line their pockets ? The problem with politicians is they have the police and military on their side .
The problem with people is we have the freedom to speak out , but wo n't .
I 'd join a group so my voice could be heard anonymously , but I 'm not going to jail because the government knows I disagreed with them.Get Mad , http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = rNxoLJy3m3s [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So what do you propose to do about it?
Are you going to lead the revolution that brings down the corrupt government and forces them to be accountable to the people that voted them in and not to the corporations that line their pockets?The problem with politicians is they have the police and military on their side.
The problem with people is we have the freedom to speak out, but won't.
I'd join a group so my voice could be heard anonymously, but I'm not going to jail because the government knows I disagreed with them.Get Mad, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNxoLJy3m3s [youtube.com] </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432190</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432822</id>
	<title>Re:and this changes what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260814440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the US Constitution, as originally written, the purpose of Copyright and Patents was to ENSURE that the items, or knowledge, in question was released to the public, for public use and improvement, in a short period of time.  The purpose was NOT to ensure a perpetual ownership by the inventor or rights-holder, but to get it out of his or her hands and into the public's.  Somehow our courts (and many parts of the world have followed) have twisted it 180 degrees around.</p><p>I say we bring back the original intent, as well as the original 14 year maximum period.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the US Constitution , as originally written , the purpose of Copyright and Patents was to ENSURE that the items , or knowledge , in question was released to the public , for public use and improvement , in a short period of time .
The purpose was NOT to ensure a perpetual ownership by the inventor or rights-holder , but to get it out of his or her hands and into the public 's .
Somehow our courts ( and many parts of the world have followed ) have twisted it 180 degrees around.I say we bring back the original intent , as well as the original 14 year maximum period .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the US Constitution, as originally written, the purpose of Copyright and Patents was to ENSURE that the items, or knowledge, in question was released to the public, for public use and improvement, in a short period of time.
The purpose was NOT to ensure a perpetual ownership by the inventor or rights-holder, but to get it out of his or her hands and into the public's.
Somehow our courts (and many parts of the world have followed) have twisted it 180 degrees around.I say we bring back the original intent, as well as the original 14 year maximum period.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432226</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30441556</id>
	<title>Re:and this changes what?</title>
	<author>Jedi Alec</author>
	<datestamp>1260869100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>On a desert island, I certainly own the work of my hands and mind. Why should I give up that control just because someone thinks themself my neighbor?</i></p><p>Because we <b>are</b> neighbours. The global village is getting smaller every day. And what you Randians seem to keep missing is that you don't, in fact, live on desert islands. (We wish...)</p><p>If we weren't neighbours, why bother with treaties in the first place? You keep your laws, we keep ours.</p><p><i>Now, unlike the misguided collectivists who beleive that "the workers" produce and therefore should "own" the wealth of the world, hands are of marginal importance compared to minds. My hands are no stronger or more durable than were the first entites that could be rightly called human hands thousands of years ago. The difference between me and them is the foundation of \_mental\_ output.</i></p><p>Way to misrepresent things...the most common argument is that perhaps the mere fact that someone is born well-connected, in the right place or with more intelligence than another man doesn't mean it's "fair" that the relative difference in income needs to be expressed in terms of 10 to the nth degree.</p><p><i>Ideas are what matter. Ideas are what have value. Ideas -- and nothing more than ideas -- are the difference between a humanity full of sky scrapers, planes, a lifespan longer than 40 years, and the cavemen who didn't know how to make fire.</i></p><p><i>Intellectual Property is the basic realization that ideas are the most valuable things in human history, and that a man ought to be free to own his ideas -- just like he is when he's alone on an island.</i></p><p>Excellent. Don't write them down on paper or tell the rest of us about them, just like on your desert island. Good luck working on that coconut detection device!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On a desert island , I certainly own the work of my hands and mind .
Why should I give up that control just because someone thinks themself my neighbor ? Because we are neighbours .
The global village is getting smaller every day .
And what you Randians seem to keep missing is that you do n't , in fact , live on desert islands .
( We wish... ) If we were n't neighbours , why bother with treaties in the first place ?
You keep your laws , we keep ours.Now , unlike the misguided collectivists who beleive that " the workers " produce and therefore should " own " the wealth of the world , hands are of marginal importance compared to minds .
My hands are no stronger or more durable than were the first entites that could be rightly called human hands thousands of years ago .
The difference between me and them is the foundation of \ _mental \ _ output.Way to misrepresent things...the most common argument is that perhaps the mere fact that someone is born well-connected , in the right place or with more intelligence than another man does n't mean it 's " fair " that the relative difference in income needs to be expressed in terms of 10 to the nth degree.Ideas are what matter .
Ideas are what have value .
Ideas -- and nothing more than ideas -- are the difference between a humanity full of sky scrapers , planes , a lifespan longer than 40 years , and the cavemen who did n't know how to make fire.Intellectual Property is the basic realization that ideas are the most valuable things in human history , and that a man ought to be free to own his ideas -- just like he is when he 's alone on an island.Excellent .
Do n't write them down on paper or tell the rest of us about them , just like on your desert island .
Good luck working on that coconut detection device !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On a desert island, I certainly own the work of my hands and mind.
Why should I give up that control just because someone thinks themself my neighbor?Because we are neighbours.
The global village is getting smaller every day.
And what you Randians seem to keep missing is that you don't, in fact, live on desert islands.
(We wish...)If we weren't neighbours, why bother with treaties in the first place?
You keep your laws, we keep ours.Now, unlike the misguided collectivists who beleive that "the workers" produce and therefore should "own" the wealth of the world, hands are of marginal importance compared to minds.
My hands are no stronger or more durable than were the first entites that could be rightly called human hands thousands of years ago.
The difference between me and them is the foundation of \_mental\_ output.Way to misrepresent things...the most common argument is that perhaps the mere fact that someone is born well-connected, in the right place or with more intelligence than another man doesn't mean it's "fair" that the relative difference in income needs to be expressed in terms of 10 to the nth degree.Ideas are what matter.
Ideas are what have value.
Ideas -- and nothing more than ideas -- are the difference between a humanity full of sky scrapers, planes, a lifespan longer than 40 years, and the cavemen who didn't know how to make fire.Intellectual Property is the basic realization that ideas are the most valuable things in human history, and that a man ought to be free to own his ideas -- just like he is when he's alone on an island.Excellent.
Don't write them down on paper or tell the rest of us about them, just like on your desert island.
Good luck working on that coconut detection device!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434130</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433294</id>
	<title>Re:Bring it on</title>
	<author>schon</author>
	<datestamp>1260816780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry, no.</p><p>As admirable as you believe the goal is (and I agree with you on that), the means is just *wrong*.</p><p>You're talking about organizations that think nothing of sending infringement notices for things that are in the public domian, or copyrighted by the people who post them.  "Artist's" groups that send DMCA notices <i>against the wishes of the authors they represent</i> for material that is published <i>by the authors themselves</i> under a CC license.</p><p>These are people who send infringement notices based on nothing more than the author's name being similar to one they represent.</p><p>They are people who send infringement notices to the wrong place,  or "link" infringement to IP addresses that are assigned to <i>printers</i>.</p><p>You get three of these?  You're off the net.  Period.  Doesn't matter if the stuff is CC'ed or not.  Doesn't matter that the notices are invalid.  You're guilty until proven innocent.  You have to prove you're innocent, and do it <i>without access to the tools necessary to do so</i>.</p><p><b>THIS IS WRONG</b></p><p>"Bring it on" is entirely the wrong way to approach this - we need to stop it before it happens, not try to fix it after.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , no.As admirable as you believe the goal is ( and I agree with you on that ) , the means is just * wrong * .You 're talking about organizations that think nothing of sending infringement notices for things that are in the public domian , or copyrighted by the people who post them .
" Artist 's " groups that send DMCA notices against the wishes of the authors they represent for material that is published by the authors themselves under a CC license.These are people who send infringement notices based on nothing more than the author 's name being similar to one they represent.They are people who send infringement notices to the wrong place , or " link " infringement to IP addresses that are assigned to printers.You get three of these ?
You 're off the net .
Period. Does n't matter if the stuff is CC'ed or not .
Does n't matter that the notices are invalid .
You 're guilty until proven innocent .
You have to prove you 're innocent , and do it without access to the tools necessary to do so.THIS IS WRONG " Bring it on " is entirely the wrong way to approach this - we need to stop it before it happens , not try to fix it after .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, no.As admirable as you believe the goal is (and I agree with you on that), the means is just *wrong*.You're talking about organizations that think nothing of sending infringement notices for things that are in the public domian, or copyrighted by the people who post them.
"Artist's" groups that send DMCA notices against the wishes of the authors they represent for material that is published by the authors themselves under a CC license.These are people who send infringement notices based on nothing more than the author's name being similar to one they represent.They are people who send infringement notices to the wrong place,  or "link" infringement to IP addresses that are assigned to printers.You get three of these?
You're off the net.
Period.  Doesn't matter if the stuff is CC'ed or not.
Doesn't matter that the notices are invalid.
You're guilty until proven innocent.
You have to prove you're innocent, and do it without access to the tools necessary to do so.THIS IS WRONG"Bring it on" is entirely the wrong way to approach this - we need to stop it before it happens, not try to fix it after.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432130</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432536</id>
	<title>Re:Bring it on</title>
	<author>Archangel Michael</author>
	<datestamp>1260813300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is yet another way. It is called massive civil disobedience.</p><p>They can't cut us all off. And I dare them to try.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is yet another way .
It is called massive civil disobedience.They ca n't cut us all off .
And I dare them to try .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is yet another way.
It is called massive civil disobedience.They can't cut us all off.
And I dare them to try.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432130</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432354</id>
	<title>If you're not doing anything wrong</title>
	<author>The Altruist</author>
	<datestamp>1260812640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>you have nothing to worry about.

Unless, of course, a disgruntled employee / competitor / girlscout-you-didn't-buy-cookies-from gives your name to the Business Software Alliance.

Then it's the Spanish Inquistion / Salem Witch Trials / Mc Carthy Trials all over again.</htmltext>
<tokenext>you have nothing to worry about .
Unless , of course , a disgruntled employee / competitor / girlscout-you-did n't-buy-cookies-from gives your name to the Business Software Alliance .
Then it 's the Spanish Inquistion / Salem Witch Trials / Mc Carthy Trials all over again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you have nothing to worry about.
Unless, of course, a disgruntled employee / competitor / girlscout-you-didn't-buy-cookies-from gives your name to the Business Software Alliance.
Then it's the Spanish Inquistion / Salem Witch Trials / Mc Carthy Trials all over again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432142</id>
	<title>Yes, help creative commons, open source etc.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260811440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If this is going live, i can foresee open source apps and creative commons goods surge in popularity.</p><p>Aren't they shooting themselves in the long term ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If this is going live , i can foresee open source apps and creative commons goods surge in popularity.Are n't they shooting themselves in the long term ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this is going live, i can foresee open source apps and creative commons goods surge in popularity.Aren't they shooting themselves in the long term ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432438</id>
	<title>Re:Emailgate</title>
	<author>angelwolf71885</author>
	<datestamp>1260812940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>12 trillion on red it gets tucked into the climate bill that will pass in the US very shortly after Copenhagen is over</htmltext>
<tokenext>12 trillion on red it gets tucked into the climate bill that will pass in the US very shortly after Copenhagen is over</tokentext>
<sentencetext>12 trillion on red it gets tucked into the climate bill that will pass in the US very shortly after Copenhagen is over</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30431938</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432278</id>
	<title>Re:Worse than terrorism.</title>
	<author>oldspewey</author>
	<datestamp>1260812220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The American economy will not recover until those treaties are abandoned and manufacturing comes back to America.</p></div><p>There are at least two ways of interpreting this sentence: the way you meant it, and the cynical one.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The American economy will not recover until those treaties are abandoned and manufacturing comes back to America.There are at least two ways of interpreting this sentence : the way you meant it , and the cynical one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The American economy will not recover until those treaties are abandoned and manufacturing comes back to America.There are at least two ways of interpreting this sentence: the way you meant it, and the cynical one.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432052</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433576</id>
	<title>If you haven't already</title>
	<author>T Murphy</author>
	<datestamp>1260818400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Be sure to contact those representing you. Just one country has to push for openness to get this out for the whole world to see. I'm as cynical as the next person about my government, but I can't complain about the system if I don't try to use it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Be sure to contact those representing you .
Just one country has to push for openness to get this out for the whole world to see .
I 'm as cynical as the next person about my government , but I ca n't complain about the system if I do n't try to use it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Be sure to contact those representing you.
Just one country has to push for openness to get this out for the whole world to see.
I'm as cynical as the next person about my government, but I can't complain about the system if I don't try to use it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30431892</id>
	<title>Wow.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260810180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Insta-dupe.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Insta-dupe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Insta-dupe.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433552</id>
	<title>Re:sneaky...</title>
	<author>pilgrim23</author>
	<datestamp>1260818340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What does it matter?  I can hear all I need to of Tiger Woods on all the major networks.  They also broadcast the latest Hollywood scandals and who is sleeping with whom.  All the Internet does is talk about oppressed people Whatchamacalitstan and  other places like France (which I think is near Iowa).</htmltext>
<tokenext>What does it matter ?
I can hear all I need to of Tiger Woods on all the major networks .
They also broadcast the latest Hollywood scandals and who is sleeping with whom .
All the Internet does is talk about oppressed people Whatchamacalitstan and other places like France ( which I think is near Iowa ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What does it matter?
I can hear all I need to of Tiger Woods on all the major networks.
They also broadcast the latest Hollywood scandals and who is sleeping with whom.
All the Internet does is talk about oppressed people Whatchamacalitstan and  other places like France (which I think is near Iowa).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432264</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434932</id>
	<title>Re:and this changes what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260782160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>Government is created to try and preserve the rights men were born with.<br> </i> </p><p>We're born with rights?  I wasn't aware of any viable <i>a priori</i> or empirical proofs towards that conclusion.  What the hell is a right, where the hell do they come from?  Neither of these questions have been answered to any degree of certainty.  Generally all they are is convenient slogans used to make an emotive argument towards their own agenda.  Functionally they are nothing more than a social construct.  All persuasive descriptions of rights are merely normative proscriptions (Kant's Categorical Imperative, the various social contracts, etc...), and not descriptive systems of actual innate rights.</p><p>
 Also who is to say who owns what?  Do you own your land, the land that someone stole from the Native Americans?</p><p>
 <i>s the idea of ownership is the most fundamental concept of a free man [certainly, a man must be allowed to own himself! another idea that is unique amongst world governments to the US constitution...]</i> </p><p>Personally ownership/property would be secondary to the basics of survival, since the latter necessarily precludes the former. Looking at the history of society, the so-called "innate right" to personal property is a relative newcomer, with early communities being rather communistic (i.e. community property), and much of the time after the widespread advent of "private property" much of the population didn't actually have this right, being that all land/property was the Crowns.  For an innate right, it springs up REALLY late in the game.</p><p>Also, how can we say that the US Constitution "allowed a man to own himself", and was "unique" in this?  We were one of the last countries to realize that a large segment of the population WASN'T property. In half of our history I could claim ownership over you, based solely on your level of melanin.  Hell, we didn't even realize that women had rights until rather late in the game, and they were over half the population.</p><p>The US was a backwards country based off of economic exploitation and not any conception of "rights".  In some regards we still fall into this mold.</p><p> <i>Intellectual Property is the basic realization that ideas are the most valuable things in human history, and that a man ought to be free to own his ideas -- just like he is when he's alone on an island.</i> </p><p>And your own holy Constitution craps on that idea.  Governments exist for the good of society (a collective entity of individuals), and not for YOU, or any other person.  Copyright, and IP in general, exists for the benefit of all members of society, and not just you.  Thus the idea of a <b>limited</b> monopoly on your intellectual creation.  The only reason you get this small monopoly is to sucker you into creating more stuff (using your greed for the benefit of the society as a whole), there is no high-falutin' "the effluvia that flows from your brain is sacrosanct"  clause in the constitution.  There is two reasons for this; the first being that there is no proof that the founding fathers were rugged individualists (in the sense we mean today, they probably would have giggled madly at Ayn Rand, and the modern libertarian party), and that it is incredibly naive to think that any individuals ideas came from a vacuum, you owe your great idea to great ideas before that.   If all individual ideas were walled off, there would be no progress since without the old ideas, there are no new ideas.</p><p> <i>Not "humanity, the pool of humans", but "humanity -- the essence of what a man is".</i> </p><p>Featherless bipeds?   There is no "essence", people are free to create their own essence.  My idea of what I would probably piss you off, and visa versa.  Human nature, is by nature, almost infinitely malleable.  Personally I do think that IP is largely meaningless, outside of a way to blackmail creators into creating more.  I can't smell, see, or measure IP, therefore it is no more real than any other mere idea.  Ideas should always be subjugated by that which exists</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Government is created to try and preserve the rights men were born with .
We 're born with rights ?
I was n't aware of any viable a priori or empirical proofs towards that conclusion .
What the hell is a right , where the hell do they come from ?
Neither of these questions have been answered to any degree of certainty .
Generally all they are is convenient slogans used to make an emotive argument towards their own agenda .
Functionally they are nothing more than a social construct .
All persuasive descriptions of rights are merely normative proscriptions ( Kant 's Categorical Imperative , the various social contracts , etc... ) , and not descriptive systems of actual innate rights .
Also who is to say who owns what ?
Do you own your land , the land that someone stole from the Native Americans ?
s the idea of ownership is the most fundamental concept of a free man [ certainly , a man must be allowed to own himself !
another idea that is unique amongst world governments to the US constitution... ] Personally ownership/property would be secondary to the basics of survival , since the latter necessarily precludes the former .
Looking at the history of society , the so-called " innate right " to personal property is a relative newcomer , with early communities being rather communistic ( i.e .
community property ) , and much of the time after the widespread advent of " private property " much of the population did n't actually have this right , being that all land/property was the Crowns .
For an innate right , it springs up REALLY late in the game.Also , how can we say that the US Constitution " allowed a man to own himself " , and was " unique " in this ?
We were one of the last countries to realize that a large segment of the population WAS N'T property .
In half of our history I could claim ownership over you , based solely on your level of melanin .
Hell , we did n't even realize that women had rights until rather late in the game , and they were over half the population.The US was a backwards country based off of economic exploitation and not any conception of " rights " .
In some regards we still fall into this mold .
Intellectual Property is the basic realization that ideas are the most valuable things in human history , and that a man ought to be free to own his ideas -- just like he is when he 's alone on an island .
And your own holy Constitution craps on that idea .
Governments exist for the good of society ( a collective entity of individuals ) , and not for YOU , or any other person .
Copyright , and IP in general , exists for the benefit of all members of society , and not just you .
Thus the idea of a limited monopoly on your intellectual creation .
The only reason you get this small monopoly is to sucker you into creating more stuff ( using your greed for the benefit of the society as a whole ) , there is no high-falutin ' " the effluvia that flows from your brain is sacrosanct " clause in the constitution .
There is two reasons for this ; the first being that there is no proof that the founding fathers were rugged individualists ( in the sense we mean today , they probably would have giggled madly at Ayn Rand , and the modern libertarian party ) , and that it is incredibly naive to think that any individuals ideas came from a vacuum , you owe your great idea to great ideas before that .
If all individual ideas were walled off , there would be no progress since without the old ideas , there are no new ideas .
Not " humanity , the pool of humans " , but " humanity -- the essence of what a man is " .
Featherless bipeds ?
There is no " essence " , people are free to create their own essence .
My idea of what I would probably piss you off , and visa versa .
Human nature , is by nature , almost infinitely malleable .
Personally I do think that IP is largely meaningless , outside of a way to blackmail creators into creating more .
I ca n't smell , see , or measure IP , therefore it is no more real than any other mere idea .
Ideas should always be subjugated by that which exists</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Government is created to try and preserve the rights men were born with.
We're born with rights?
I wasn't aware of any viable a priori or empirical proofs towards that conclusion.
What the hell is a right, where the hell do they come from?
Neither of these questions have been answered to any degree of certainty.
Generally all they are is convenient slogans used to make an emotive argument towards their own agenda.
Functionally they are nothing more than a social construct.
All persuasive descriptions of rights are merely normative proscriptions (Kant's Categorical Imperative, the various social contracts, etc...), and not descriptive systems of actual innate rights.
Also who is to say who owns what?
Do you own your land, the land that someone stole from the Native Americans?
s the idea of ownership is the most fundamental concept of a free man [certainly, a man must be allowed to own himself!
another idea that is unique amongst world governments to the US constitution...] Personally ownership/property would be secondary to the basics of survival, since the latter necessarily precludes the former.
Looking at the history of society, the so-called "innate right" to personal property is a relative newcomer, with early communities being rather communistic (i.e.
community property), and much of the time after the widespread advent of "private property" much of the population didn't actually have this right, being that all land/property was the Crowns.
For an innate right, it springs up REALLY late in the game.Also, how can we say that the US Constitution "allowed a man to own himself", and was "unique" in this?
We were one of the last countries to realize that a large segment of the population WASN'T property.
In half of our history I could claim ownership over you, based solely on your level of melanin.
Hell, we didn't even realize that women had rights until rather late in the game, and they were over half the population.The US was a backwards country based off of economic exploitation and not any conception of "rights".
In some regards we still fall into this mold.
Intellectual Property is the basic realization that ideas are the most valuable things in human history, and that a man ought to be free to own his ideas -- just like he is when he's alone on an island.
And your own holy Constitution craps on that idea.
Governments exist for the good of society (a collective entity of individuals), and not for YOU, or any other person.
Copyright, and IP in general, exists for the benefit of all members of society, and not just you.
Thus the idea of a limited monopoly on your intellectual creation.
The only reason you get this small monopoly is to sucker you into creating more stuff (using your greed for the benefit of the society as a whole), there is no high-falutin' "the effluvia that flows from your brain is sacrosanct"  clause in the constitution.
There is two reasons for this; the first being that there is no proof that the founding fathers were rugged individualists (in the sense we mean today, they probably would have giggled madly at Ayn Rand, and the modern libertarian party), and that it is incredibly naive to think that any individuals ideas came from a vacuum, you owe your great idea to great ideas before that.
If all individual ideas were walled off, there would be no progress since without the old ideas, there are no new ideas.
Not "humanity, the pool of humans", but "humanity -- the essence of what a man is".
Featherless bipeds?
There is no "essence", people are free to create their own essence.
My idea of what I would probably piss you off, and visa versa.
Human nature, is by nature, almost infinitely malleable.
Personally I do think that IP is largely meaningless, outside of a way to blackmail creators into creating more.
I can't smell, see, or measure IP, therefore it is no more real than any other mere idea.
Ideas should always be subjugated by that which exists</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434130</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432198</id>
	<title>Re:Yes, help creative commons, open source etc.</title>
	<author>sajuuk</author>
	<datestamp>1260811740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nope, the next international treaty will outlaw open source and creative commons.  At which point I shall secede from the human race.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nope , the next international treaty will outlaw open source and creative commons .
At which point I shall secede from the human race .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nope, the next international treaty will outlaw open source and creative commons.
At which point I shall secede from the human race.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432474</id>
	<title>Re:Doubleplusnotgood!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260813000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's silly!  Just peel the stickers off the outside and move them to the correct side.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's silly !
Just peel the stickers off the outside and move them to the correct side .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's silly!
Just peel the stickers off the outside and move them to the correct side.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432314</id>
	<title>Re:Pro-ACTA arguments are disingenuous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260812400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, Canada is still dragging their heals ratifying many portions of the WIPO treaties, the government ignored the Kyoto protocol, free trade agreements signed with countries in South America may or may not still need to be implemented by an act of parliament, but essentially the Member of Parliament is correct when he says that treaty agreements are subservient to the acts of parliament. As such it is entirely possibly for future parliaments to pull out of treaty agreements by implementing their own acts. However, of course, there are the potential backlashes internationally of violating the agreements that have to be weighed... at the same time, the Conservative party is very likely going to attempt to implement legislation to conform to ACTA. If Canada is lucky, then there will be an election before then causing any proposed amendment to the copyright act to be dropped until it can be reintroduced in a new session. Which has thankfully happened I think at least twice that I can remember?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , Canada is still dragging their heals ratifying many portions of the WIPO treaties , the government ignored the Kyoto protocol , free trade agreements signed with countries in South America may or may not still need to be implemented by an act of parliament , but essentially the Member of Parliament is correct when he says that treaty agreements are subservient to the acts of parliament .
As such it is entirely possibly for future parliaments to pull out of treaty agreements by implementing their own acts .
However , of course , there are the potential backlashes internationally of violating the agreements that have to be weighed... at the same time , the Conservative party is very likely going to attempt to implement legislation to conform to ACTA .
If Canada is lucky , then there will be an election before then causing any proposed amendment to the copyright act to be dropped until it can be reintroduced in a new session .
Which has thankfully happened I think at least twice that I can remember ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, Canada is still dragging their heals ratifying many portions of the WIPO treaties, the government ignored the Kyoto protocol, free trade agreements signed with countries in South America may or may not still need to be implemented by an act of parliament, but essentially the Member of Parliament is correct when he says that treaty agreements are subservient to the acts of parliament.
As such it is entirely possibly for future parliaments to pull out of treaty agreements by implementing their own acts.
However, of course, there are the potential backlashes internationally of violating the agreements that have to be weighed... at the same time, the Conservative party is very likely going to attempt to implement legislation to conform to ACTA.
If Canada is lucky, then there will be an election before then causing any proposed amendment to the copyright act to be dropped until it can be reintroduced in a new session.
Which has thankfully happened I think at least twice that I can remember?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432190</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432052</id>
	<title>Worse than terrorism.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260810960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These global organizations, as well as global governance, are a far bigger threat to freedom and democracy than terrorism ever could be.</p><p>We need politicians who are running on a platform that will directly challenge this sort of behavior. We need politicians who will withdraw our nations from these organizations and treaties.</p><p>NAFTA and treaties with various third-world countries have destroyed the American manufacturing base. The American economy will not recover until those treaties are abandoned and manufacturing comes back to America. We need politicians who will make this so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These global organizations , as well as global governance , are a far bigger threat to freedom and democracy than terrorism ever could be.We need politicians who are running on a platform that will directly challenge this sort of behavior .
We need politicians who will withdraw our nations from these organizations and treaties.NAFTA and treaties with various third-world countries have destroyed the American manufacturing base .
The American economy will not recover until those treaties are abandoned and manufacturing comes back to America .
We need politicians who will make this so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These global organizations, as well as global governance, are a far bigger threat to freedom and democracy than terrorism ever could be.We need politicians who are running on a platform that will directly challenge this sort of behavior.
We need politicians who will withdraw our nations from these organizations and treaties.NAFTA and treaties with various third-world countries have destroyed the American manufacturing base.
The American economy will not recover until those treaties are abandoned and manufacturing comes back to America.
We need politicians who will make this so.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30436132</id>
	<title>Re:Worse than terrorism.</title>
	<author>dwiget001</author>
	<datestamp>1260788340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pfft, yeah.</p><p>We also need, at least in the U.S. and probably elsewhere, representatives and senators that are financially responsible individuals as a whole.</p><p>I blew a gasket and wrote my senators and representative about the OMFG unbelievable passing of the senate bill that boosts government spending by 12 percent AND gives government employees a two percent raise. Why? Well, given the financial condition of the country and the already outrageous borrowing that has already been done, they are setting things up so that we have to borrow *even more*.</p><p>So, not only have past and current Administrations, Houses and Senates made things *worse*, but they are doing things to make the future even worse!</p><p>The U.S. is going to hell in a hand basket, and our politicians are happily helping it along at a faster and faster pace. It un-f*cking-believable, to say the least.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pfft , yeah.We also need , at least in the U.S. and probably elsewhere , representatives and senators that are financially responsible individuals as a whole.I blew a gasket and wrote my senators and representative about the OMFG unbelievable passing of the senate bill that boosts government spending by 12 percent AND gives government employees a two percent raise .
Why ? Well , given the financial condition of the country and the already outrageous borrowing that has already been done , they are setting things up so that we have to borrow * even more * .So , not only have past and current Administrations , Houses and Senates made things * worse * , but they are doing things to make the future even worse ! The U.S. is going to hell in a hand basket , and our politicians are happily helping it along at a faster and faster pace .
It un-f * cking-believable , to say the least .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pfft, yeah.We also need, at least in the U.S. and probably elsewhere, representatives and senators that are financially responsible individuals as a whole.I blew a gasket and wrote my senators and representative about the OMFG unbelievable passing of the senate bill that boosts government spending by 12 percent AND gives government employees a two percent raise.
Why? Well, given the financial condition of the country and the already outrageous borrowing that has already been done, they are setting things up so that we have to borrow *even more*.So, not only have past and current Administrations, Houses and Senates made things *worse*, but they are doing things to make the future even worse!The U.S. is going to hell in a hand basket, and our politicians are happily helping it along at a faster and faster pace.
It un-f*cking-believable, to say the least.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432052</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434150</id>
	<title>exiciting times!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260821340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a cyberpunk RPG'r, I'm excited for the opportunity to live just a little cyberpunk.</p><p>It's starting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a cyberpunk RPG'r , I 'm excited for the opportunity to live just a little cyberpunk.It 's starting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a cyberpunk RPG'r, I'm excited for the opportunity to live just a little cyberpunk.It's starting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433396</id>
	<title>Re:Worse than terrorism.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260817320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>These global organizations, as well as global governance, are a far bigger threat to freedom and democracy than terrorism ever could be.</p></div><p>You sure got that right. WTO, IMF and the world bank == the NWO, nothing democratic or free about them.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>These global organizations , as well as global governance , are a far bigger threat to freedom and democracy than terrorism ever could be.You sure got that right .
WTO , IMF and the world bank = = the NWO , nothing democratic or free about them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These global organizations, as well as global governance, are a far bigger threat to freedom and democracy than terrorism ever could be.You sure got that right.
WTO, IMF and the world bank == the NWO, nothing democratic or free about them.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432052</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433686</id>
	<title>Where's the "skeptics"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260818880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where's the "skeptics"? Where are they when you need someone to throw great vitriol at the idea of One World Government?</p><p>We had plenty of them on anything that turned to global warming, so where are they now???</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where 's the " skeptics " ?
Where are they when you need someone to throw great vitriol at the idea of One World Government ? We had plenty of them on anything that turned to global warming , so where are they now ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where's the "skeptics"?
Where are they when you need someone to throw great vitriol at the idea of One World Government?We had plenty of them on anything that turned to global warming, so where are they now??
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432594</id>
	<title>Not Enough</title>
	<author>Das Auge</author>
	<datestamp>1260813540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When is it okay for me to start killing them?</htmltext>
<tokenext>When is it okay for me to start killing them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When is it okay for me to start killing them?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30431938</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432032</id>
	<title>Doubleplusnotgood!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260810900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I get a very bad feeling about international DCMA. It is bad enough the US citizens bent over and allowed the DCMA to be delivered, but now?<br><br>Next thing, I'll be sitting in jail for trying to solve a Rubik's Cube by taking it apart.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I get a very bad feeling about international DCMA .
It is bad enough the US citizens bent over and allowed the DCMA to be delivered , but now ? Next thing , I 'll be sitting in jail for trying to solve a Rubik 's Cube by taking it apart .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I get a very bad feeling about international DCMA.
It is bad enough the US citizens bent over and allowed the DCMA to be delivered, but now?Next thing, I'll be sitting in jail for trying to solve a Rubik's Cube by taking it apart.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432324</id>
	<title>DDOS on the law?</title>
	<author>dshk</author>
	<datestamp>1260812460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There seems to be a way to screw the three-strike scheme:<br>At least a third of the adult internet subscribers of a country starts to illegally download a song, then they report themself to the police. The author of that song guarantees that he will not seek any damages. Neither the police is able to handle so many cases, nor it is acceptable for the government to disconnect millions of Internet subscribers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There seems to be a way to screw the three-strike scheme : At least a third of the adult internet subscribers of a country starts to illegally download a song , then they report themself to the police .
The author of that song guarantees that he will not seek any damages .
Neither the police is able to handle so many cases , nor it is acceptable for the government to disconnect millions of Internet subscribers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There seems to be a way to screw the three-strike scheme:At least a third of the adult internet subscribers of a country starts to illegally download a song, then they report themself to the police.
The author of that song guarantees that he will not seek any damages.
Neither the police is able to handle so many cases, nor it is acceptable for the government to disconnect millions of Internet subscribers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432360</id>
	<title>New World Order</title>
	<author>kurt555gs</author>
	<datestamp>1260812640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ever wonder what that phrase meant?</p><p>It means a few elite rich folks controlling, well, everyone else regardless of silly little local laws or constitutions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ever wonder what that phrase meant ? It means a few elite rich folks controlling , well , everyone else regardless of silly little local laws or constitutions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ever wonder what that phrase meant?It means a few elite rich folks controlling, well, everyone else regardless of silly little local laws or constitutions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432196</id>
	<title>DMCA induced Economic collapse</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260811680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As far as I'm concerned the more they tighted and restrict what I can do with something I bought, the less I'm inclined to even buy anything (and no, not pirating).</p><p>If enough people feel this way, watch the sales tank . . . .</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As far as I 'm concerned the more they tighted and restrict what I can do with something I bought , the less I 'm inclined to even buy anything ( and no , not pirating ) .If enough people feel this way , watch the sales tank .
. .
.</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As far as I'm concerned the more they tighted and restrict what I can do with something I bought, the less I'm inclined to even buy anything (and no, not pirating).If enough people feel this way, watch the sales tank .
. .
.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434476</id>
	<title>Re:Bring it on</title>
	<author>ItsJustAPseudonym</author>
	<datestamp>1260822900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Question: In the U.S., isn't the Executive Branch the only branch of government that is currently involved in the ACTA negotiations?<br>
<br>
That would mean that U.S. citizens can't even write to their (our) representatives about it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Question : In the U.S. , is n't the Executive Branch the only branch of government that is currently involved in the ACTA negotiations ?
That would mean that U.S. citizens ca n't even write to their ( our ) representatives about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Question: In the U.S., isn't the Executive Branch the only branch of government that is currently involved in the ACTA negotiations?
That would mean that U.S. citizens can't even write to their (our) representatives about it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432532</id>
	<title>The Results of Being Off The Net</title>
	<author>pky666</author>
	<datestamp>1260813300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>
You may recall the
<a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/video/google\_opt\_out\_feature\_lets\_users" title="theonion.com" rel="nofollow">
funny little article from "The Onion"</a> [theonion.com]
that discussed Google's new opt out feature that allowed paranoid users to remove any traces of their online presence.  The three strikes law for DMCA violations would simply add you to this list without going to all the troubles of signing up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You may recall the funny little article from " The Onion " [ theonion.com ] that discussed Google 's new opt out feature that allowed paranoid users to remove any traces of their online presence .
The three strikes law for DMCA violations would simply add you to this list without going to all the troubles of signing up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
You may recall the

funny little article from "The Onion" [theonion.com]
that discussed Google's new opt out feature that allowed paranoid users to remove any traces of their online presence.
The three strikes law for DMCA violations would simply add you to this list without going to all the troubles of signing up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432350</id>
	<title>Re:Yes, help creative commons, open source etc.</title>
	<author>filesiteguy</author>
	<datestamp>1260812640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Currently, OSS distributions cannot send out - for example - CSS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content\_Scramble\_System) code in many countries due to things like the DCMA.  However, it can easily be downloaded from other countries, where the DCMA is not in effect. This allows one to play DVD's using MPlayer or VLC without worrying about the local authorities knocking on one's door.<br><br>Given this bastard law, one wouldn't be able to download code regardless.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Currently , OSS distributions can not send out - for example - CSS ( http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content \ _Scramble \ _System ) code in many countries due to things like the DCMA .
However , it can easily be downloaded from other countries , where the DCMA is not in effect .
This allows one to play DVD 's using MPlayer or VLC without worrying about the local authorities knocking on one 's door.Given this bastard law , one would n't be able to download code regardless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Currently, OSS distributions cannot send out - for example - CSS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content\_Scramble\_System) code in many countries due to things like the DCMA.
However, it can easily be downloaded from other countries, where the DCMA is not in effect.
This allows one to play DVD's using MPlayer or VLC without worrying about the local authorities knocking on one's door.Given this bastard law, one wouldn't be able to download code regardless.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432130</id>
	<title>Bring it on</title>
	<author>frenchbedroom</author>
	<datestamp>1260811440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The harder they push in this direction, the more people will realize there is <a href="http://creativecommons.org/" title="creativecommons.org" rel="nofollow">another way</a> [creativecommons.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The harder they push in this direction , the more people will realize there is another way [ creativecommons.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The harder they push in this direction, the more people will realize there is another way [creativecommons.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434122</id>
	<title>Re:Wow.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260821100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>$ISSUE awareness needs to reach as far as it possibly can.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..  The maximum must be brought to light before the widest audience. If that means dupe stories, then I'm all for dupes.</p></div></blockquote><p>People who forward me emails about Amber Alerts, find-a-home-for-this-dog, Obama-has-no-birth-certificate, Teabaggers-are-pro-big-government hypocrits, etc probably feel the same way.  And yet, at some point, it becomes constant noise so I ignore it <em>all</em>.</p><p>One idea is to think that at some level of seriousness/importance, you draw a line: some stuff is ok to spam, some isn't.  But everyone has different feelings about what's important and what isn't.  If I complain about your spammy Amber Alerts, does that mean I hate children?</p><p>This leads to a better idea than drawing a line that "important" things may cross, and unimportant things may not cross : <em>don't</em> draw a line, and just say, "No spam, no matter how important it is."  People can always read the original story, and if they don't, work on making it easier to find, or create more pointers to it and endorsements.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>$ ISSUE awareness needs to reach as far as it possibly can .
.. The maximum must be brought to light before the widest audience .
If that means dupe stories , then I 'm all for dupes.People who forward me emails about Amber Alerts , find-a-home-for-this-dog , Obama-has-no-birth-certificate , Teabaggers-are-pro-big-government hypocrits , etc probably feel the same way .
And yet , at some point , it becomes constant noise so I ignore it all.One idea is to think that at some level of seriousness/importance , you draw a line : some stuff is ok to spam , some is n't .
But everyone has different feelings about what 's important and what is n't .
If I complain about your spammy Amber Alerts , does that mean I hate children ? This leads to a better idea than drawing a line that " important " things may cross , and unimportant things may not cross : do n't draw a line , and just say , " No spam , no matter how important it is .
" People can always read the original story , and if they do n't , work on making it easier to find , or create more pointers to it and endorsements .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$ISSUE awareness needs to reach as far as it possibly can.
..  The maximum must be brought to light before the widest audience.
If that means dupe stories, then I'm all for dupes.People who forward me emails about Amber Alerts, find-a-home-for-this-dog, Obama-has-no-birth-certificate, Teabaggers-are-pro-big-government hypocrits, etc probably feel the same way.
And yet, at some point, it becomes constant noise so I ignore it all.One idea is to think that at some level of seriousness/importance, you draw a line: some stuff is ok to spam, some isn't.
But everyone has different feelings about what's important and what isn't.
If I complain about your spammy Amber Alerts, does that mean I hate children?This leads to a better idea than drawing a line that "important" things may cross, and unimportant things may not cross : don't draw a line, and just say, "No spam, no matter how important it is.
"  People can always read the original story, and if they don't, work on making it easier to find, or create more pointers to it and endorsements.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30441800</id>
	<title>Re:Bring it on</title>
	<author>IBBoard</author>
	<datestamp>1260871920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That only works with physical things. Disconnecting an Internet account is trivial compared to imprisoning someone (which is what you'd need for physical civil disobedience). The level of technical competence of the user will vary the amount of time before they try (potentially unsuccessfully if there is a common blacklist) to get back online, but the mass disconnecting shouldn't be all that difficult.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That only works with physical things .
Disconnecting an Internet account is trivial compared to imprisoning someone ( which is what you 'd need for physical civil disobedience ) .
The level of technical competence of the user will vary the amount of time before they try ( potentially unsuccessfully if there is a common blacklist ) to get back online , but the mass disconnecting should n't be all that difficult .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That only works with physical things.
Disconnecting an Internet account is trivial compared to imprisoning someone (which is what you'd need for physical civil disobedience).
The level of technical competence of the user will vary the amount of time before they try (potentially unsuccessfully if there is a common blacklist) to get back online, but the mass disconnecting shouldn't be all that difficult.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432536</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432814</id>
	<title>Timeline?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260814440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So can we get to a different timeline where the DMCA didn't happen? Anybody got a time machine (or combination of stargates and solar flares)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So can we get to a different timeline where the DMCA did n't happen ?
Anybody got a time machine ( or combination of stargates and solar flares )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So can we get to a different timeline where the DMCA didn't happen?
Anybody got a time machine (or combination of stargates and solar flares)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433432</id>
	<title>Who cares?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260817560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Negotiate in secret all you like, we'll see the finished product when Congress attempts to ratify it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Negotiate in secret all you like , we 'll see the finished product when Congress attempts to ratify it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Negotiate in secret all you like, we'll see the finished product when Congress attempts to ratify it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432448</id>
	<title>Easy solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260812940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's take on politics then: http://www.piratpartiet.se/international/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's take on politics then : http : //www.piratpartiet.se/international/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's take on politics then: http://www.piratpartiet.se/international/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432864</id>
	<title>Re:Wow.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260814620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My view is, that the Internet by its very definition does not make it possible for such a treaty to be any more that a pipe dream.</p><p>We already have darknets, wich are way beyond the grasp of any legislation. They would have to literally shut down the internet, to even stop it for more than a month. After that everyone would just have a personal net with all the wlan nodes around, completely and literally routing around the net. Everyone who knows how to do it, will do it. And everybody else will ask those, to do it for them. Even if that becomes illegal, it will become like selling weed. (A war long lost.) But it won&rsquo;t ever stop.<br>Because inside, everybody knows what is right and wrong. And that ACTA is not right. Even the hypocrites who say the opposite, secretly use Bittorrent.</p><p>Until there is nothing else left for them, than to give up.</p><p>First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My view is , that the Internet by its very definition does not make it possible for such a treaty to be any more that a pipe dream.We already have darknets , wich are way beyond the grasp of any legislation .
They would have to literally shut down the internet , to even stop it for more than a month .
After that everyone would just have a personal net with all the wlan nodes around , completely and literally routing around the net .
Everyone who knows how to do it , will do it .
And everybody else will ask those , to do it for them .
Even if that becomes illegal , it will become like selling weed .
( A war long lost .
) But it won    t ever stop.Because inside , everybody knows what is right and wrong .
And that ACTA is not right .
Even the hypocrites who say the opposite , secretly use Bittorrent.Until there is nothing else left for them , than to give up.First they ignore you , then they ridicule you , then they fight you , then you win .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My view is, that the Internet by its very definition does not make it possible for such a treaty to be any more that a pipe dream.We already have darknets, wich are way beyond the grasp of any legislation.
They would have to literally shut down the internet, to even stop it for more than a month.
After that everyone would just have a personal net with all the wlan nodes around, completely and literally routing around the net.
Everyone who knows how to do it, will do it.
And everybody else will ask those, to do it for them.
Even if that becomes illegal, it will become like selling weed.
(A war long lost.
) But it won’t ever stop.Because inside, everybody knows what is right and wrong.
And that ACTA is not right.
Even the hypocrites who say the opposite, secretly use Bittorrent.Until there is nothing else left for them, than to give up.First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30435516</id>
	<title>Re:Emailgate</title>
	<author>wall0159</author>
	<datestamp>1260785460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, I agree. If only there was a wealthy and powerful opposition to the global DMCA to fund such a thing (like probably occurred with the global warming docs).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , I agree .
If only there was a wealthy and powerful opposition to the global DMCA to fund such a thing ( like probably occurred with the global warming docs ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, I agree.
If only there was a wealthy and powerful opposition to the global DMCA to fund such a thing (like probably occurred with the global warming docs).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30431938</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432528</id>
	<title>Re:and this changes what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260813300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;Intellectual property is an invention of the rich countries</p><p>Or, you know, people just wanted to make money off their creations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Intellectual property is an invention of the rich countriesOr , you know , people just wanted to make money off their creations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;Intellectual property is an invention of the rich countriesOr, you know, people just wanted to make money off their creations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432226</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433526</id>
	<title>Re:Emailgate</title>
	<author>Pete Venkman</author>
	<datestamp>1260818220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If someone did leak more documents, do you think the news would cover it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If someone did leak more documents , do you think the news would cover it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If someone did leak more documents, do you think the news would cover it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30431938</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30448794</id>
	<title>Re:Bring it on</title>
	<author>sowth</author>
	<datestamp>1260910080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One necessary thing is stiff penalties for anyone who submits false copyright infringement claims. There are stiff penalties for infringing copyrights, which some claim is "stealing" (they are two different things). However a crime which is much more close to stealing is almost always unpunished. Fraudulently taking down a work infringes on the freedom of the person who made the work.

</p><p>It is not any different than someone who claims you stole the car you are driving, and elicits the help of police or others to "take it back." Really, that is stealing. I don't think copyright infringement is a great idea, but at least copying other's works does not prohibit them from using it or them from allowing others to use it.

</p><p>It is similar when a company abuses copyright law to lock down their product so you are only able to use it as they approve. You bought it, it is yours. Maybe you shouldn't be allowed to copy the ROM and such, but they shouldn't be allowed to deliberately lock you out from modding it. Saying it prevents "evil pirates" from copying games or some crap is bullshit. Under the right conditions, my ass can copy newsprint. Should I be required to sugically remove my ass now?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One necessary thing is stiff penalties for anyone who submits false copyright infringement claims .
There are stiff penalties for infringing copyrights , which some claim is " stealing " ( they are two different things ) .
However a crime which is much more close to stealing is almost always unpunished .
Fraudulently taking down a work infringes on the freedom of the person who made the work .
It is not any different than someone who claims you stole the car you are driving , and elicits the help of police or others to " take it back .
" Really , that is stealing .
I do n't think copyright infringement is a great idea , but at least copying other 's works does not prohibit them from using it or them from allowing others to use it .
It is similar when a company abuses copyright law to lock down their product so you are only able to use it as they approve .
You bought it , it is yours .
Maybe you should n't be allowed to copy the ROM and such , but they should n't be allowed to deliberately lock you out from modding it .
Saying it prevents " evil pirates " from copying games or some crap is bullshit .
Under the right conditions , my ass can copy newsprint .
Should I be required to sugically remove my ass now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One necessary thing is stiff penalties for anyone who submits false copyright infringement claims.
There are stiff penalties for infringing copyrights, which some claim is "stealing" (they are two different things).
However a crime which is much more close to stealing is almost always unpunished.
Fraudulently taking down a work infringes on the freedom of the person who made the work.
It is not any different than someone who claims you stole the car you are driving, and elicits the help of police or others to "take it back.
" Really, that is stealing.
I don't think copyright infringement is a great idea, but at least copying other's works does not prohibit them from using it or them from allowing others to use it.
It is similar when a company abuses copyright law to lock down their product so you are only able to use it as they approve.
You bought it, it is yours.
Maybe you shouldn't be allowed to copy the ROM and such, but they shouldn't be allowed to deliberately lock you out from modding it.
Saying it prevents "evil pirates" from copying games or some crap is bullshit.
Under the right conditions, my ass can copy newsprint.
Should I be required to sugically remove my ass now?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432458</id>
	<title>Re:read your history books, corporate goons</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260812940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>agree here.</p><p>check out the world bank and how it uses treaties as qualification and compliance requirements in order to get loans from them.</p><p>this is another way of forcing treaties onto countries.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>agree here.check out the world bank and how it uses treaties as qualification and compliance requirements in order to get loans from them.this is another way of forcing treaties onto countries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>agree here.check out the world bank and how it uses treaties as qualification and compliance requirements in order to get loans from them.this is another way of forcing treaties onto countries.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434260</id>
	<title>Re:Wow.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260821880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>ACTA awareness needs to reach as far as it possibly can. We are, quite literally, talking about the future of the world here: A global treaty that promises to have a profound effect upon the freedom of all of us is being negotiated in secret.</i> </p><p>But it is necessary to save the world's climate!  Think of the children!</p><p>Clearly you are just another copyright denier.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ACTA awareness needs to reach as far as it possibly can .
We are , quite literally , talking about the future of the world here : A global treaty that promises to have a profound effect upon the freedom of all of us is being negotiated in secret .
But it is necessary to save the world 's climate !
Think of the children ! Clearly you are just another copyright denier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ACTA awareness needs to reach as far as it possibly can.
We are, quite literally, talking about the future of the world here: A global treaty that promises to have a profound effect upon the freedom of all of us is being negotiated in secret.
But it is necessary to save the world's climate!
Think of the children!Clearly you are just another copyright denier.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432292</id>
	<title>Re:Doubleplusnotgood!</title>
	<author>Penguinisto</author>
	<datestamp>1260812340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, any other route to global domination would be a bit too obvious, dontcha think? I mean, why make blatantly obvious laws that everyone notices immediately? Instead, you can make opaque, confusing, and outright obscure laws to sneak in and swipe individual liberty, one piece at a time, just like seawater eroding a sand castle on the beach. After all, it's far easier to point at a pile of obfuscation and say "don't worry - only those nasty artist-raping copyright pirates will have to worry about it - you're fine". Next, you can impose laws in the name of, oh, "the environment", then "safety", then "health", of course "the children", and then... well, you get the idea. Give it a pretty name, gloss over the ugly parts, and market it, one small piece at a time. As long as the proletariat is comfortable, they won't mind the ride until it's too late to actually do anything about it.</p><p>Besides, fascism-by-bureaucracy is far less messy to accomplish than staging an armed coup. Certainly a bit slower to do, but far more certain (as a bonus, you can condition the masses to actually be comfortable in the new environment. All you have to do is keep them distracted with neat little toys, lots of sexual entertainment, and the occasional celebrity gossip, just like they did it in the old days of Rome...)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , any other route to global domination would be a bit too obvious , dontcha think ?
I mean , why make blatantly obvious laws that everyone notices immediately ?
Instead , you can make opaque , confusing , and outright obscure laws to sneak in and swipe individual liberty , one piece at a time , just like seawater eroding a sand castle on the beach .
After all , it 's far easier to point at a pile of obfuscation and say " do n't worry - only those nasty artist-raping copyright pirates will have to worry about it - you 're fine " .
Next , you can impose laws in the name of , oh , " the environment " , then " safety " , then " health " , of course " the children " , and then... well , you get the idea .
Give it a pretty name , gloss over the ugly parts , and market it , one small piece at a time .
As long as the proletariat is comfortable , they wo n't mind the ride until it 's too late to actually do anything about it.Besides , fascism-by-bureaucracy is far less messy to accomplish than staging an armed coup .
Certainly a bit slower to do , but far more certain ( as a bonus , you can condition the masses to actually be comfortable in the new environment .
All you have to do is keep them distracted with neat little toys , lots of sexual entertainment , and the occasional celebrity gossip , just like they did it in the old days of Rome... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, any other route to global domination would be a bit too obvious, dontcha think?
I mean, why make blatantly obvious laws that everyone notices immediately?
Instead, you can make opaque, confusing, and outright obscure laws to sneak in and swipe individual liberty, one piece at a time, just like seawater eroding a sand castle on the beach.
After all, it's far easier to point at a pile of obfuscation and say "don't worry - only those nasty artist-raping copyright pirates will have to worry about it - you're fine".
Next, you can impose laws in the name of, oh, "the environment", then "safety", then "health", of course "the children", and then... well, you get the idea.
Give it a pretty name, gloss over the ugly parts, and market it, one small piece at a time.
As long as the proletariat is comfortable, they won't mind the ride until it's too late to actually do anything about it.Besides, fascism-by-bureaucracy is far less messy to accomplish than staging an armed coup.
Certainly a bit slower to do, but far more certain (as a bonus, you can condition the masses to actually be comfortable in the new environment.
All you have to do is keep them distracted with neat little toys, lots of sexual entertainment, and the occasional celebrity gossip, just like they did it in the old days of Rome...)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434086</id>
	<title>Re:read your history books, corporate goons</title>
	<author>Yvan256</author>
	<datestamp>1260820920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Haikus are easy<br>But sometimes they don't make sense<br>Refrigerator</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Haikus are easyBut sometimes they do n't make senseRefrigerator</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Haikus are easyBut sometimes they don't make senseRefrigerator</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433914</id>
	<title>It's not just RIAA/MPAA</title>
	<author>microbox</author>
	<datestamp>1260819960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Our economic system is predicated on perpetual growth -- and business interests have talked about IP as the new "gold" for decades. It is not an evil conspiracy, but rather, politicians and business leaders believe that they need to enact these laws for our system to continue to grow. It's not just the RIAA and MPAA, it's also the big phama and agricultural firms.<br>
<br>
Personally, I think it is bullocks dreamed up by people who never created art in their entire lives. Nobody is going to pay for "IP" when they need food on the table. Furthermore, these laws will be used to silence the critics of political interests.<br>
<br>
It is precisely the free exchange of ideas that creates intellectual wealth, which is why these laws are fundamentally counter-productive in their goals.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Our economic system is predicated on perpetual growth -- and business interests have talked about IP as the new " gold " for decades .
It is not an evil conspiracy , but rather , politicians and business leaders believe that they need to enact these laws for our system to continue to grow .
It 's not just the RIAA and MPAA , it 's also the big phama and agricultural firms .
Personally , I think it is bullocks dreamed up by people who never created art in their entire lives .
Nobody is going to pay for " IP " when they need food on the table .
Furthermore , these laws will be used to silence the critics of political interests .
It is precisely the free exchange of ideas that creates intellectual wealth , which is why these laws are fundamentally counter-productive in their goals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Our economic system is predicated on perpetual growth -- and business interests have talked about IP as the new "gold" for decades.
It is not an evil conspiracy, but rather, politicians and business leaders believe that they need to enact these laws for our system to continue to grow.
It's not just the RIAA and MPAA, it's also the big phama and agricultural firms.
Personally, I think it is bullocks dreamed up by people who never created art in their entire lives.
Nobody is going to pay for "IP" when they need food on the table.
Furthermore, these laws will be used to silence the critics of political interests.
It is precisely the free exchange of ideas that creates intellectual wealth, which is why these laws are fundamentally counter-productive in their goals.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432638</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432666</id>
	<title>technology tames the law</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260813780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Technology can't even finish that fucking movie of yours.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Technology ca n't even finish that fucking movie of yours .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Technology can't even finish that fucking movie of yours.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432264</id>
	<title>sneaky...</title>
	<author>gedw99</author>
	<datestamp>1260812160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Lets face it. The "authorities" have now realised that the internet allows people to collaborate and learn openly whats really going on in the world, and how the puzzle fits togther.

this to them is danderous.
the cat is out of the bag, and now they are trying to gain control over it so they can manage the leaks as it were.

Its crucial that the internet remain fully open !!!! Its thats simple.

More groups that support open information should be targettting these groups hard. This is the type of thing that the authorities will try to slide in to legislation as part of trade agreements like they do with all the other things.

Dont support treaty x, y and z - Sorry you cant trade with us. Its really insidious and smart tactic they use.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lets face it .
The " authorities " have now realised that the internet allows people to collaborate and learn openly whats really going on in the world , and how the puzzle fits togther .
this to them is danderous .
the cat is out of the bag , and now they are trying to gain control over it so they can manage the leaks as it were .
Its crucial that the internet remain fully open ! ! ! !
Its thats simple .
More groups that support open information should be targettting these groups hard .
This is the type of thing that the authorities will try to slide in to legislation as part of trade agreements like they do with all the other things .
Dont support treaty x , y and z - Sorry you cant trade with us .
Its really insidious and smart tactic they use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lets face it.
The "authorities" have now realised that the internet allows people to collaborate and learn openly whats really going on in the world, and how the puzzle fits togther.
this to them is danderous.
the cat is out of the bag, and now they are trying to gain control over it so they can manage the leaks as it were.
Its crucial that the internet remain fully open !!!!
Its thats simple.
More groups that support open information should be targettting these groups hard.
This is the type of thing that the authorities will try to slide in to legislation as part of trade agreements like they do with all the other things.
Dont support treaty x, y and z - Sorry you cant trade with us.
Its really insidious and smart tactic they use.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434536</id>
	<title>Re:Bring it on</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260823380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sadly, the path that has been suggested here, leads to creative commons becoming outlawed, if not illegal.</p><p>This will ultimately split the creative crowd to a degree never imagined. You'll have industry, and independent, except independent will be locked out to the grass roots and fringe of society, because everything else will be owned by Corporations. You want to advertise using 'this format'? Sorry, we only support this, and that, both of which require this license, and that software, which can be bought over there.</p><p>Competition is the only thing that keeps free markets at bay. OSS, and open formats which I fully support in every way shape and form, can not keep the monster that is Capitalism at bay. The higher education in this country has indoctrinated far too many for that ideology to go away in the next half century.</p><p>It's both sad and tragic that the DMCA came from the most free* nation on the planet, yet stinks of a Totalitarian nature.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sadly , the path that has been suggested here , leads to creative commons becoming outlawed , if not illegal.This will ultimately split the creative crowd to a degree never imagined .
You 'll have industry , and independent , except independent will be locked out to the grass roots and fringe of society , because everything else will be owned by Corporations .
You want to advertise using 'this format ' ?
Sorry , we only support this , and that , both of which require this license , and that software , which can be bought over there.Competition is the only thing that keeps free markets at bay .
OSS , and open formats which I fully support in every way shape and form , can not keep the monster that is Capitalism at bay .
The higher education in this country has indoctrinated far too many for that ideology to go away in the next half century.It 's both sad and tragic that the DMCA came from the most free * nation on the planet , yet stinks of a Totalitarian nature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sadly, the path that has been suggested here, leads to creative commons becoming outlawed, if not illegal.This will ultimately split the creative crowd to a degree never imagined.
You'll have industry, and independent, except independent will be locked out to the grass roots and fringe of society, because everything else will be owned by Corporations.
You want to advertise using 'this format'?
Sorry, we only support this, and that, both of which require this license, and that software, which can be bought over there.Competition is the only thing that keeps free markets at bay.
OSS, and open formats which I fully support in every way shape and form, can not keep the monster that is Capitalism at bay.
The higher education in this country has indoctrinated far too many for that ideology to go away in the next half century.It's both sad and tragic that the DMCA came from the most free* nation on the planet, yet stinks of a Totalitarian nature.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432130</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30436056</id>
	<title>Re:Worse than terrorism.</title>
	<author>nido</author>
	<datestamp>1260788040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good points, all. I just have a short comment.</p><p><i>NAFTA and treaties with various third-world countries have destroyed the American manufacturing base.</i></p><p>You're surely talking about the massive loss in manufacturing jobs in the U.S. over the past 30+ years. While many of these job losses are due to so-called "free trade" treaties, automation via computers has also taken many jobs. Cool stuff is still made in the U.S., just not a whole lot of consumer-grade stuff.</p><p>For example, I met a man about 6 months ago who has a machine shop that makes tubes for telescopes and other similar projects. IIRC, he employed himself and his wife. 25 years ago, he would have needed a machinist for each machine in his shop...</p><p><i>The American economy will not recover until those treaties are abandoned and manufacturing comes back to America. </i></p><p>I think the problem is debt. The American economy will not recover until <a href="http://www.realitysandwich.com/?q=money\_and\_crisis\_civilization" title="realitysandwich.com">the debt problem</a> [realitysandwich.com] is resolved. Once that's accomplished (possibly via <a href="http://www.webofdebt.com/" title="webofdebt.com">state-owned banks</a> [webofdebt.com]), the economy will quickly take care of itself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good points , all .
I just have a short comment.NAFTA and treaties with various third-world countries have destroyed the American manufacturing base.You 're surely talking about the massive loss in manufacturing jobs in the U.S. over the past 30 + years .
While many of these job losses are due to so-called " free trade " treaties , automation via computers has also taken many jobs .
Cool stuff is still made in the U.S. , just not a whole lot of consumer-grade stuff.For example , I met a man about 6 months ago who has a machine shop that makes tubes for telescopes and other similar projects .
IIRC , he employed himself and his wife .
25 years ago , he would have needed a machinist for each machine in his shop...The American economy will not recover until those treaties are abandoned and manufacturing comes back to America .
I think the problem is debt .
The American economy will not recover until the debt problem [ realitysandwich.com ] is resolved .
Once that 's accomplished ( possibly via state-owned banks [ webofdebt.com ] ) , the economy will quickly take care of itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good points, all.
I just have a short comment.NAFTA and treaties with various third-world countries have destroyed the American manufacturing base.You're surely talking about the massive loss in manufacturing jobs in the U.S. over the past 30+ years.
While many of these job losses are due to so-called "free trade" treaties, automation via computers has also taken many jobs.
Cool stuff is still made in the U.S., just not a whole lot of consumer-grade stuff.For example, I met a man about 6 months ago who has a machine shop that makes tubes for telescopes and other similar projects.
IIRC, he employed himself and his wife.
25 years ago, he would have needed a machinist for each machine in his shop...The American economy will not recover until those treaties are abandoned and manufacturing comes back to America.
I think the problem is debt.
The American economy will not recover until the debt problem [realitysandwich.com] is resolved.
Once that's accomplished (possibly via state-owned banks [webofdebt.com]), the economy will quickly take care of itself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432052</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432446</id>
	<title>All I can say is...</title>
	<author>Penguinisto</author>
	<datestamp>1260812940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...if you're not participating in <a href="http://freenetproject.org/" title="freenetproject.org">FreeNet</a> [freenetproject.org] by now, you'd damned well better start. It's likely to be the last place left (assuming it isn't outlawed).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...if you 're not participating in FreeNet [ freenetproject.org ] by now , you 'd damned well better start .
It 's likely to be the last place left ( assuming it is n't outlawed ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...if you're not participating in FreeNet [freenetproject.org] by now, you'd damned well better start.
It's likely to be the last place left (assuming it isn't outlawed).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30435094</id>
	<title>Re:and this changes what?</title>
	<author>schon</author>
	<datestamp>1260782940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I happen to think that I own the toil of my hands and the ingenuity of my mind.</p></div><p>You can think whatever you like, it doesn't make it correct.</p><p>Say you walk by a construction site after everyone's gone home, and decide you're gonna use the materials there to build a house.  Do you own the house?   After all, it was done with "the toil of your hands and the ingenuity of your mind".</p><p>But no - you will find that the owners of the materials and the land own the house, not you.  And *they* will be the ones that have "exclusive control" over it.</p><p>Creativity does not occur in a vacuum.  Writing music, drawing, sculpting, story writing - these are *all* built upon the work of others.  When you go to school and study how to become a painter, you start by examining the works of other artists.  We learn how to be great artists by studying the works of others, and incorporating their methods into our own.   If you disagree, I challenge you to create something that does not incorporate any prior work or idea from anyone else - if you are delusional, you might even think you will succeed.. but it wouldn't take anyone familiar with the medium to find similar elements "stolen" from others.</p><p>Since these works have no tangible goods they do not belong to anyone, but in order to encourage creation the government has graciously granted the authors the right to exclude others from copying them for a period of time.  Make no mistake - you cannot own culture or ideas.  You can be granted the exclusive right to profit from it, but you cannot own it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I happen to think that I own the toil of my hands and the ingenuity of my mind.You can think whatever you like , it does n't make it correct.Say you walk by a construction site after everyone 's gone home , and decide you 're gon na use the materials there to build a house .
Do you own the house ?
After all , it was done with " the toil of your hands and the ingenuity of your mind " .But no - you will find that the owners of the materials and the land own the house , not you .
And * they * will be the ones that have " exclusive control " over it.Creativity does not occur in a vacuum .
Writing music , drawing , sculpting , story writing - these are * all * built upon the work of others .
When you go to school and study how to become a painter , you start by examining the works of other artists .
We learn how to be great artists by studying the works of others , and incorporating their methods into our own .
If you disagree , I challenge you to create something that does not incorporate any prior work or idea from anyone else - if you are delusional , you might even think you will succeed.. but it would n't take anyone familiar with the medium to find similar elements " stolen " from others.Since these works have no tangible goods they do not belong to anyone , but in order to encourage creation the government has graciously granted the authors the right to exclude others from copying them for a period of time .
Make no mistake - you can not own culture or ideas .
You can be granted the exclusive right to profit from it , but you can not own it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I happen to think that I own the toil of my hands and the ingenuity of my mind.You can think whatever you like, it doesn't make it correct.Say you walk by a construction site after everyone's gone home, and decide you're gonna use the materials there to build a house.
Do you own the house?
After all, it was done with "the toil of your hands and the ingenuity of your mind".But no - you will find that the owners of the materials and the land own the house, not you.
And *they* will be the ones that have "exclusive control" over it.Creativity does not occur in a vacuum.
Writing music, drawing, sculpting, story writing - these are *all* built upon the work of others.
When you go to school and study how to become a painter, you start by examining the works of other artists.
We learn how to be great artists by studying the works of others, and incorporating their methods into our own.
If you disagree, I challenge you to create something that does not incorporate any prior work or idea from anyone else - if you are delusional, you might even think you will succeed.. but it wouldn't take anyone familiar with the medium to find similar elements "stolen" from others.Since these works have no tangible goods they do not belong to anyone, but in order to encourage creation the government has graciously granted the authors the right to exclude others from copying them for a period of time.
Make no mistake - you cannot own culture or ideas.
You can be granted the exclusive right to profit from it, but you cannot own it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434130</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30439880</id>
	<title>Re:sneaky...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260807720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is... we don't. That is, most of us won't. Most people won't be knowledgeable enough, and most people won't even care.</p><p>A few people may be able to do that and actually utilise the possibility but would it reach the mass to actually have any effect on any real decision-making? Information is necessary but not sufficient -- a few might have the information but that alone doesn't guarantee practical results. You'd need the mass for that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is... we do n't .
That is , most of us wo n't .
Most people wo n't be knowledgeable enough , and most people wo n't even care.A few people may be able to do that and actually utilise the possibility but would it reach the mass to actually have any effect on any real decision-making ?
Information is necessary but not sufficient -- a few might have the information but that alone does n't guarantee practical results .
You 'd need the mass for that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is... we don't.
That is, most of us won't.
Most people won't be knowledgeable enough, and most people won't even care.A few people may be able to do that and actually utilise the possibility but would it reach the mass to actually have any effect on any real decision-making?
Information is necessary but not sufficient -- a few might have the information but that alone doesn't guarantee practical results.
You'd need the mass for that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433012</id>
	<title>Re:sneaky...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260815340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Its crucial that the internet remain fully open !!!! Its thats simple.</p></div><p>Nah. Not even. If only one single stream of communication remains open, that&rsquo;s enough to pipe the whole internet trough. If we have, we pipe every tcp/ip packet trough twitter. If we have, we form direct wlan-to-wlan nets. We do not even need providers in any city of reasonable size. Soon with mobile phones, this will even become bigger. In theory, you can use any mobile phone as a gateway.</p><p>The can/box, and it won&rsquo;t ever close again. It&rsquo;s that simple.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Its crucial that the internet remain fully open ! ! ! !
Its thats simple.Nah .
Not even .
If only one single stream of communication remains open , that    s enough to pipe the whole internet trough .
If we have , we pipe every tcp/ip packet trough twitter .
If we have , we form direct wlan-to-wlan nets .
We do not even need providers in any city of reasonable size .
Soon with mobile phones , this will even become bigger .
In theory , you can use any mobile phone as a gateway.The can/box , and it won    t ever close again .
It    s that simple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its crucial that the internet remain fully open !!!!
Its thats simple.Nah.
Not even.
If only one single stream of communication remains open, that’s enough to pipe the whole internet trough.
If we have, we pipe every tcp/ip packet trough twitter.
If we have, we form direct wlan-to-wlan nets.
We do not even need providers in any city of reasonable size.
Soon with mobile phones, this will even become bigger.
In theory, you can use any mobile phone as a gateway.The can/box, and it won’t ever close again.
It’s that simple.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432264</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432422</id>
	<title>Re:and this changes what?</title>
	<author>gedw99</author>
	<datestamp>1260812880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Patents and intellectual property are one things.</p><p>But this treaty and others go further than that.</p><p>Dont be so simplistic.</p><p>they already enforce that all countries that trade with the US, must respect international treaties. Copyright and intellectual property was one of the first many many years ago.</p><p>the stuff they are pushing through now is much more focused on addressing open information leakage. They want to gain some level of control over information spread.</p><p>Its not just the US. Its the EU. The EU tends to be more socialist in their agenda, and able to also interpret these treaties for what they are.</p><p>But again, the pressure to sign up to these treaties is on the EU parliament too, because they need to trade with the US.</p><p>Now that the EU has a more solid power base, and the US economy has started to falter it does allow the EU much more wriggle room and negotiation room.</p><p>The danger of course is of the EU simply embraces whole heartedly what the US is trying to achieve with these treaties.  In essence the EU then becomes just as draconian as the US.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Patents and intellectual property are one things.But this treaty and others go further than that.Dont be so simplistic.they already enforce that all countries that trade with the US , must respect international treaties .
Copyright and intellectual property was one of the first many many years ago.the stuff they are pushing through now is much more focused on addressing open information leakage .
They want to gain some level of control over information spread.Its not just the US .
Its the EU .
The EU tends to be more socialist in their agenda , and able to also interpret these treaties for what they are.But again , the pressure to sign up to these treaties is on the EU parliament too , because they need to trade with the US.Now that the EU has a more solid power base , and the US economy has started to falter it does allow the EU much more wriggle room and negotiation room.The danger of course is of the EU simply embraces whole heartedly what the US is trying to achieve with these treaties .
In essence the EU then becomes just as draconian as the US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Patents and intellectual property are one things.But this treaty and others go further than that.Dont be so simplistic.they already enforce that all countries that trade with the US, must respect international treaties.
Copyright and intellectual property was one of the first many many years ago.the stuff they are pushing through now is much more focused on addressing open information leakage.
They want to gain some level of control over information spread.Its not just the US.
Its the EU.
The EU tends to be more socialist in their agenda, and able to also interpret these treaties for what they are.But again, the pressure to sign up to these treaties is on the EU parliament too, because they need to trade with the US.Now that the EU has a more solid power base, and the US economy has started to falter it does allow the EU much more wriggle room and negotiation room.The danger of course is of the EU simply embraces whole heartedly what the US is trying to achieve with these treaties.
In essence the EU then becomes just as draconian as the US.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432226</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432368</id>
	<title>Re:Bring it on</title>
	<author>oldspewey</author>
	<datestamp>1260812700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where's the link on that site to download movies and music? Because as tempting as it is to believe people want to build a brighter, DMCA-free future and live in a shiny happy world, for most people the overriding concern is "how can I get hold of the latest music/movie/game?"</p><p>cc.org, cool and noble though it may be, doesn't address that need and therefore will not resonate with 95\% of the people out there. Find a way to make cc.org (or something similar) legitimately compete with the **IA, and you'll be on to something.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where 's the link on that site to download movies and music ?
Because as tempting as it is to believe people want to build a brighter , DMCA-free future and live in a shiny happy world , for most people the overriding concern is " how can I get hold of the latest music/movie/game ?
" cc.org , cool and noble though it may be , does n't address that need and therefore will not resonate with 95 \ % of the people out there .
Find a way to make cc.org ( or something similar ) legitimately compete with the * * IA , and you 'll be on to something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where's the link on that site to download movies and music?
Because as tempting as it is to believe people want to build a brighter, DMCA-free future and live in a shiny happy world, for most people the overriding concern is "how can I get hold of the latest music/movie/game?
"cc.org, cool and noble though it may be, doesn't address that need and therefore will not resonate with 95\% of the people out there.
Find a way to make cc.org (or something similar) legitimately compete with the **IA, and you'll be on to something.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432130</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432638</id>
	<title>You sound like Fox Mulder...</title>
	<author>MikeRT</author>
	<datestamp>1260813660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>That, people, is the true objective of intellectual property. You people think they care about you making pirate copies of CDs and DVDs? How pathetically self-centered! The truth is much bigger than your hard drive contents.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

As a matter of fact, I think they do because there is no other reason why the RIAA and MPAA would go after so many students if they were really just secret imperialistic stooges hoping to maintain our global hegemony. The truth is that the developing world would benefit from greater IP protection, as IP currently has functionally **no** protection in most of it. India in particular would greatly benefit from the sale of a lot more legitimate copies versus illegitimate copies of IP goods.

<br> <br>
Furthermore, your argument falls apart in that if we were really so paranoid about them, we wouldn't be training their students in our universities to the level we are.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That , people , is the true objective of intellectual property .
You people think they care about you making pirate copies of CDs and DVDs ?
How pathetically self-centered !
The truth is much bigger than your hard drive contents .
As a matter of fact , I think they do because there is no other reason why the RIAA and MPAA would go after so many students if they were really just secret imperialistic stooges hoping to maintain our global hegemony .
The truth is that the developing world would benefit from greater IP protection , as IP currently has functionally * * no * * protection in most of it .
India in particular would greatly benefit from the sale of a lot more legitimate copies versus illegitimate copies of IP goods .
Furthermore , your argument falls apart in that if we were really so paranoid about them , we would n't be training their students in our universities to the level we are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That, people, is the true objective of intellectual property.
You people think they care about you making pirate copies of CDs and DVDs?
How pathetically self-centered!
The truth is much bigger than your hard drive contents.
As a matter of fact, I think they do because there is no other reason why the RIAA and MPAA would go after so many students if they were really just secret imperialistic stooges hoping to maintain our global hegemony.
The truth is that the developing world would benefit from greater IP protection, as IP currently has functionally **no** protection in most of it.
India in particular would greatly benefit from the sale of a lot more legitimate copies versus illegitimate copies of IP goods.
Furthermore, your argument falls apart in that if we were really so paranoid about them, we wouldn't be training their students in our universities to the level we are.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432226</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30435662</id>
	<title>Re:Bring it on</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260786180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Never happen.  People will never rebel, not in today's day and age.  People will just keep rolling over and taking it, no matter what.</p><p>I used to think that eventually, things would get bad enough that there'd be enough angry people to create a change.  I've come to see that as only wishful thinking.  The future is such that people are worthless, expendable resources to be mined by big corporations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Never happen .
People will never rebel , not in today 's day and age .
People will just keep rolling over and taking it , no matter what.I used to think that eventually , things would get bad enough that there 'd be enough angry people to create a change .
I 've come to see that as only wishful thinking .
The future is such that people are worthless , expendable resources to be mined by big corporations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Never happen.
People will never rebel, not in today's day and age.
People will just keep rolling over and taking it, no matter what.I used to think that eventually, things would get bad enough that there'd be enough angry people to create a change.
I've come to see that as only wishful thinking.
The future is such that people are worthless, expendable resources to be mined by big corporations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432536</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432334</id>
	<title>Re:Pro-ACTA arguments are disingenuous</title>
	<author>gedw99</author>
	<datestamp>1260812520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, fully agree here.


Once the treaty is in place, the nations will be not allowed to trade unless they support and hence legislate the principles of the treaty into their laws.


This is exactly how its worked in the past. Countries sign up, and then realize that the US and others cant or wont trade with them unless they too legislate the treaty.

No country can afford to be out of the world trade economy and so is forced to act on the treaty and put it in effect as legislation.

Its very sneaky and effective and have been used for decades. The world bank also uses this to their advantage as a rule. "You must implement this treaty in order to qualify for this loan".



The pattern of how they get this ratified and legislated is all around us. History teaches us. I want countries and people to learn from these patterns that history has shown us again and again.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , fully agree here .
Once the treaty is in place , the nations will be not allowed to trade unless they support and hence legislate the principles of the treaty into their laws .
This is exactly how its worked in the past .
Countries sign up , and then realize that the US and others cant or wont trade with them unless they too legislate the treaty .
No country can afford to be out of the world trade economy and so is forced to act on the treaty and put it in effect as legislation .
Its very sneaky and effective and have been used for decades .
The world bank also uses this to their advantage as a rule .
" You must implement this treaty in order to qualify for this loan " .
The pattern of how they get this ratified and legislated is all around us .
History teaches us .
I want countries and people to learn from these patterns that history has shown us again and again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, fully agree here.
Once the treaty is in place, the nations will be not allowed to trade unless they support and hence legislate the principles of the treaty into their laws.
This is exactly how its worked in the past.
Countries sign up, and then realize that the US and others cant or wont trade with them unless they too legislate the treaty.
No country can afford to be out of the world trade economy and so is forced to act on the treaty and put it in effect as legislation.
Its very sneaky and effective and have been used for decades.
The world bank also uses this to their advantage as a rule.
"You must implement this treaty in order to qualify for this loan".
The pattern of how they get this ratified and legislated is all around us.
History teaches us.
I want countries and people to learn from these patterns that history has shown us again and again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432190</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30431938</id>
	<title>Emailgate</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260810360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If any organization needed an emailgate, this is one of them. We need to see who is manipulating and bribing who. Just like the open docs. fiasco.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If any organization needed an emailgate , this is one of them .
We need to see who is manipulating and bribing who .
Just like the open docs .
fiasco .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If any organization needed an emailgate, this is one of them.
We need to see who is manipulating and bribing who.
Just like the open docs.
fiasco.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432226</id>
	<title>and this changes what?</title>
	<author>girlintraining</author>
	<datestamp>1260811860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Intellectual property is an invention of the rich countries to force the poor countries into an economic model that benefits them. Knowledge has always been power, and the developed countries of the world realize that by locking up their books and restricting the free trade of information and knowledge, they can effectively keep those countries enslaved -- producing real, material goods, in exchange for imaginary ones.</p><p>That, people, is the true objective of intellectual property. You people think they care about you making pirate copies of CDs and DVDs? How pathetically self-centered! The truth is much bigger than your hard drive contents.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Intellectual property is an invention of the rich countries to force the poor countries into an economic model that benefits them .
Knowledge has always been power , and the developed countries of the world realize that by locking up their books and restricting the free trade of information and knowledge , they can effectively keep those countries enslaved -- producing real , material goods , in exchange for imaginary ones.That , people , is the true objective of intellectual property .
You people think they care about you making pirate copies of CDs and DVDs ?
How pathetically self-centered !
The truth is much bigger than your hard drive contents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Intellectual property is an invention of the rich countries to force the poor countries into an economic model that benefits them.
Knowledge has always been power, and the developed countries of the world realize that by locking up their books and restricting the free trade of information and knowledge, they can effectively keep those countries enslaved -- producing real, material goods, in exchange for imaginary ones.That, people, is the true objective of intellectual property.
You people think they care about you making pirate copies of CDs and DVDs?
How pathetically self-centered!
The truth is much bigger than your hard drive contents.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434728</id>
	<title>Re:and this changes what?</title>
	<author>babblefrog</author>
	<datestamp>1260824340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>What? An idea is yours so long as you keep it to yourself. Once you tell me your idea, you want to be able to control what I can do with it? By force, of course. How can you own something which is now in my mind? This is one of the most perverted discussions of "the rights that men were born with" that I have ever read.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What ?
An idea is yours so long as you keep it to yourself .
Once you tell me your idea , you want to be able to control what I can do with it ?
By force , of course .
How can you own something which is now in my mind ?
This is one of the most perverted discussions of " the rights that men were born with " that I have ever read .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What?
An idea is yours so long as you keep it to yourself.
Once you tell me your idea, you want to be able to control what I can do with it?
By force, of course.
How can you own something which is now in my mind?
This is one of the most perverted discussions of "the rights that men were born with" that I have ever read.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434130</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432902</id>
	<title>Re:Pro-ACTA arguments are disingenuous</title>
	<author>Abcd1234</author>
	<datestamp>1260814800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>If one follows the link in TFA to Michael Geist's interactive timeline, there's an element that leads to a short video of a debate in the Canadian Houses of Parliament-- one member says ACTA is a tool of US corporate interests and will lock millions of users out of the net; the government minister who responds says anything in ACTA is "subservient to the acts of this Parliament". What he DOESN'T say, and what the member is not sharp enough to pick up in the swift give-and-take of debate, is that *once the treaty is in place*, there is NO more subservience to *anything*</i></p><p>Clearly you have no understanding of the role of treaties in Canadian law.</p><p>Unlike our American neighbours to the south, treaties have *no legal force on their own*.  That's right, they do *not* become the law of the land.  Rather, once a treaty is ratified, it's up to the government to then pass laws which harmonize Canadian law with the treaty provisions.  But that's *not legally required*.  ie, there's nothing stopping the house from simply refusing to pass laws to harmonize Canadian law with our treaty obligations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If one follows the link in TFA to Michael Geist 's interactive timeline , there 's an element that leads to a short video of a debate in the Canadian Houses of Parliament-- one member says ACTA is a tool of US corporate interests and will lock millions of users out of the net ; the government minister who responds says anything in ACTA is " subservient to the acts of this Parliament " .
What he DOES N'T say , and what the member is not sharp enough to pick up in the swift give-and-take of debate , is that * once the treaty is in place * , there is NO more subservience to * anything * Clearly you have no understanding of the role of treaties in Canadian law.Unlike our American neighbours to the south , treaties have * no legal force on their own * .
That 's right , they do * not * become the law of the land .
Rather , once a treaty is ratified , it 's up to the government to then pass laws which harmonize Canadian law with the treaty provisions .
But that 's * not legally required * .
ie , there 's nothing stopping the house from simply refusing to pass laws to harmonize Canadian law with our treaty obligations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If one follows the link in TFA to Michael Geist's interactive timeline, there's an element that leads to a short video of a debate in the Canadian Houses of Parliament-- one member says ACTA is a tool of US corporate interests and will lock millions of users out of the net; the government minister who responds says anything in ACTA is "subservient to the acts of this Parliament".
What he DOESN'T say, and what the member is not sharp enough to pick up in the swift give-and-take of debate, is that *once the treaty is in place*, there is NO more subservience to *anything*Clearly you have no understanding of the role of treaties in Canadian law.Unlike our American neighbours to the south, treaties have *no legal force on their own*.
That's right, they do *not* become the law of the land.
Rather, once a treaty is ratified, it's up to the government to then pass laws which harmonize Canadian law with the treaty provisions.
But that's *not legally required*.
ie, there's nothing stopping the house from simply refusing to pass laws to harmonize Canadian law with our treaty obligations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432190</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433774</id>
	<title>Brilliant.</title>
	<author>Dirtside</author>
	<datestamp>1260819180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, because perpetual copyright wasn't enough for these greedy fucktards.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , because perpetual copyright was n't enough for these greedy fucktards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, because perpetual copyright wasn't enough for these greedy fucktards.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30435004</id>
	<title>Btw</title>
	<author>Weezul</author>
	<datestamp>1260782460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the treaty also imposes French style three strikes laws which are a fundamental violation of human rights not that the internet has become so widespread.  (Fine print : yes rights may be revoked by courts, but ACTA bypasses the courts.)</p><p>We've had almost continuously accelerating cultural, scientific, and technological advancement and increasing levels of freedom for quite some time now, most cultures have collapsed back upon idiocy eventually.  Imho, copyright law and patent law have already achieved the same level of absurdity as civil servants being selected upon poetry prowess in ancient China or Islam's decent into traditionalism.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the treaty also imposes French style three strikes laws which are a fundamental violation of human rights not that the internet has become so widespread .
( Fine print : yes rights may be revoked by courts , but ACTA bypasses the courts .
) We 've had almost continuously accelerating cultural , scientific , and technological advancement and increasing levels of freedom for quite some time now , most cultures have collapsed back upon idiocy eventually .
Imho , copyright law and patent law have already achieved the same level of absurdity as civil servants being selected upon poetry prowess in ancient China or Islam 's decent into traditionalism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the treaty also imposes French style three strikes laws which are a fundamental violation of human rights not that the internet has become so widespread.
(Fine print : yes rights may be revoked by courts, but ACTA bypasses the courts.
)We've had almost continuously accelerating cultural, scientific, and technological advancement and increasing levels of freedom for quite some time now, most cultures have collapsed back upon idiocy eventually.
Imho, copyright law and patent law have already achieved the same level of absurdity as civil servants being selected upon poetry prowess in ancient China or Islam's decent into traditionalism.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433714</id>
	<title>Good luck with that.</title>
	<author>crhylove</author>
	<datestamp>1260818940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nobody is going to follow the increasingly ridiculous IP laws.  Nobody.  Information should be available to all, free of charge.  That was the recommendation of Ben Franklin, and he is certainly smarter than any of the corporate tools they've assembled to put together this inhuman legislation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody is going to follow the increasingly ridiculous IP laws .
Nobody. Information should be available to all , free of charge .
That was the recommendation of Ben Franklin , and he is certainly smarter than any of the corporate tools they 've assembled to put together this inhuman legislation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody is going to follow the increasingly ridiculous IP laws.
Nobody.  Information should be available to all, free of charge.
That was the recommendation of Ben Franklin, and he is certainly smarter than any of the corporate tools they've assembled to put together this inhuman legislation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434754</id>
	<title>Re:Yes, help creative commons, open source etc.</title>
	<author>ppanon</author>
	<datestamp>1260781260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Aren't they shooting themselves in the long term ?</p></div></blockquote><p>
Pretty well. Up here, SOCAN are trying to <a href="http://www.metronews.ca/vancouver/local/article/396668--singing-the-royalty-blues" title="metronews.ca">renegotiate higher performance fees</a> [metronews.ca] to get a cut of expected higher revenues for Vancouver transit buskers during the Olympics. It may result in getting the busker program (and SOCAN's revenues from it) cancelled instead. Does it make sense to charge buskers making $50 a weekend a rate much closer to DJs making hundreds of dollars a night?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are n't they shooting themselves in the long term ?
Pretty well .
Up here , SOCAN are trying to renegotiate higher performance fees [ metronews.ca ] to get a cut of expected higher revenues for Vancouver transit buskers during the Olympics .
It may result in getting the busker program ( and SOCAN 's revenues from it ) cancelled instead .
Does it make sense to charge buskers making $ 50 a weekend a rate much closer to DJs making hundreds of dollars a night ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Aren't they shooting themselves in the long term ?
Pretty well.
Up here, SOCAN are trying to renegotiate higher performance fees [metronews.ca] to get a cut of expected higher revenues for Vancouver transit buskers during the Olympics.
It may result in getting the busker program (and SOCAN's revenues from it) cancelled instead.
Does it make sense to charge buskers making $50 a weekend a rate much closer to DJs making hundreds of dollars a night?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433958</id>
	<title>Re:I would propose the public hold secret talks.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260820200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Has long as you keep the supply of beer coming I will keep drinking errr......figthing</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Has long as you keep the supply of beer coming I will keep drinking errr......figthing</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has long as you keep the supply of beer coming I will keep drinking errr......figthing</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432990</id>
	<title>Democracy no?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260815280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>A lot of us live in "Democracies."  Maybe some of us who don't suck should run for office.  And maybe some others could help them out.  I don't thing voting for change is enough in this day of age.  We need people who are different that we can vote for first.  Any takers?</htmltext>
<tokenext>A lot of us live in " Democracies .
" Maybe some of us who do n't suck should run for office .
And maybe some others could help them out .
I do n't thing voting for change is enough in this day of age .
We need people who are different that we can vote for first .
Any takers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A lot of us live in "Democracies.
"  Maybe some of us who don't suck should run for office.
And maybe some others could help them out.
I don't thing voting for change is enough in this day of age.
We need people who are different that we can vote for first.
Any takers?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432258</id>
	<title>Re:Yes, help creative commons, open source etc.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260812160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can also foresee alot of Open source apps unable to foster because of global copyright laws.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can also foresee alot of Open source apps unable to foster because of global copyright laws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can also foresee alot of Open source apps unable to foster because of global copyright laws.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432190</id>
	<title>Pro-ACTA arguments are disingenuous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260811680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If one follows the link in TFA to Michael Geist's interactive timeline, there's an element that leads to a short video of a debate in the Canadian Houses of Parliament-- one member says ACTA is a tool of US corporate interests and will lock millions of users out of the net; the government minister who responds says anything in ACTA is "subservient to the acts of this Parliament". What he DOESN'T say, and what the member is not sharp enough to pick up in the swift give-and-take of debate, is that *once the treaty is in place*, there is NO more subservience to *anything* (short of something on the order of a US Constitutional Amendment". This is the point: the people and even those of their representatives who want to derail this blindsiding juggernaut *will be able to do nothing* once the treaty is signed, and *saying the treaty is subject to US or Canadian law* is a pure, cynical smokescreen. An ounce of prevention here can accomplish what no amount of cure can fix. ACTA negotiations must be transparent. If we don't fight for that the corporate interests will do an end run around our rights.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If one follows the link in TFA to Michael Geist 's interactive timeline , there 's an element that leads to a short video of a debate in the Canadian Houses of Parliament-- one member says ACTA is a tool of US corporate interests and will lock millions of users out of the net ; the government minister who responds says anything in ACTA is " subservient to the acts of this Parliament " .
What he DOES N'T say , and what the member is not sharp enough to pick up in the swift give-and-take of debate , is that * once the treaty is in place * , there is NO more subservience to * anything * ( short of something on the order of a US Constitutional Amendment " .
This is the point : the people and even those of their representatives who want to derail this blindsiding juggernaut * will be able to do nothing * once the treaty is signed , and * saying the treaty is subject to US or Canadian law * is a pure , cynical smokescreen .
An ounce of prevention here can accomplish what no amount of cure can fix .
ACTA negotiations must be transparent .
If we do n't fight for that the corporate interests will do an end run around our rights .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If one follows the link in TFA to Michael Geist's interactive timeline, there's an element that leads to a short video of a debate in the Canadian Houses of Parliament-- one member says ACTA is a tool of US corporate interests and will lock millions of users out of the net; the government minister who responds says anything in ACTA is "subservient to the acts of this Parliament".
What he DOESN'T say, and what the member is not sharp enough to pick up in the swift give-and-take of debate, is that *once the treaty is in place*, there is NO more subservience to *anything* (short of something on the order of a US Constitutional Amendment".
This is the point: the people and even those of their representatives who want to derail this blindsiding juggernaut *will be able to do nothing* once the treaty is signed, and *saying the treaty is subject to US or Canadian law* is a pure, cynical smokescreen.
An ounce of prevention here can accomplish what no amount of cure can fix.
ACTA negotiations must be transparent.
If we don't fight for that the corporate interests will do an end run around our rights.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432332</id>
	<title>Re:Wow.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260812520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Normally I'm against captain-obvious troll-feeding, but this is one case where I think a response is merited.</p><p>ACTA awareness needs to reach as far as it possibly can. We are, quite literally, talking about the future of the world here: A global treaty that promises to have a profound effect upon the freedom of all of us is being negotiated in secret.</p><p>The maximum must be brought to light before the widest audience. If that means dupe stories, then I'm all for dupes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Normally I 'm against captain-obvious troll-feeding , but this is one case where I think a response is merited.ACTA awareness needs to reach as far as it possibly can .
We are , quite literally , talking about the future of the world here : A global treaty that promises to have a profound effect upon the freedom of all of us is being negotiated in secret.The maximum must be brought to light before the widest audience .
If that means dupe stories , then I 'm all for dupes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Normally I'm against captain-obvious troll-feeding, but this is one case where I think a response is merited.ACTA awareness needs to reach as far as it possibly can.
We are, quite literally, talking about the future of the world here: A global treaty that promises to have a profound effect upon the freedom of all of us is being negotiated in secret.The maximum must be brought to light before the widest audience.
If that means dupe stories, then I'm all for dupes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30431892</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432234</id>
	<title>read your history books, corporate goons</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1260811920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>technology tames the law</p><p>the law never tames technology</p><p>not for want of trying of course</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>technology tames the lawthe law never tames technologynot for want of trying of course</tokentext>
<sentencetext>technology tames the lawthe law never tames technologynot for want of trying of course</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432092</id>
	<title>I would propose the public hold secret talks.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260811140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Secret talks to discuss, develop policy for and enact positive action to counter the erosion of our rights as we step into a new global digital age.

Only, that's terrorism these days isn't it?

Ok. Non-secret talks.

Who's in? I'll buy beer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Secret talks to discuss , develop policy for and enact positive action to counter the erosion of our rights as we step into a new global digital age .
Only , that 's terrorism these days is n't it ?
Ok. Non-secret talks .
Who 's in ?
I 'll buy beer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Secret talks to discuss, develop policy for and enact positive action to counter the erosion of our rights as we step into a new global digital age.
Only, that's terrorism these days isn't it?
Ok. Non-secret talks.
Who's in?
I'll buy beer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434618</id>
	<title>Re:You sound like Fox Mulder...</title>
	<author>bussdriver</author>
	<datestamp>1260823800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is more than MUSIC and MOVIES to the whole "Intellectual Property" BS invented by the propagandists (aka Public Relations, as they call themselves.)</p><p>The RIAA and MPAA may not have direct reach in other nations, especially the ones where people are not so preoccupied with consumerism but they help support the imperial corporate movement because it benefits them locally and eventually internationally.</p><p>Agra Business is far more involved in the I.P. imperialism than the entertainment industry is. Look into Monsanto, United Fruit, etc.  Nationally, there are nationalistic, corporatist, and harsh economic realities at stake.  You have nations like the USA where they have little of substance offer; their economy runs on financial gambling (no exaggeration, they had to pass exceptions to gambling laws for derivative trading,) the military industry, healthcare, an oil backed currency, and I.P.  Small business never counts despite it being a substantial part of the US economy.  Its obvious what the USA will do and has been since the 70s either continue the easy trend to instability and constant effort to maintain it or a drastic change in direction requiring more change than Obama can ever vaguely promise - remember: Carter tried to change tack and look what happened-- it just accelerated in the other direction.</p><p>Long term it is going to get interesting.... People in the USA still haven't accepted (or know) that the EU has surpassed them as the biggest economy; they think their education is getting worse when it fact, the world is developing and catching up-- you can't maintain the same advantage when you're near the peak with little room for improvement and the others are approaching. (the "help" that is harming our school system is another issue-- and beside the main point. The BIG-O of this problem is the 1st world nations can't advance a whole lot more relatively and the others are developing algorithms approaching ours.)  Plus you have the fact much of the US economic policies are based upon the 3rd world being<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...well, 3rd world.  The USA needs a WW3 to repeat what WW2 did for them in order to maintain and that not considering environmental and resource realities which can not be ignored this time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is more than MUSIC and MOVIES to the whole " Intellectual Property " BS invented by the propagandists ( aka Public Relations , as they call themselves .
) The RIAA and MPAA may not have direct reach in other nations , especially the ones where people are not so preoccupied with consumerism but they help support the imperial corporate movement because it benefits them locally and eventually internationally.Agra Business is far more involved in the I.P .
imperialism than the entertainment industry is .
Look into Monsanto , United Fruit , etc .
Nationally , there are nationalistic , corporatist , and harsh economic realities at stake .
You have nations like the USA where they have little of substance offer ; their economy runs on financial gambling ( no exaggeration , they had to pass exceptions to gambling laws for derivative trading , ) the military industry , healthcare , an oil backed currency , and I.P .
Small business never counts despite it being a substantial part of the US economy .
Its obvious what the USA will do and has been since the 70s either continue the easy trend to instability and constant effort to maintain it or a drastic change in direction requiring more change than Obama can ever vaguely promise - remember : Carter tried to change tack and look what happened-- it just accelerated in the other direction.Long term it is going to get interesting.... People in the USA still have n't accepted ( or know ) that the EU has surpassed them as the biggest economy ; they think their education is getting worse when it fact , the world is developing and catching up-- you ca n't maintain the same advantage when you 're near the peak with little room for improvement and the others are approaching .
( the " help " that is harming our school system is another issue-- and beside the main point .
The BIG-O of this problem is the 1st world nations ca n't advance a whole lot more relatively and the others are developing algorithms approaching ours .
) Plus you have the fact much of the US economic policies are based upon the 3rd world being ...well , 3rd world .
The USA needs a WW3 to repeat what WW2 did for them in order to maintain and that not considering environmental and resource realities which can not be ignored this time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is more than MUSIC and MOVIES to the whole "Intellectual Property" BS invented by the propagandists (aka Public Relations, as they call themselves.
)The RIAA and MPAA may not have direct reach in other nations, especially the ones where people are not so preoccupied with consumerism but they help support the imperial corporate movement because it benefits them locally and eventually internationally.Agra Business is far more involved in the I.P.
imperialism than the entertainment industry is.
Look into Monsanto, United Fruit, etc.
Nationally, there are nationalistic, corporatist, and harsh economic realities at stake.
You have nations like the USA where they have little of substance offer; their economy runs on financial gambling (no exaggeration, they had to pass exceptions to gambling laws for derivative trading,) the military industry, healthcare, an oil backed currency, and I.P.
Small business never counts despite it being a substantial part of the US economy.
Its obvious what the USA will do and has been since the 70s either continue the easy trend to instability and constant effort to maintain it or a drastic change in direction requiring more change than Obama can ever vaguely promise - remember: Carter tried to change tack and look what happened-- it just accelerated in the other direction.Long term it is going to get interesting.... People in the USA still haven't accepted (or know) that the EU has surpassed them as the biggest economy; they think their education is getting worse when it fact, the world is developing and catching up-- you can't maintain the same advantage when you're near the peak with little room for improvement and the others are approaching.
(the "help" that is harming our school system is another issue-- and beside the main point.
The BIG-O of this problem is the 1st world nations can't advance a whole lot more relatively and the others are developing algorithms approaching ours.
)  Plus you have the fact much of the US economic policies are based upon the 3rd world being ...well, 3rd world.
The USA needs a WW3 to repeat what WW2 did for them in order to maintain and that not considering environmental and resource realities which can not be ignored this time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432638</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432314
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432190
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432528
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432226
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30441556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432226
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432190
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30436132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432052
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432226
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434728
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432226
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30431938
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432052
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30448794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432130
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30441800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432536
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432130
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30441342
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30431892
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432438
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30431938
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30435516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30431938
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30435004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30431892
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433526
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30431938
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432368
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432130
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434754
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432474
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432032
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434932
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432226
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30435662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432536
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432130
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432226
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432130
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432032
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432190
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432334
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432190
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30431892
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30439880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30436056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432052
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432638
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432226
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434536
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432130
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30435094
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432226
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30431892
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432052
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_14_1441252_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434618
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432638
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432226
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_14_1441252.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432234
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432458
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434150
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432666
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_14_1441252.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433958
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_14_1441252.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433432
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_14_1441252.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432990
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_14_1441252.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432196
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_14_1441252.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30431892
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432332
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30435004
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434122
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434260
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432864
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30441342
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_14_1441252.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432360
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_14_1441252.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432190
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432334
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432902
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432314
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432388
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_14_1441252.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432446
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_14_1441252.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432264
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433012
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30439880
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433552
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_14_1441252.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432324
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_14_1441252.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433686
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_14_1441252.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432130
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432536
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30441800
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30435662
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433294
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434476
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30448794
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434536
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432368
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_14_1441252.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432226
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434130
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30441556
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434728
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30435094
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434932
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432638
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433914
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434618
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432422
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432528
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432822
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_14_1441252.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432052
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30436056
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432278
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433396
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30436132
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_14_1441252.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30431938
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432438
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30435516
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30433526
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432594
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_14_1441252.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432032
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432474
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432292
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_14_1441252.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432142
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432258
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432198
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30434754
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_14_1441252.30432350
</commentlist>
</conversation>
