<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_20_192215</id>
	<title>DMCA Takedown Scandal, Part Two</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1261296660000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>pmdubs writes <i>"Following up on our <a href="//yro.slashdot.org/story/09/12/08/2116205/Questionable-Best-Effort-Copyright-Enforcement">earlier discussion</a>, Michael Freedman updates us on <a href="http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/mfreed/erroneous-dmca-notices-and-copyright-enforcement-part-deux">experience with dubious DMCA takedown notices</a>. As a result of the publicity his initial post received, the Video Protection Alliance has dropped Nexicon, the company to which they had outsourced infringement detection. In this case, while there may be little legal recourse to issuing invalid DMCA notices, the threat of bad press seems to have reined in highly questionable practices."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>pmdubs writes " Following up on our earlier discussion , Michael Freedman updates us on experience with dubious DMCA takedown notices .
As a result of the publicity his initial post received , the Video Protection Alliance has dropped Nexicon , the company to which they had outsourced infringement detection .
In this case , while there may be little legal recourse to issuing invalid DMCA notices , the threat of bad press seems to have reined in highly questionable practices .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>pmdubs writes "Following up on our earlier discussion, Michael Freedman updates us on experience with dubious DMCA takedown notices.
As a result of the publicity his initial post received, the Video Protection Alliance has dropped Nexicon, the company to which they had outsourced infringement detection.
In this case, while there may be little legal recourse to issuing invalid DMCA notices, the threat of bad press seems to have reined in highly questionable practices.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507060</id>
	<title>Re:The takedown notice system isn't inherently bad</title>
	<author>michaelmalak</author>
	<datestamp>1261307580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When Google was in the rocess of buying YouTube, people were saying it was going to be the death of Google since YouTube was a trove of pirated works. That was common sense. But you are right, the DMCA protects Google/YouTube, defying common sense. (It wasn't clear at the time to the public that YouTube could hide behind the DMCA; in fact, it was YouTube that ushered in that practice.)  Of course, 90+ year coyrights also defy common sense. If we had 14+14 year copyrights again that stimulate rather than stifle the arts, the DMCA takedown system would be counterproductive.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When Google was in the rocess of buying YouTube , people were saying it was going to be the death of Google since YouTube was a trove of pirated works .
That was common sense .
But you are right , the DMCA protects Google/YouTube , defying common sense .
( It was n't clear at the time to the public that YouTube could hide behind the DMCA ; in fact , it was YouTube that ushered in that practice .
) Of course , 90 + year coyrights also defy common sense .
If we had 14 + 14 year copyrights again that stimulate rather than stifle the arts , the DMCA takedown system would be counterproductive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When Google was in the rocess of buying YouTube, people were saying it was going to be the death of Google since YouTube was a trove of pirated works.
That was common sense.
But you are right, the DMCA protects Google/YouTube, defying common sense.
(It wasn't clear at the time to the public that YouTube could hide behind the DMCA; in fact, it was YouTube that ushered in that practice.
)  Of course, 90+ year coyrights also defy common sense.
If we had 14+14 year copyrights again that stimulate rather than stifle the arts, the DMCA takedown system would be counterproductive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506510</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507868</id>
	<title>Re:Penalty of Perjury</title>
	<author>Kjella</author>
	<datestamp>1261316220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your reading comprehension is very poor, because it explicitly says of the "right that is allegedly infringed". This means that if I allege that you violate the distribution right of "District 9", then the statement under perjury is that I'm authorized to act on violations of the distribution right of "District 9". No more and no less, whether the distribution right of "District 9" has actually been violated is completely irrelevant.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your reading comprehension is very poor , because it explicitly says of the " right that is allegedly infringed " .
This means that if I allege that you violate the distribution right of " District 9 " , then the statement under perjury is that I 'm authorized to act on violations of the distribution right of " District 9 " .
No more and no less , whether the distribution right of " District 9 " has actually been violated is completely irrelevant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your reading comprehension is very poor, because it explicitly says of the "right that is allegedly infringed".
This means that if I allege that you violate the distribution right of "District 9", then the statement under perjury is that I'm authorized to act on violations of the distribution right of "District 9".
No more and no less, whether the distribution right of "District 9" has actually been violated is completely irrelevant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507428</id>
	<title>Re:Reigned vs. reined ...</title>
	<author>sxeraverx</author>
	<datestamp>1261310880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You, sir, rain supreme.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You , sir , rain supreme .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You, sir, rain supreme.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506450</id>
	<title>The problem with DCMA takedown notices</title>
	<author>bugs2squash</author>
	<datestamp>1261302300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>is that there are just not enough of them out there. If there were FAR more, then there would be a lot of people calling their congressman. The solution to DCMA involves its own petard.</htmltext>
<tokenext>is that there are just not enough of them out there .
If there were FAR more , then there would be a lot of people calling their congressman .
The solution to DCMA involves its own petard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is that there are just not enough of them out there.
If there were FAR more, then there would be a lot of people calling their congressman.
The solution to DCMA involves its own petard.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30508564</id>
	<title>You're an idiot.</title>
	<author>schon</author>
	<datestamp>1261324740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Filing a false notice is a fucking FELONY (17 USC 512).</p></div><p>No, it isn't.  <b>Deliberately</b> filing a false notice when you <b>know</b> you're not the rightsholder is perjury.  However the problem is that you'd have to *prove* that they filed it deliberately.  If they say "whoops, we thought that file labeled 'Usher221.mp3' was ours" then there is <b>nothing</b> you can do about it.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Call the police and press charges.</p></div><p>What are the odds that a DA would take on a case like that, when they could instead focus their efforts prosecuting people for <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,497604,00.html" title="foxnews.com">"creating child pornography"</a> [foxnews.com] so they can get re-elected?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Filing a false notice is a fucking FELONY ( 17 USC 512 ) .No , it is n't .
Deliberately filing a false notice when you know you 're not the rightsholder is perjury .
However the problem is that you 'd have to * prove * that they filed it deliberately .
If they say " whoops , we thought that file labeled 'Usher221.mp3 ' was ours " then there is nothing you can do about it.Call the police and press charges.What are the odds that a DA would take on a case like that , when they could instead focus their efforts prosecuting people for " creating child pornography " [ foxnews.com ] so they can get re-elected ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Filing a false notice is a fucking FELONY (17 USC 512).No, it isn't.
Deliberately filing a false notice when you know you're not the rightsholder is perjury.
However the problem is that you'd have to *prove* that they filed it deliberately.
If they say "whoops, we thought that file labeled 'Usher221.mp3' was ours" then there is nothing you can do about it.Call the police and press charges.What are the odds that a DA would take on a case like that, when they could instead focus their efforts prosecuting people for "creating child pornography" [foxnews.com] so they can get re-elected?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507864</id>
	<title>The answer is money once again</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1261316220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The internet is overwhelmingly against the DMCA, why keep it?</p></div><p>The internet doesn't purchase* as many politicians as the MPAA and RIAA members.</p><p>* I mean bribe**<br>** I mean 'offer campaign contributions'</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The internet is overwhelmingly against the DMCA , why keep it ? The internet does n't purchase * as many politicians as the MPAA and RIAA members .
* I mean bribe * * * * I mean 'offer campaign contributions '</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The internet is overwhelmingly against the DMCA, why keep it?The internet doesn't purchase* as many politicians as the MPAA and RIAA members.
* I mean bribe**** I mean 'offer campaign contributions'
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30508642</id>
	<title>Re:Oh kdawson</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261325700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uh! Oh god! I'm angry!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh !
Oh god !
I 'm angry !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh!
Oh god!
I'm angry!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506280</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506520</id>
	<title>Re:Not a solution.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261302840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I disagree. The proper way to solve these problems is via RPG.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I disagree .
The proper way to solve these problems is via RPG .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I disagree.
The proper way to solve these problems is via RPG.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506510</id>
	<title>The takedown notice system isn't inherently bad</title>
	<author>JoshuaZ</author>
	<datestamp>1261302720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>The DMCA take down system isn't inherently bad. It protects ISPs and various hosts from what would otherwise be severe liability. Wikipedia and Youtube would never be able to function if they didn't have the liability protection they get from the system as long as they comply promptly with reasonable requests. The system does need some reform but reform is not abolition.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The DMCA take down system is n't inherently bad .
It protects ISPs and various hosts from what would otherwise be severe liability .
Wikipedia and Youtube would never be able to function if they did n't have the liability protection they get from the system as long as they comply promptly with reasonable requests .
The system does need some reform but reform is not abolition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The DMCA take down system isn't inherently bad.
It protects ISPs and various hosts from what would otherwise be severe liability.
Wikipedia and Youtube would never be able to function if they didn't have the liability protection they get from the system as long as they comply promptly with reasonable requests.
The system does need some reform but reform is not abolition.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507312</id>
	<title>Re:Penalty of Perjury</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261309740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And there is no need for any other coverage, really. If you send out a DMCA takedown and do not hold copyright to the material you are demanding be taken down - and have not been authorized to "act on behalf of the copyright holder" - then by having filed the DMCA takedown notice you have perjured yourself.</p><p>It's not hard to understand - this does mean, however, that every bad DMCA Takedown is prosecutable under extremely well-known law.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And there is no need for any other coverage , really .
If you send out a DMCA takedown and do not hold copyright to the material you are demanding be taken down - and have not been authorized to " act on behalf of the copyright holder " - then by having filed the DMCA takedown notice you have perjured yourself.It 's not hard to understand - this does mean , however , that every bad DMCA Takedown is prosecutable under extremely well-known law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And there is no need for any other coverage, really.
If you send out a DMCA takedown and do not hold copyright to the material you are demanding be taken down - and have not been authorized to "act on behalf of the copyright holder" - then by having filed the DMCA takedown notice you have perjured yourself.It's not hard to understand - this does mean, however, that every bad DMCA Takedown is prosecutable under extremely well-known law.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506384</id>
	<title>CmdrTaco's pants takedown scandal, part two</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261301700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>CmdrTaco's pants were taken yet down again, due to a DMCA request.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>CmdrTaco 's pants were taken yet down again , due to a DMCA request .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CmdrTaco's pants were taken yet down again, due to a DMCA request.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506664</id>
	<title>Penalty of Perjury</title>
	<author>Cbs228</author>
	<datestamp>1261304340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Under Section 512 of the DMCA, all requests must include</p><blockquote><div><p>A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and <b>under penalty of perjury</b>, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed. (<a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/usc\_sec\_17\_00000512----000-.html" title="cornell.edu" rel="nofollow">17 U.S.C.  512(c)(3)</a> [cornell.edu])</p></div></blockquote><p>The offenders can be prosecuted for sending false DMCA notices, since they made statements "under penalty of perjury." All it would take is for one judge to get annoyed and throw the rulebook at these people. Unfortunately, perjury is a criminal offense&mdash;not a civil one&mdash;so it is unlikely anyone could file suit to force the issue.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Under Section 512 of the DMCA , all requests must includeA statement that the information in the notification is accurate , and under penalty of perjury , that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed .
( 17 U.S.C .
512 ( c ) ( 3 ) [ cornell.edu ] ) The offenders can be prosecuted for sending false DMCA notices , since they made statements " under penalty of perjury .
" All it would take is for one judge to get annoyed and throw the rulebook at these people .
Unfortunately , perjury is a criminal offense    not a civil one    so it is unlikely anyone could file suit to force the issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Under Section 512 of the DMCA, all requests must includeA statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
(17 U.S.C.
512(c)(3) [cornell.edu])The offenders can be prosecuted for sending false DMCA notices, since they made statements "under penalty of perjury.
" All it would take is for one judge to get annoyed and throw the rulebook at these people.
Unfortunately, perjury is a criminal offense—not a civil one—so it is unlikely anyone could file suit to force the issue.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30567726</id>
	<title>Re:The takedown notice system isn't inherently bad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261927680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a fact. fucking slashedoters are full of shit as always.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a fact .
fucking slashedoters are full of shit as always .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a fact.
fucking slashedoters are full of shit as always.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30515176</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30509046</id>
	<title>Re:Oh kdawson</title>
	<author>Mashiki</author>
	<datestamp>1261330380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I want to see pictures.  Hot dirty pictures.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I want to see pictures .
Hot dirty pictures .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want to see pictures.
Hot dirty pictures.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506280</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506752</id>
	<title>slashdotted.  cache</title>
	<author>lkcl</author>
	<datestamp>1261305180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:E6SCqgDxxGAJ:www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/mfreed/erroneous-dmca-notices-and-copyright-enforcement-part-deux+freedom+to+tinker+erroneous+dmca&amp;hl=en&amp;gl=uk&amp;strip=1" title="209.85.229.132">http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:E6SCqgDxxGAJ:www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/mfreed/erroneous-dmca-notices-and-copyright-enforcement-part-deux+freedom+to+tinker+erroneous+dmca&amp;hl=en&amp;gl=uk&amp;strip=1</a> [209.85.229.132]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //209.85.229.132/search ? q = cache : E6SCqgDxxGAJ : www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/mfreed/erroneous-dmca-notices-and-copyright-enforcement-part-deux + freedom + to + tinker + erroneous + dmca&amp;hl = en&amp;gl = uk&amp;strip = 1 [ 209.85.229.132 ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:E6SCqgDxxGAJ:www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/mfreed/erroneous-dmca-notices-and-copyright-enforcement-part-deux+freedom+to+tinker+erroneous+dmca&amp;hl=en&amp;gl=uk&amp;strip=1 [209.85.229.132]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30515258</id>
	<title>Re:Repeal the law...</title>
	<author>wolrahnaes</author>
	<datestamp>1261425480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Ok, now that we've had over a decade with the DMCA, haven't lawmakers seen that it doesn't work and ends up being a pain to the purchaser more than the pirate? Since the DMCA, how many fewer movies have been pirated? My guess is none. What about music? Nope. However, how many purchasers of content really wanted to strip out DRM and other nonsense from the things they bought but can't legally? My guess is just about everyone who has purchased DRM-ed content and wants to use it in some way.</p><p>The internet is overwhelmingly against the DMCA, why keep it?</p></div><p>In the mind of a politician, if a law is not working that can mean nothing more than it needs to be strengthened, not that it was pointless in the first place.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , now that we 've had over a decade with the DMCA , have n't lawmakers seen that it does n't work and ends up being a pain to the purchaser more than the pirate ?
Since the DMCA , how many fewer movies have been pirated ?
My guess is none .
What about music ?
Nope. However , how many purchasers of content really wanted to strip out DRM and other nonsense from the things they bought but ca n't legally ?
My guess is just about everyone who has purchased DRM-ed content and wants to use it in some way.The internet is overwhelmingly against the DMCA , why keep it ? In the mind of a politician , if a law is not working that can mean nothing more than it needs to be strengthened , not that it was pointless in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, now that we've had over a decade with the DMCA, haven't lawmakers seen that it doesn't work and ends up being a pain to the purchaser more than the pirate?
Since the DMCA, how many fewer movies have been pirated?
My guess is none.
What about music?
Nope. However, how many purchasers of content really wanted to strip out DRM and other nonsense from the things they bought but can't legally?
My guess is just about everyone who has purchased DRM-ed content and wants to use it in some way.The internet is overwhelmingly against the DMCA, why keep it?In the mind of a politician, if a law is not working that can mean nothing more than it needs to be strengthened, not that it was pointless in the first place.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506932</id>
	<title>Re:The takedown notice system isn't inherently bad</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1261306740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Right now very few DMCA takedown notices are legit. I can't remember the exact numbers, but it was appalling. Something like 20-40\% would be lawful if taken to court. The rest are just to get something a company doesn't like taken off the web. It's rather like sending thugs to a business to ruff up the owner and get him to comply.</p><p>Good use of our legal system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right now very few DMCA takedown notices are legit .
I ca n't remember the exact numbers , but it was appalling .
Something like 20-40 \ % would be lawful if taken to court .
The rest are just to get something a company does n't like taken off the web .
It 's rather like sending thugs to a business to ruff up the owner and get him to comply.Good use of our legal system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right now very few DMCA takedown notices are legit.
I can't remember the exact numbers, but it was appalling.
Something like 20-40\% would be lawful if taken to court.
The rest are just to get something a company doesn't like taken off the web.
It's rather like sending thugs to a business to ruff up the owner and get him to comply.Good use of our legal system.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506510</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30509058</id>
	<title>Re:Reigned vs. reined ...</title>
	<author>Spykk</author>
	<datestamp>1261330440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Way to reign on his parade...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Way to reign on his parade.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Way to reign on his parade...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30508508</id>
	<title>Re:The takedown notice system isn't inherently bad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261324140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The DMCA take down system isn't inherently bad.</p></div><p>Yes, it is inherently bad.  It is deliberately slanted to protect large corporations, while trampling over the free speech rights of individuals.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>It protects ISPs and various hosts from what would otherwise be severe liability.</p></div><p>So would any <i>sane</i> take-down system.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The DMCA take down system is n't inherently bad.Yes , it is inherently bad .
It is deliberately slanted to protect large corporations , while trampling over the free speech rights of individuals.It protects ISPs and various hosts from what would otherwise be severe liability.So would any sane take-down system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The DMCA take down system isn't inherently bad.Yes, it is inherently bad.
It is deliberately slanted to protect large corporations, while trampling over the free speech rights of individuals.It protects ISPs and various hosts from what would otherwise be severe liability.So would any sane take-down system.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506510</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507684</id>
	<title>Re:Little recourse?!</title>
	<author>stimpleton</author>
	<datestamp>1261313760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Its a civil matter, Sir"</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Its a civil matter , Sir "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Its a civil matter, Sir"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506270</id>
	<title>Reigned vs. reined ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261300620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These highly questionable practices have reigned for a long time, but in this case may have been reined in...</p><p>Your english teacher.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These highly questionable practices have reigned for a long time , but in this case may have been reined in...Your english teacher .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These highly questionable practices have reigned for a long time, but in this case may have been reined in...Your english teacher.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506906</id>
	<title>Re:Penalty of Perjury</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261306500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why don't you actually read what you quoted?</p><p>The only part of a DMCA notice which is made under penalty of perjury is the statement that the sender is authorised to act on behalf of the copyright holder.</p><p>The claim of infringement isn't made under penalty of perjury (it cannot be, as it's a legal claim, not testimony).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do n't you actually read what you quoted ? The only part of a DMCA notice which is made under penalty of perjury is the statement that the sender is authorised to act on behalf of the copyright holder.The claim of infringement is n't made under penalty of perjury ( it can not be , as it 's a legal claim , not testimony ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why don't you actually read what you quoted?The only part of a DMCA notice which is made under penalty of perjury is the statement that the sender is authorised to act on behalf of the copyright holder.The claim of infringement isn't made under penalty of perjury (it cannot be, as it's a legal claim, not testimony).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506284</id>
	<title>I like it</title>
	<author>Demonantis</author>
	<datestamp>1261300800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>At least some companies realize that IP addresses != people. I might have hope for corporations after all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>At least some companies realize that IP addresses ! = people .
I might have hope for corporations after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least some companies realize that IP addresses != people.
I might have hope for corporations after all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507762</id>
	<title>Re:Penalty of Perjury</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261314720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Under Section 512 of the DMCA, all requests must include</p><blockquote><div><p>A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and <b>under penalty of perjury</b>, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed. (<a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/usc\_sec\_17\_00000512----000-.html" title="cornell.edu" rel="nofollow">17 U.S.C.  512(c)(3)</a> [cornell.edu])</p></div></blockquote><p>The offenders can be prosecuted for sending false DMCA notices, since they made statements "under penalty of perjury." All it would take is for one judge to get annoyed and throw the rulebook at these people. Unfortunately, perjury is a criminal offense&mdash;not a civil one&mdash;so it is unlikely anyone could file suit to force the issue.</p></div><p>Right, so penalty of perjury if the complaining party is NOT authorized to act on behalf of the owner, or if the owner does not actually own an exclusive right. Nothing about the accuracy is reflected in that paragraph in regards to perjury.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Under Section 512 of the DMCA , all requests must includeA statement that the information in the notification is accurate , and under penalty of perjury , that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed .
( 17 U.S.C .
512 ( c ) ( 3 ) [ cornell.edu ] ) The offenders can be prosecuted for sending false DMCA notices , since they made statements " under penalty of perjury .
" All it would take is for one judge to get annoyed and throw the rulebook at these people .
Unfortunately , perjury is a criminal offense    not a civil one    so it is unlikely anyone could file suit to force the issue.Right , so penalty of perjury if the complaining party is NOT authorized to act on behalf of the owner , or if the owner does not actually own an exclusive right .
Nothing about the accuracy is reflected in that paragraph in regards to perjury .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Under Section 512 of the DMCA, all requests must includeA statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
(17 U.S.C.
512(c)(3) [cornell.edu])The offenders can be prosecuted for sending false DMCA notices, since they made statements "under penalty of perjury.
" All it would take is for one judge to get annoyed and throw the rulebook at these people.
Unfortunately, perjury is a criminal offense—not a civil one—so it is unlikely anyone could file suit to force the issue.Right, so penalty of perjury if the complaining party is NOT authorized to act on behalf of the owner, or if the owner does not actually own an exclusive right.
Nothing about the accuracy is reflected in that paragraph in regards to perjury.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506628</id>
	<title>Re:Repeal the law...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261303920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because the internet does not make laws. People on teh **AA's paychekcs make laws.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because the internet does not make laws .
People on teh * * AA 's paychekcs make laws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because the internet does not make laws.
People on teh **AA's paychekcs make laws.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506768</id>
	<title>Little recourse?!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261305300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Filing a false notice is a fucking FELONY (17 USC 512). Call the police and press charges.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Filing a false notice is a fucking FELONY ( 17 USC 512 ) .
Call the police and press charges .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Filing a false notice is a fucking FELONY (17 USC 512).
Call the police and press charges.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507934</id>
	<title>informative TroolTroll</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261317120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">private sex party U8ited` States of</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>private sex party U8ited ` States of [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>private sex party U8ited` States of [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30511190</id>
	<title>Comments of the Nexicon CTO</title>
	<author>CanarDuck</author>
	<datestamp>1261405140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I found the most fascinating part of TFA to be a link to a <a href="http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/mfreed/inaccurate-copyright-enforcement-questionable-best-practices-and-bittorrent-specificatio#comment-109448" title="freedom-to-tinker.com" rel="nofollow">post</a> [freedom-to-tinker.com] by the Nexicon CTO himself in the comments of the initial article. It's 500 words of frantic, badly spelled gibberish whithout a single grammatically correct sentence and devoid of any substantial argument. You can literally see the poor man going litteraly nuts with rage while the sky is falling on his head.</p><p>Try it, it'll do you good. Seriously, I had not experienced such a powerful rush of pure, unaltered, sweet schadenfreude on the internets for a long time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I found the most fascinating part of TFA to be a link to a post [ freedom-to-tinker.com ] by the Nexicon CTO himself in the comments of the initial article .
It 's 500 words of frantic , badly spelled gibberish whithout a single grammatically correct sentence and devoid of any substantial argument .
You can literally see the poor man going litteraly nuts with rage while the sky is falling on his head.Try it , it 'll do you good .
Seriously , I had not experienced such a powerful rush of pure , unaltered , sweet schadenfreude on the internets for a long time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I found the most fascinating part of TFA to be a link to a post [freedom-to-tinker.com] by the Nexicon CTO himself in the comments of the initial article.
It's 500 words of frantic, badly spelled gibberish whithout a single grammatically correct sentence and devoid of any substantial argument.
You can literally see the poor man going litteraly nuts with rage while the sky is falling on his head.Try it, it'll do you good.
Seriously, I had not experienced such a powerful rush of pure, unaltered, sweet schadenfreude on the internets for a long time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507228</id>
	<title>SPONGe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261308960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">geeting together to a super-or6anised came as a complete</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>geeting together to a super-or6anised came as a complete [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>geeting together to a super-or6anised came as a complete [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506254</id>
	<title>Not a solution.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261300500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The proper way to solve these problems is to establish legal precedent, not to give them bad press.  They'll just find someone else to do their dirty work now, and we're still as fucked as always in the eyes of the braindead laws.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The proper way to solve these problems is to establish legal precedent , not to give them bad press .
They 'll just find someone else to do their dirty work now , and we 're still as fucked as always in the eyes of the braindead laws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The proper way to solve these problems is to establish legal precedent, not to give them bad press.
They'll just find someone else to do their dirty work now, and we're still as fucked as always in the eyes of the braindead laws.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506444</id>
	<title>Repeal the law...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261302240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ok, now that we've had over a decade with the DMCA, haven't lawmakers seen that it doesn't work and ends up being a pain to the purchaser more than the pirate? Since the DMCA, how many fewer movies have been pirated? My guess is none. What about music? Nope. However, how many purchasers of content really wanted to strip out DRM and other nonsense from the things they bought but can't legally? My guess is just about everyone who has purchased DRM-ed content and wants to use it in some way. <br> <br>

The internet is overwhelmingly against the DMCA, why keep it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , now that we 've had over a decade with the DMCA , have n't lawmakers seen that it does n't work and ends up being a pain to the purchaser more than the pirate ?
Since the DMCA , how many fewer movies have been pirated ?
My guess is none .
What about music ?
Nope. However , how many purchasers of content really wanted to strip out DRM and other nonsense from the things they bought but ca n't legally ?
My guess is just about everyone who has purchased DRM-ed content and wants to use it in some way .
The internet is overwhelmingly against the DMCA , why keep it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, now that we've had over a decade with the DMCA, haven't lawmakers seen that it doesn't work and ends up being a pain to the purchaser more than the pirate?
Since the DMCA, how many fewer movies have been pirated?
My guess is none.
What about music?
Nope. However, how many purchasers of content really wanted to strip out DRM and other nonsense from the things they bought but can't legally?
My guess is just about everyone who has purchased DRM-ed content and wants to use it in some way.
The internet is overwhelmingly against the DMCA, why keep it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506280</id>
	<title>Oh kdawson</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261300740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Troll me harder kdawson. HARDER, troll me harder!<br>I need it so bad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Troll me harder kdawson .
HARDER , troll me harder ! I need it so bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Troll me harder kdawson.
HARDER, troll me harder!I need it so bad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507224</id>
	<title>Re:The takedown notice system isn't inherently bad</title>
	<author>billeeto</author>
	<datestamp>1261308900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>adding to the irony, some plaintiffs regret when a defendants' youtube video is actually taken down in response to a complaint, as it limits the damages.</htmltext>
<tokenext>adding to the irony , some plaintiffs regret when a defendants ' youtube video is actually taken down in response to a complaint , as it limits the damages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>adding to the irony, some plaintiffs regret when a defendants' youtube video is actually taken down in response to a complaint, as it limits the damages.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506510</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30515176</id>
	<title>Re:The takedown notice system isn't inherently bad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261425180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The DMCA take down system isn't inherently bad. It protects ISPs and various hosts from what would otherwise be severe liability</p></div><p>I'm posting this ac as I don't give a flying fig about points and somehow someone's inane shit always floats to the top. I want my point to resurface as it was once common knowledge.</p><p>I am tired of the oft repeated bogosities, nonfacts or misrepresentations of law, ethics and morals. I remember the time of the DMCA passing in 1997 or 99, I wont bother to look it up. The DMCA was passed because <b>without</b> a profit motive,</p><ul><li>It was not illegal to infringe copyright by \_trading\_ mp3s, etc. - <b>if no money exchanged hands</b></li><li>Ipso facto it was not unethical/immoral by infringing copyright by \_trading\_ mp3s, etc. (was one infringing copyright if no profit {money, fame, etc.} was involved)- if no money exchanged hands <b>AS THE LAW DID NOT RECOGNIZE A CRIME HAD OCCURRED</b>. BECAUSE WHY WOULD CRIMINALS AND HIGH SEAS MURDERING RAPING PLUNDERING "PIRATES", you know, copyright infringers, WORK SO HARD FOR NO MONEY.</li></ul><p>So. If the DMCA was passed to make infringing copyright for no-profit a legal violation after ~1999, how could repealing that rockbed foundation from the edifice that is current law (less than 10 years old btw) be the coming of End of Days of Our Way of Life? Mierda.</p><p>What are we left to fear? in the Land of the Fee and the Home of the Knave.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The DMCA take down system is n't inherently bad .
It protects ISPs and various hosts from what would otherwise be severe liabilityI 'm posting this ac as I do n't give a flying fig about points and somehow someone 's inane shit always floats to the top .
I want my point to resurface as it was once common knowledge.I am tired of the oft repeated bogosities , nonfacts or misrepresentations of law , ethics and morals .
I remember the time of the DMCA passing in 1997 or 99 , I wont bother to look it up .
The DMCA was passed because without a profit motive,It was not illegal to infringe copyright by \ _trading \ _ mp3s , etc .
- if no money exchanged handsIpso facto it was not unethical/immoral by infringing copyright by \ _trading \ _ mp3s , etc .
( was one infringing copyright if no profit { money , fame , etc .
} was involved ) - if no money exchanged hands AS THE LAW DID NOT RECOGNIZE A CRIME HAD OCCURRED .
BECAUSE WHY WOULD CRIMINALS AND HIGH SEAS MURDERING RAPING PLUNDERING " PIRATES " , you know , copyright infringers , WORK SO HARD FOR NO MONEY.So .
If the DMCA was passed to make infringing copyright for no-profit a legal violation after ~ 1999 , how could repealing that rockbed foundation from the edifice that is current law ( less than 10 years old btw ) be the coming of End of Days of Our Way of Life ?
Mierda.What are we left to fear ?
in the Land of the Fee and the Home of the Knave .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The DMCA take down system isn't inherently bad.
It protects ISPs and various hosts from what would otherwise be severe liabilityI'm posting this ac as I don't give a flying fig about points and somehow someone's inane shit always floats to the top.
I want my point to resurface as it was once common knowledge.I am tired of the oft repeated bogosities, nonfacts or misrepresentations of law, ethics and morals.
I remember the time of the DMCA passing in 1997 or 99, I wont bother to look it up.
The DMCA was passed because without a profit motive,It was not illegal to infringe copyright by \_trading\_ mp3s, etc.
- if no money exchanged handsIpso facto it was not unethical/immoral by infringing copyright by \_trading\_ mp3s, etc.
(was one infringing copyright if no profit {money, fame, etc.
} was involved)- if no money exchanged hands AS THE LAW DID NOT RECOGNIZE A CRIME HAD OCCURRED.
BECAUSE WHY WOULD CRIMINALS AND HIGH SEAS MURDERING RAPING PLUNDERING "PIRATES", you know, copyright infringers, WORK SO HARD FOR NO MONEY.So.
If the DMCA was passed to make infringing copyright for no-profit a legal violation after ~1999, how could repealing that rockbed foundation from the edifice that is current law (less than 10 years old btw) be the coming of End of Days of Our Way of Life?
Mierda.What are we left to fear?
in the Land of the Fee and the Home of the Knave.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506510</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507116</id>
	<title>Re:The takedown notice system isn't inherently bad</title>
	<author>kenshin33</author>
	<datestamp>1261307940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>ISP should have nothing to do with this<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... (is postal service (carrier) responsible for the drugs/copied CD/DVDs they deliver ????) <br>
notice and notice. where a fundamental constitutional/human right  is respected (presumption of innocence). right holder says "hey you're infringing" and here's why. <br> burden of proof is not on the defendant!</htmltext>
<tokenext>ISP should have nothing to do with this ... ( is postal service ( carrier ) responsible for the drugs/copied CD/DVDs they deliver ? ? ? ?
) notice and notice .
where a fundamental constitutional/human right is respected ( presumption of innocence ) .
right holder says " hey you 're infringing " and here 's why .
burden of proof is not on the defendant !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ISP should have nothing to do with this ... (is postal service (carrier) responsible for the drugs/copied CD/DVDs they deliver ????
) 
notice and notice.
where a fundamental constitutional/human right  is respected (presumption of innocence).
right holder says "hey you're infringing" and here's why.
burden of proof is not on the defendant!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506510</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507198</id>
	<title>Re:Repeal the law...</title>
	<author>Jah-Wren Ryel</author>
	<datestamp>1261308600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Ok, now that we've had over a decade with the DMCA, haven't lawmakers seen that it doesn't work and ends up being a pain to the purchaser more than the pirate?</p></div><p>Yeah, and then they will disband the TSA too!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , now that we 've had over a decade with the DMCA , have n't lawmakers seen that it does n't work and ends up being a pain to the purchaser more than the pirate ? Yeah , and then they will disband the TSA too !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, now that we've had over a decade with the DMCA, haven't lawmakers seen that it doesn't work and ends up being a pain to the purchaser more than the pirate?Yeah, and then they will disband the TSA too!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507174</id>
	<title>Re:Not a solution.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261308480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>They'll just find someone else to do their dirty work now</i> <br> <br>Or Nexicon could just assume a different corporate identity and get re-contracted, which is probably the most likely scenario.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 'll just find someone else to do their dirty work now Or Nexicon could just assume a different corporate identity and get re-contracted , which is probably the most likely scenario .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They'll just find someone else to do their dirty work now  Or Nexicon could just assume a different corporate identity and get re-contracted, which is probably the most likely scenario.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506410</id>
	<title>Legal recourse for malicious notices.</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1261302000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>while there may be little legal recourse to issuing invalid DMCA notices</p></div></blockquote><p>Not sure what world you live in, but there have been more than a few lawsuits against people issuing malicious/bogus DMCA notices, and they've not went the way the original issuer wanted.</p><p>Short version of how it works:<br>Company sends notice to your ISP<br>ISP/whatever shuts you off<br>You send a counter notice<br>ISP turns you back on<br>You both sue each other and fight it out.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>while there may be little legal recourse to issuing invalid DMCA noticesNot sure what world you live in , but there have been more than a few lawsuits against people issuing malicious/bogus DMCA notices , and they 've not went the way the original issuer wanted.Short version of how it works : Company sends notice to your ISPISP/whatever shuts you offYou send a counter noticeISP turns you back onYou both sue each other and fight it out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>while there may be little legal recourse to issuing invalid DMCA noticesNot sure what world you live in, but there have been more than a few lawsuits against people issuing malicious/bogus DMCA notices, and they've not went the way the original issuer wanted.Short version of how it works:Company sends notice to your ISPISP/whatever shuts you offYou send a counter noticeISP turns you back onYou both sue each other and fight it out.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507188</id>
	<title>Re:Little recourse?!</title>
	<author>billeeto</author>
	<datestamp>1261308600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Police:  This is 911, how can we help you?
DMCA False Takedown Victim:  Hello office someone has taken down my guns n' roses video with a bogus DMCA notice.
Police:   OK calm down.  Just keep it on the floor, don't move it.  Is it breathing?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Police : This is 911 , how can we help you ?
DMCA False Takedown Victim : Hello office someone has taken down my guns n ' roses video with a bogus DMCA notice .
Police : OK calm down .
Just keep it on the floor , do n't move it .
Is it breathing ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Police:  This is 911, how can we help you?
DMCA False Takedown Victim:  Hello office someone has taken down my guns n' roses video with a bogus DMCA notice.
Police:   OK calm down.
Just keep it on the floor, don't move it.
Is it breathing?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30514582</id>
	<title>bad press leads to rejection by the public</title>
	<author>formfeed</author>
	<datestamp>1261422660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not that the Alliance cares to much about the public, but what they care about is where the public discussion goes.
<p> They are kind of in a bind here: copyright enforcement through physical media is most likely a dead end, the current balance between fair share, free speech, and easy access on one side and copyright enforcement on the other side is shifting away from them. </p><p> The only way to fix this are new restrictions of usage rights, and controlled access only - taking away anonymity and some free speech. With states (US, Europe, China) that are more than willing to gain wider control over their citizens, this route has worked out pretty good so far. And as long as only a few geeks and librarians are protesting, it works fine. But once the press starts reporting about lawyers chasing down 10 yo girls, public opinion might shift.
</p><p> In this year's election in Germany the pirate-party gained about 2\%. Once they reach 5\% they are in parliament. At that point other parties will  start to "borrow" some of the topics to get voters back.  With the voting system in the US -at least theoretically- 30\% could vote for one party without getting a single seat, so I don't know where the tipping point in the US is. But I guess the Alliance doesn't want to find out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not that the Alliance cares to much about the public , but what they care about is where the public discussion goes .
They are kind of in a bind here : copyright enforcement through physical media is most likely a dead end , the current balance between fair share , free speech , and easy access on one side and copyright enforcement on the other side is shifting away from them .
The only way to fix this are new restrictions of usage rights , and controlled access only - taking away anonymity and some free speech .
With states ( US , Europe , China ) that are more than willing to gain wider control over their citizens , this route has worked out pretty good so far .
And as long as only a few geeks and librarians are protesting , it works fine .
But once the press starts reporting about lawyers chasing down 10 yo girls , public opinion might shift .
In this year 's election in Germany the pirate-party gained about 2 \ % .
Once they reach 5 \ % they are in parliament .
At that point other parties will start to " borrow " some of the topics to get voters back .
With the voting system in the US -at least theoretically- 30 \ % could vote for one party without getting a single seat , so I do n't know where the tipping point in the US is .
But I guess the Alliance does n't want to find out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not that the Alliance cares to much about the public, but what they care about is where the public discussion goes.
They are kind of in a bind here: copyright enforcement through physical media is most likely a dead end, the current balance between fair share, free speech, and easy access on one side and copyright enforcement on the other side is shifting away from them.
The only way to fix this are new restrictions of usage rights, and controlled access only - taking away anonymity and some free speech.
With states (US, Europe, China) that are more than willing to gain wider control over their citizens, this route has worked out pretty good so far.
And as long as only a few geeks and librarians are protesting, it works fine.
But once the press starts reporting about lawyers chasing down 10 yo girls, public opinion might shift.
In this year's election in Germany the pirate-party gained about 2\%.
Once they reach 5\% they are in parliament.
At that point other parties will  start to "borrow" some of the topics to get voters back.
With the voting system in the US -at least theoretically- 30\% could vote for one party without getting a single seat, so I don't know where the tipping point in the US is.
But I guess the Alliance doesn't want to find out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506732</id>
	<title>Re:Penalty of Perjury</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261305000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IANAL, but I read that as stating that only a violation of the second half of that sentence, that the complaining party is authorized, has a penalty of perjury. What you're suggesting might be better implied by "A statement, under penalty of perjury, that the information in the notification is accurate..." etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IANAL , but I read that as stating that only a violation of the second half of that sentence , that the complaining party is authorized , has a penalty of perjury .
What you 're suggesting might be better implied by " A statement , under penalty of perjury , that the information in the notification is accurate... " etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IANAL, but I read that as stating that only a violation of the second half of that sentence, that the complaining party is authorized, has a penalty of perjury.
What you're suggesting might be better implied by "A statement, under penalty of perjury, that the information in the notification is accurate..." etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507294</id>
	<title>Re:The takedown notice system isn't inherently bad</title>
	<author>davecb</author>
	<datestamp>1261309620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Canada (currently*) has it better: if someone gives a legal notice to the ISP, the ISP passes it on to the customer to decide.

</p><p>I think the notice required is whatever one typically gives in order to commence a lawsuit, but I haven't read all of Halsbury's yet, so I don't know (;-))

</p><p>--dave<br>
* This may change if the secret antipiracy treaty currently being debated worldwide passes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Canada ( currently * ) has it better : if someone gives a legal notice to the ISP , the ISP passes it on to the customer to decide .
I think the notice required is whatever one typically gives in order to commence a lawsuit , but I have n't read all of Halsbury 's yet , so I do n't know ( ; - ) ) --dave * This may change if the secret antipiracy treaty currently being debated worldwide passes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Canada (currently*) has it better: if someone gives a legal notice to the ISP, the ISP passes it on to the customer to decide.
I think the notice required is whatever one typically gives in order to commence a lawsuit, but I haven't read all of Halsbury's yet, so I don't know (;-))

--dave
* This may change if the secret antipiracy treaty currently being debated worldwide passes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506510</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30508050</id>
	<title>Law as a tool to legitimise social control....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261318740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unfortunately law is now the tool with which the powerful interests legitimise their actions.</p><p>To a limited extent this has always been true. However, the corruption in the system is so widespread....</p><p><div class="quote"><p>And now bills were passed, not only for national objects but for individual cases, and laws were most numerous when the commonwealth was most corrupt.</p></div><p>I'm too disheartened to write intelligently about this at the present time.</p><p>I left a career in the law when it became apparent that my own prominent success caused more problems than I could solve in practice. The more prominent my own achievements, and the better I practised, the greater veneer of fairness and legitimacy I gave to a corrupt system.</p><p>I would urge all lawyers to think carefully about their role in this system. With a very few exceptions, I think prominent and talented advocates do more damage than good working within this system.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately law is now the tool with which the powerful interests legitimise their actions.To a limited extent this has always been true .
However , the corruption in the system is so widespread....And now bills were passed , not only for national objects but for individual cases , and laws were most numerous when the commonwealth was most corrupt.I 'm too disheartened to write intelligently about this at the present time.I left a career in the law when it became apparent that my own prominent success caused more problems than I could solve in practice .
The more prominent my own achievements , and the better I practised , the greater veneer of fairness and legitimacy I gave to a corrupt system.I would urge all lawyers to think carefully about their role in this system .
With a very few exceptions , I think prominent and talented advocates do more damage than good working within this system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately law is now the tool with which the powerful interests legitimise their actions.To a limited extent this has always been true.
However, the corruption in the system is so widespread....And now bills were passed, not only for national objects but for individual cases, and laws were most numerous when the commonwealth was most corrupt.I'm too disheartened to write intelligently about this at the present time.I left a career in the law when it became apparent that my own prominent success caused more problems than I could solve in practice.
The more prominent my own achievements, and the better I practised, the greater veneer of fairness and legitimacy I gave to a corrupt system.I would urge all lawyers to think carefully about their role in this system.
With a very few exceptions, I think prominent and talented advocates do more damage than good working within this system.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507024</id>
	<title>Re:Legal recourse for malicious notices.</title>
	<author>catman</author>
	<datestamp>1261307340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>
You both sue each other and fight it out.</p></div><p>And the winners are - the lawyers!!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You both sue each other and fight it out.And the winners are - the lawyers !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
You both sue each other and fight it out.And the winners are - the lawyers!
!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506410</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30509046
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30515258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506444
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30508564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506768
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30508508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506510
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506664
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506628
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506444
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30514582
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506254
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506510
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506664
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506510
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30508642
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507762
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506664
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507174
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506254
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30567726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30515176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506510
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506410
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506444
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507684
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506768
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506732
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506664
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506932
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506510
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507116
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506510
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506510
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506444
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30509058
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507188
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506768
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_20_192215_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506254
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_192215.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506768
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507188
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507684
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30508564
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_192215.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506664
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507868
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507762
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506906
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507312
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506732
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_192215.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506752
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_192215.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506280
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30508642
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30509046
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_192215.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506450
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_192215.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506384
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_192215.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506270
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507428
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30509058
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_192215.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506410
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507024
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_192215.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506444
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506628
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30515258
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507198
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507864
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_192215.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506510
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506932
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507116
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30508508
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507224
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507294
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507060
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30515176
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30567726
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_20_192215.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506254
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30507174
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30506520
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_20_192215.30514582
</commentlist>
</conversation>
