<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_02_0310211</id>
	<title>Man Tracked Down and Arrested Via <em>WoW</em></title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1262459340000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>kabome writes with this excerpt from a story about an alleged drug dealer who was located by law enforcement thanks to <em>World of Warcraft</em>:
<i>"Roberson&rsquo;s subpoena was nothing more than a politely worded request, considering the limits of his law enforcement jurisdiction and the ambiguity of the online world. 'They don&rsquo;t have to respond to us, and I was under the assumption that they wouldn&rsquo;t,' said Roberson. ... Blizzard did more than cooperate. It gave Roberson everything he needed to track down Hightower, including <a href="http://kokomoperspective.com/news/local\_news/article\_15a0a546-f574-11de-ab22-001cc4c03286.html">his IP address, his account information and history, his billing address</a>, and even his online screen name and preferred server. From there it was a simple matter to zero in on the suspect's location."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>kabome writes with this excerpt from a story about an alleged drug dealer who was located by law enforcement thanks to World of Warcraft : " Roberson    s subpoena was nothing more than a politely worded request , considering the limits of his law enforcement jurisdiction and the ambiguity of the online world .
'They don    t have to respond to us , and I was under the assumption that they wouldn    t, ' said Roberson .
... Blizzard did more than cooperate .
It gave Roberson everything he needed to track down Hightower , including his IP address , his account information and history , his billing address , and even his online screen name and preferred server .
From there it was a simple matter to zero in on the suspect 's location .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>kabome writes with this excerpt from a story about an alleged drug dealer who was located by law enforcement thanks to World of Warcraft:
"Roberson’s subpoena was nothing more than a politely worded request, considering the limits of his law enforcement jurisdiction and the ambiguity of the online world.
'They don’t have to respond to us, and I was under the assumption that they wouldn’t,' said Roberson.
... Blizzard did more than cooperate.
It gave Roberson everything he needed to track down Hightower, including his IP address, his account information and history, his billing address, and even his online screen name and preferred server.
From there it was a simple matter to zero in on the suspect's location.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621028</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>dontmakemethink</author>
	<datestamp>1262431860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Besides, killing real people doesn't leave a data trail, and is far more realistic.  Why pay for the fake stuff that gets you busted!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Besides , killing real people does n't leave a data trail , and is far more realistic .
Why pay for the fake stuff that gets you busted !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Besides, killing real people doesn't leave a data trail, and is far more realistic.
Why pay for the fake stuff that gets you busted!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620378</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620586</id>
	<title>Personal vendetta?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262424720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I get the feeling this sheriff actually played WoW with the dealer and got upset/angry enough to chase him based on guild chat comments. How else would he know that the guy is in Canada and plays WoW? What sort of childhood friend would sell you out for a couple of drug dealing charges in such detail?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I get the feeling this sheriff actually played WoW with the dealer and got upset/angry enough to chase him based on guild chat comments .
How else would he know that the guy is in Canada and plays WoW ?
What sort of childhood friend would sell you out for a couple of drug dealing charges in such detail ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I get the feeling this sheriff actually played WoW with the dealer and got upset/angry enough to chase him based on guild chat comments.
How else would he know that the guy is in Canada and plays WoW?
What sort of childhood friend would sell you out for a couple of drug dealing charges in such detail?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30623934</id>
	<title>WoW got real</title>
	<author>findoutmoretoday</author>
	<datestamp>1262457540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>Somewhere, just for a few seconds, WoW got real, for someone.</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>Somewhere , just for a few seconds , WoW got real , for someone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Somewhere, just for a few seconds, WoW got real, for someone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620346</id>
	<title>Heh.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262465040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>What's Blizzard going to do when someone posing as law enforcement gets some information and then goes and murders that person...  Hmm?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's Blizzard going to do when someone posing as law enforcement gets some information and then goes and murders that person... Hmm ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's Blizzard going to do when someone posing as law enforcement gets some information and then goes and murders that person...  Hmm?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620562</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262424480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So this warrant was issued two years ago, he fled the country, started a new life, and there is (as far as I can tell) no evidence of him dealing drugs after that.</p></div><p>This is America, where you aren't allowed to start over and have a new life after realizing a mistake such as helping other people.</p><p>In the eyes of our police force, just because he stopped selling doesn't mean he isn't a horrible person that deserves prison time, but he's also never allowed to make a life for himself after supposedly 'paying his dues'.<br>It is only acceptable to never let these people work or live in society again.</p><p>While granted the entire basis of our legal system is stated as rehabilitation, their actions over the last 300 years show the exact opposite is true in reality.</p><p>And if our police force has shown us anything, it is that a murderer is not worth going after because it will be too hard, yet someone selling $50 worth of pot is totally worth the tens of thousands (or more in this case) of dollars to track them down and ruin their life.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So this warrant was issued two years ago , he fled the country , started a new life , and there is ( as far as I can tell ) no evidence of him dealing drugs after that.This is America , where you are n't allowed to start over and have a new life after realizing a mistake such as helping other people.In the eyes of our police force , just because he stopped selling does n't mean he is n't a horrible person that deserves prison time , but he 's also never allowed to make a life for himself after supposedly 'paying his dues'.It is only acceptable to never let these people work or live in society again.While granted the entire basis of our legal system is stated as rehabilitation , their actions over the last 300 years show the exact opposite is true in reality.And if our police force has shown us anything , it is that a murderer is not worth going after because it will be too hard , yet someone selling $ 50 worth of pot is totally worth the tens of thousands ( or more in this case ) of dollars to track them down and ruin their life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So this warrant was issued two years ago, he fled the country, started a new life, and there is (as far as I can tell) no evidence of him dealing drugs after that.This is America, where you aren't allowed to start over and have a new life after realizing a mistake such as helping other people.In the eyes of our police force, just because he stopped selling doesn't mean he isn't a horrible person that deserves prison time, but he's also never allowed to make a life for himself after supposedly 'paying his dues'.It is only acceptable to never let these people work or live in society again.While granted the entire basis of our legal system is stated as rehabilitation, their actions over the last 300 years show the exact opposite is true in reality.And if our police force has shown us anything, it is that a murderer is not worth going after because it will be too hard, yet someone selling $50 worth of pot is totally worth the tens of thousands (or more in this case) of dollars to track them down and ruin their life.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30625054</id>
	<title>"This is the city"</title>
	<author>Chris Mattern</author>
	<datestamp>1262464020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Stormwind, Azeroth.  I work here.  My name is Sir Lothar.  I carry a mace."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Stormwind , Azeroth .
I work here .
My name is Sir Lothar .
I carry a mace .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Stormwind, Azeroth.
I work here.
My name is Sir Lothar.
I carry a mace.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30622294</id>
	<title>Wake me up when the arrest somebody inworld</title>
	<author>RobertLTux</author>
	<datestamp>1262448060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even if its partly Real World partly Virtual World (of course i would have the police tricked out and leveled to +10 of current max.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if its partly Real World partly Virtual World ( of course i would have the police tricked out and leveled to + 10 of current max .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if its partly Real World partly Virtual World (of course i would have the police tricked out and leveled to +10 of current max.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621680</id>
	<title>Re:Your answer is right there in the Terms of Use</title>
	<author>Jah-Wren Ryel</author>
	<datestamp>1262442120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Well, though people do tend to gloss over the fine details in things like EULAs and Terms of Service, it's not as if Blizzard is hiding anything from its users. From the WoW Terms of Use:</p></div><p>Except that Blizzard <i>also</i> has a published privacy policy, referenced multiple times in this topic already, that reduces the scope of the requests of when they will hand that information over to a very limited set of cases and this situation - that of a 2 year old crime of the sale of drugs like steroids - is not in that list of cases.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , though people do tend to gloss over the fine details in things like EULAs and Terms of Service , it 's not as if Blizzard is hiding anything from its users .
From the WoW Terms of Use : Except that Blizzard also has a published privacy policy , referenced multiple times in this topic already , that reduces the scope of the requests of when they will hand that information over to a very limited set of cases and this situation - that of a 2 year old crime of the sale of drugs like steroids - is not in that list of cases .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, though people do tend to gloss over the fine details in things like EULAs and Terms of Service, it's not as if Blizzard is hiding anything from its users.
From the WoW Terms of Use:Except that Blizzard also has a published privacy policy, referenced multiple times in this topic already, that reduces the scope of the requests of when they will hand that information over to a very limited set of cases and this situation - that of a 2 year old crime of the sale of drugs like steroids - is not in that list of cases.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620336</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620784</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262427660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you read through Blizzard's privacy statement, you can summarize it as "We promise to hold your personal information with the utmost of confidentiality - until someone asks us for it."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you read through Blizzard 's privacy statement , you can summarize it as " We promise to hold your personal information with the utmost of confidentiality - until someone asks us for it .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you read through Blizzard's privacy statement, you can summarize it as "We promise to hold your personal information with the utmost of confidentiality - until someone asks us for it.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621432</id>
	<title>Re:Your answer is right there in the Terms of Use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262438040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sorry if I got it wrong, but I thought a <b>proper</b> "request from law enforcement" had a name - a "subpoena". <b> ANYTHING</b> not filed under that name are to be considered <em>improper</em> requests, and should thus <em>not</em> be complied with, since that's essentially the beginning of the "informant-society", as seen in the third Reich, the Soviet Union and other such cozy places.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sorry if I got it wrong , but I thought a proper " request from law enforcement " had a name - a " subpoena " .
ANYTHING not filed under that name are to be considered improper requests , and should thus not be complied with , since that 's essentially the beginning of the " informant-society " , as seen in the third Reich , the Soviet Union and other such cozy places .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sorry if I got it wrong, but I thought a proper "request from law enforcement" had a name - a "subpoena".
ANYTHING not filed under that name are to be considered improper requests, and should thus not be complied with, since that's essentially the beginning of the "informant-society", as seen in the third Reich, the Soviet Union and other such cozy places.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620336</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30626090</id>
	<title>Re:Armory Link</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262427000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He doesn't play much. I agree how he distributed his talents was quite questionable, but his gear seems to be in line with what someone who recently got to 80 would have. He probably didn't have any experience with healing, but was required to switch due to a required role that needed to be filled.</p><p>Its pretty clear that he wasn't always restro (healing), his glyphs indicate that he was elemental before the switch, he was just too lazy, or didn't have enough coin to change them (considering he didn't pay for dual spec). With only one talent reset (since they start tracking), he isn't switching roles often. He reached maximum level on october 17th, and with under 100 boss emblems, has not been playing pve content too heavily. There is evidence that he did play earlier content a bit too, so he probably quit and started back up in August or September.</p><p>With over 10,000 pvp kills, it is evident that he does pvp some, no serious arenas, mainly strand of the ancients and isle of conquest battle grounds. These two battle grounds have the vehicles, indicating that he prefers games that don't rely on brute force as much. However, he has won a large majority of his games in these two battle grounds. This does not indicate that he is good in these, but rather that he perfers games where his side is more likely to win (some battle grounds tend to become favorites of one faction or another in battle groups). Since he doesn't have his pvp gear on, its hard to determine how serious he is about pvp.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He does n't play much .
I agree how he distributed his talents was quite questionable , but his gear seems to be in line with what someone who recently got to 80 would have .
He probably did n't have any experience with healing , but was required to switch due to a required role that needed to be filled.Its pretty clear that he was n't always restro ( healing ) , his glyphs indicate that he was elemental before the switch , he was just too lazy , or did n't have enough coin to change them ( considering he did n't pay for dual spec ) .
With only one talent reset ( since they start tracking ) , he is n't switching roles often .
He reached maximum level on october 17th , and with under 100 boss emblems , has not been playing pve content too heavily .
There is evidence that he did play earlier content a bit too , so he probably quit and started back up in August or September.With over 10,000 pvp kills , it is evident that he does pvp some , no serious arenas , mainly strand of the ancients and isle of conquest battle grounds .
These two battle grounds have the vehicles , indicating that he prefers games that do n't rely on brute force as much .
However , he has won a large majority of his games in these two battle grounds .
This does not indicate that he is good in these , but rather that he perfers games where his side is more likely to win ( some battle grounds tend to become favorites of one faction or another in battle groups ) .
Since he does n't have his pvp gear on , its hard to determine how serious he is about pvp .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He doesn't play much.
I agree how he distributed his talents was quite questionable, but his gear seems to be in line with what someone who recently got to 80 would have.
He probably didn't have any experience with healing, but was required to switch due to a required role that needed to be filled.Its pretty clear that he wasn't always restro (healing), his glyphs indicate that he was elemental before the switch, he was just too lazy, or didn't have enough coin to change them (considering he didn't pay for dual spec).
With only one talent reset (since they start tracking), he isn't switching roles often.
He reached maximum level on october 17th, and with under 100 boss emblems, has not been playing pve content too heavily.
There is evidence that he did play earlier content a bit too, so he probably quit and started back up in August or September.With over 10,000 pvp kills, it is evident that he does pvp some, no serious arenas, mainly strand of the ancients and isle of conquest battle grounds.
These two battle grounds have the vehicles, indicating that he prefers games that don't rely on brute force as much.
However, he has won a large majority of his games in these two battle grounds.
This does not indicate that he is good in these, but rather that he perfers games where his side is more likely to win (some battle grounds tend to become favorites of one faction or another in battle groups).
Since he doesn't have his pvp gear on, its hard to determine how serious he is about pvp.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620422</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620638</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>Stevecrox</author>
	<datestamp>1262425560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually the Data Protection Act in the UK/Europe would probably make this sort of thing illegal. If I remember the act correctly Police have to get a search warrant in order to obtain this information otherwise it's no different from releasing the information to some bloke off the street. Blizzard would be liable here and probably fined up to &pound;250k.<br> <br>
America's complete lack of such a directive is the reason I'll never travel there, you demand personnel information to ensure we aren't terrorists and then allow any and every government department uncontrolled access to that information.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually the Data Protection Act in the UK/Europe would probably make this sort of thing illegal .
If I remember the act correctly Police have to get a search warrant in order to obtain this information otherwise it 's no different from releasing the information to some bloke off the street .
Blizzard would be liable here and probably fined up to   250k .
America 's complete lack of such a directive is the reason I 'll never travel there , you demand personnel information to ensure we are n't terrorists and then allow any and every government department uncontrolled access to that information .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually the Data Protection Act in the UK/Europe would probably make this sort of thing illegal.
If I remember the act correctly Police have to get a search warrant in order to obtain this information otherwise it's no different from releasing the information to some bloke off the street.
Blizzard would be liable here and probably fined up to £250k.
America's complete lack of such a directive is the reason I'll never travel there, you demand personnel information to ensure we aren't terrorists and then allow any and every government department uncontrolled access to that information.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620378</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621610</id>
	<title>The difference in this is in your visa statement..</title>
	<author>freaker\_TuC</author>
	<datestamp>1262441220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... Blizzard sells legal drugs (which you can have on your VISA statement)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>that dealer apparantly sold illegal drugs<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... which you rather don't want on your VISA statement<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... Blizzard sells legal drugs ( which you can have on your VISA statement ) ...that dealer apparantly sold illegal drugs .... which you rather do n't want on your VISA statement ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... Blizzard sells legal drugs (which you can have on your VISA statement) ...that dealer apparantly sold illegal drugs .... which you rather don't want on your VISA statement ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620486</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262423460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait until they realize how much money they can make selling the data to bill collectors...</p><p>"You may not advance to the next level until you have paid your outstanding Verizon bills".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait until they realize how much money they can make selling the data to bill collectors... " You may not advance to the next level until you have paid your outstanding Verizon bills " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait until they realize how much money they can make selling the data to bill collectors..."You may not advance to the next level until you have paid your outstanding Verizon bills".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621002</id>
	<title>resto shammy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262431440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Damn, it's already hard enough to find a resto shammy, there goes another one...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Damn , it 's already hard enough to find a resto shammy , there goes another one.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Damn, it's already hard enough to find a resto shammy, there goes another one...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30622420</id>
	<title>Re-roll</title>
	<author>BlackHawk-666</author>
	<datestamp>1262449080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The real moral of this story is that when you go on the run, you need to re-roll.

If the guy had just grabbed a new copy of WoW for sub $20 and the expansions, then some game cards - he could have played all he wanted anonymously.

On the run, hiding out alone in a different country, what better time to roll a FOTM and get leveling!</htmltext>
<tokenext>The real moral of this story is that when you go on the run , you need to re-roll .
If the guy had just grabbed a new copy of WoW for sub $ 20 and the expansions , then some game cards - he could have played all he wanted anonymously .
On the run , hiding out alone in a different country , what better time to roll a FOTM and get leveling !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The real moral of this story is that when you go on the run, you need to re-roll.
If the guy had just grabbed a new copy of WoW for sub $20 and the expansions, then some game cards - he could have played all he wanted anonymously.
On the run, hiding out alone in a different country, what better time to roll a FOTM and get leveling!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30624112</id>
	<title>Re:Your answer is right there in the Terms of Use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262458380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have worked at ISPs since the good ol days and I can tell you that a request from the police without a very detailed warrant gets you absolutely no cooperation from us.<br>I once told a detective to call back when he had a warrant that was delivered to ME, he was very pissed, but still ended up with no information.</p><p>Cops make mistakes, until the guy is convicted, you cannot label him "the bad guy"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have worked at ISPs since the good ol days and I can tell you that a request from the police without a very detailed warrant gets you absolutely no cooperation from us.I once told a detective to call back when he had a warrant that was delivered to ME , he was very pissed , but still ended up with no information.Cops make mistakes , until the guy is convicted , you can not label him " the bad guy "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have worked at ISPs since the good ol days and I can tell you that a request from the police without a very detailed warrant gets you absolutely no cooperation from us.I once told a detective to call back when he had a warrant that was delivered to ME, he was very pissed, but still ended up with no information.Cops make mistakes, until the guy is convicted, you cannot label him "the bad guy"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620336</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621058</id>
	<title>Mass exodus</title>
	<author>Kenoli</author>
	<datestamp>1262432580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This decision is just going to lead the game straight to ruin.<br>
I imagine the total number of accounts that will be closed as a result of this incident will be somewhere around, well, one.
<br>
Assuming the guy goes to jail<br>
<br>
And assuming they don't have WoW in jail.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This decision is just going to lead the game straight to ruin .
I imagine the total number of accounts that will be closed as a result of this incident will be somewhere around , well , one .
Assuming the guy goes to jail And assuming they do n't have WoW in jail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This decision is just going to lead the game straight to ruin.
I imagine the total number of accounts that will be closed as a result of this incident will be somewhere around, well, one.
Assuming the guy goes to jail

And assuming they don't have WoW in jail.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620722</id>
	<title>What I want to know is...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262426700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did the police raid his house shouting "LEEEEROOOOOY!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did the police raid his house shouting " LEEEEROOOOOY !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did the police raid his house shouting "LEEEEROOOOOY!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620870</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262429100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WOW's TOS is incredibly clear and up front about this; if law enforcement 'requests', they give.</p><p><a href="http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/legal/termsofuse.html" title="worldofwarcraft.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/legal/termsofuse.html</a> [worldofwarcraft.com]</p><p>17.  C. Blizzard may, with or without notice to you, disclose your Internet Protocol (IP) address(es), personal information, Chat logs, and other information about you and your activities: (a) in response to a request by law enforcement, a court order or other legal process; or (b) if Blizzard believes that doing so may protect your safety or the safety of others.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WOW 's TOS is incredibly clear and up front about this ; if law enforcement 'requests ' , they give.http : //www.worldofwarcraft.com/legal/termsofuse.html [ worldofwarcraft.com ] 17 .
C. Blizzard may , with or without notice to you , disclose your Internet Protocol ( IP ) address ( es ) , personal information , Chat logs , and other information about you and your activities : ( a ) in response to a request by law enforcement , a court order or other legal process ; or ( b ) if Blizzard believes that doing so may protect your safety or the safety of others .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WOW's TOS is incredibly clear and up front about this; if law enforcement 'requests', they give.http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/legal/termsofuse.html [worldofwarcraft.com]17.
C. Blizzard may, with or without notice to you, disclose your Internet Protocol (IP) address(es), personal information, Chat logs, and other information about you and your activities: (a) in response to a request by law enforcement, a court order or other legal process; or (b) if Blizzard believes that doing so may protect your safety or the safety of others.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620806</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262428200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;I'm glad the bad guy got caught</p><p>Are you?  He's only accused of dealing drugs.  Everyone has used drugs.  Shouldn't freedom over your own body be a right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; I 'm glad the bad guy got caughtAre you ?
He 's only accused of dealing drugs .
Everyone has used drugs .
Should n't freedom over your own body be a right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;I'm glad the bad guy got caughtAre you?
He's only accused of dealing drugs.
Everyone has used drugs.
Shouldn't freedom over your own body be a right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621024</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>thsths</author>
	<datestamp>1262431800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; There is certainly no law that states a company cannot cooperate with police without a search warrant.</p><p>Maybe not in American, but here there certainly is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; There is certainly no law that states a company can not cooperate with police without a search warrant.Maybe not in American , but here there certainly is : - ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; There is certainly no law that states a company cannot cooperate with police without a search warrant.Maybe not in American, but here there certainly is :-).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620378</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620370</id>
	<title>RTFA people...</title>
	<author>CaptainPotato</author>
	<datestamp>1262465280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Blizzard <i>was</i> subpoenaed:</p><p>&ldquo;None of that information was sound enough to pursue on its own, but putting everything we had together gave me enough evidence to send a subpoena to Blizzard Entertainment. I knew exactly what he was playing &mdash; World of Warcraft. I used to play it. It&rsquo;s one of the largest online games in the world.&rdquo;</p><p>Due to the guy being in a different country, there was not a need to respond to it, but I guess that there would have been nothing to have stopped one being sought in Canada....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Blizzard was subpoenaed :    None of that information was sound enough to pursue on its own , but putting everything we had together gave me enough evidence to send a subpoena to Blizzard Entertainment .
I knew exactly what he was playing    World of Warcraft .
I used to play it .
It    s one of the largest online games in the world.    Due to the guy being in a different country , there was not a need to respond to it , but I guess that there would have been nothing to have stopped one being sought in Canada... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Blizzard was subpoenaed:“None of that information was sound enough to pursue on its own, but putting everything we had together gave me enough evidence to send a subpoena to Blizzard Entertainment.
I knew exactly what he was playing — World of Warcraft.
I used to play it.
It’s one of the largest online games in the world.”Due to the guy being in a different country, there was not a need to respond to it, but I guess that there would have been nothing to have stopped one being sought in Canada....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621776</id>
	<title>Re:So he's not a drug dealer.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262443140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess it's a great time to become a lawyer then, what with all the false imprisonment charges we can file against the State because of this little thing called "custody".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess it 's a great time to become a lawyer then , what with all the false imprisonment charges we can file against the State because of this little thing called " custody " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess it's a great time to become a lawyer then, what with all the false imprisonment charges we can file against the State because of this little thing called "custody".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621340</id>
	<title>Too much black-and-white thinking here</title>
	<author>goodmanj</author>
	<datestamp>1262436660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nevermind the Internet angle, the real question here is an ancient one: should you cooperate with the police?</p><p>I think most of us would agree that law enforcement is necessary -- if you don't, you and I are never going to see eye to eye so you might as well stop reading now.  Law enforcement needs information to work properly.  If citizens universally refuse to provide that information, the only way to get it is via direct police surveillance.</p><p>So you've got three options: A) police act without any information, B) they set up ubiquitous surveillance to get their info, or C) they get information from citizens.  I hope we all agree that C) is the lesser of evils.</p><p>So our society has set things up so that in certain very limited circumstances, people are *required* to give information to the police (search warrants, subpoenas, etc.)  In other situations, police are forbidden from demanding certain kinds of information, to protect the rights of the accused.  (Miranda laws, etc)</p><p>For everything in between, cooperation is optional and voluntary.  We can decide whether to help or not, based on our sense of the severity of the crime, our personal ties to the suspect, our trust of the police, and any details of the case we're familiar with.  It's a judgment call.</p><p>I think we need to respect the fact that different people or entities are going to make that judgment call differently, based on their own priorities and values.</p><p>To say that helping the cops is always the right or the wrong choice is ridiculously simplistic.  You can comment on Blizzard's decision in this particular case, but tying it to some absurd moral absolute is asking for trouble.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nevermind the Internet angle , the real question here is an ancient one : should you cooperate with the police ? I think most of us would agree that law enforcement is necessary -- if you do n't , you and I are never going to see eye to eye so you might as well stop reading now .
Law enforcement needs information to work properly .
If citizens universally refuse to provide that information , the only way to get it is via direct police surveillance.So you 've got three options : A ) police act without any information , B ) they set up ubiquitous surveillance to get their info , or C ) they get information from citizens .
I hope we all agree that C ) is the lesser of evils.So our society has set things up so that in certain very limited circumstances , people are * required * to give information to the police ( search warrants , subpoenas , etc .
) In other situations , police are forbidden from demanding certain kinds of information , to protect the rights of the accused .
( Miranda laws , etc ) For everything in between , cooperation is optional and voluntary .
We can decide whether to help or not , based on our sense of the severity of the crime , our personal ties to the suspect , our trust of the police , and any details of the case we 're familiar with .
It 's a judgment call.I think we need to respect the fact that different people or entities are going to make that judgment call differently , based on their own priorities and values.To say that helping the cops is always the right or the wrong choice is ridiculously simplistic .
You can comment on Blizzard 's decision in this particular case , but tying it to some absurd moral absolute is asking for trouble .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nevermind the Internet angle, the real question here is an ancient one: should you cooperate with the police?I think most of us would agree that law enforcement is necessary -- if you don't, you and I are never going to see eye to eye so you might as well stop reading now.
Law enforcement needs information to work properly.
If citizens universally refuse to provide that information, the only way to get it is via direct police surveillance.So you've got three options: A) police act without any information, B) they set up ubiquitous surveillance to get their info, or C) they get information from citizens.
I hope we all agree that C) is the lesser of evils.So our society has set things up so that in certain very limited circumstances, people are *required* to give information to the police (search warrants, subpoenas, etc.
)  In other situations, police are forbidden from demanding certain kinds of information, to protect the rights of the accused.
(Miranda laws, etc)For everything in between, cooperation is optional and voluntary.
We can decide whether to help or not, based on our sense of the severity of the crime, our personal ties to the suspect, our trust of the police, and any details of the case we're familiar with.
It's a judgment call.I think we need to respect the fact that different people or entities are going to make that judgment call differently, based on their own priorities and values.To say that helping the cops is always the right or the wrong choice is ridiculously simplistic.
You can comment on Blizzard's decision in this particular case, but tying it to some absurd moral absolute is asking for trouble.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30628304</id>
	<title>Re:So he's not a drug dealer.</title>
	<author>Jacked</author>
	<datestamp>1262442660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just because he's an alleged drug dealer doesn't mean he isn't one.  What is historically factual does not depend on the future ruling of a court.</p><p>And, he's <b> <i>presumed</i> </b> innocent.  If he did the crime, he's guilty, regardless of what any court has or has not said.  And the reverse is true if he didn't do the crime.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just because he 's an alleged drug dealer does n't mean he is n't one .
What is historically factual does not depend on the future ruling of a court.And , he 's presumed innocent .
If he did the crime , he 's guilty , regardless of what any court has or has not said .
And the reverse is true if he did n't do the crime .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just because he's an alleged drug dealer doesn't mean he isn't one.
What is historically factual does not depend on the future ruling of a court.And, he's  presumed  innocent.
If he did the crime, he's guilty, regardless of what any court has or has not said.
And the reverse is true if he didn't do the crime.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30628134</id>
	<title>Re:Armory Link</title>
	<author>DMorritt</author>
	<datestamp>1262440920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dear god, anyone with Convection in a Resto build needs locking up.
<br> <br>
I don't play on that server, so no idea what reputation he has, but to think... I could have x-realm pugged with him...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dear god , anyone with Convection in a Resto build needs locking up .
I do n't play on that server , so no idea what reputation he has , but to think... I could have x-realm pugged with him.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dear god, anyone with Convection in a Resto build needs locking up.
I don't play on that server, so no idea what reputation he has, but to think... I could have x-realm pugged with him...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620422</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621442</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262438220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/legal/termsofuse.html" title="worldofwarcraft.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/legal/termsofuse.html</a> [worldofwarcraft.com]
<br> <br>
17. C. Blizzard may, with or without notice to you, disclose your Internet Protocol (IP) address(es), personal information, Chat logs, and other information about you and your activities: (a) in response to a request by law enforcement, a court order or other legal process; or (b) if Blizzard believes that doing so may protect your safety or the safety of others.</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.worldofwarcraft.com/legal/termsofuse.html [ worldofwarcraft.com ] 17 .
C. Blizzard may , with or without notice to you , disclose your Internet Protocol ( IP ) address ( es ) , personal information , Chat logs , and other information about you and your activities : ( a ) in response to a request by law enforcement , a court order or other legal process ; or ( b ) if Blizzard believes that doing so may protect your safety or the safety of others .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/legal/termsofuse.html [worldofwarcraft.com]
 
17.
C. Blizzard may, with or without notice to you, disclose your Internet Protocol (IP) address(es), personal information, Chat logs, and other information about you and your activities: (a) in response to a request by law enforcement, a court order or other legal process; or (b) if Blizzard believes that doing so may protect your safety or the safety of others.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30622650</id>
	<title>Large organisations usually cooperate</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262450760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I worked for a large ISP in the UK. We regularly received requests to take down user websites. The requests usually came from organisations which specialised in tracking down pornographic material of one form or another, or from injured parties who objected to content. Sometimes the police would contact us and ask for user details, though that was less common.</p><p>We (the ISP) would always take a look, and if there was any doubt about the material, it would be taken down. I recall one incident when one user posted an obviously mock threat to cause harm to a well known person. The police asked for and were given the address of the account associated with the IP of the person who posted the comment. There was no court intervention and the word of the police was accepted at face value. Don't kid yourselves. If you post salacious comments or questionable material but do not get a knock at the door, it isn't because your privacy is being protected. It is because there is too much material out there for the police to deal with.</p><p>Governments around the world are moving to implement legislation to allow the automatic blocking of specific websites (Australia is there already) and you can be sure that when the population is used to that, the ratchet will be tightened a notch or two more.</p><p>The days of freedom on the Internet are limited. Enjoy it while it lasts. You will conform.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I worked for a large ISP in the UK .
We regularly received requests to take down user websites .
The requests usually came from organisations which specialised in tracking down pornographic material of one form or another , or from injured parties who objected to content .
Sometimes the police would contact us and ask for user details , though that was less common.We ( the ISP ) would always take a look , and if there was any doubt about the material , it would be taken down .
I recall one incident when one user posted an obviously mock threat to cause harm to a well known person .
The police asked for and were given the address of the account associated with the IP of the person who posted the comment .
There was no court intervention and the word of the police was accepted at face value .
Do n't kid yourselves .
If you post salacious comments or questionable material but do not get a knock at the door , it is n't because your privacy is being protected .
It is because there is too much material out there for the police to deal with.Governments around the world are moving to implement legislation to allow the automatic blocking of specific websites ( Australia is there already ) and you can be sure that when the population is used to that , the ratchet will be tightened a notch or two more.The days of freedom on the Internet are limited .
Enjoy it while it lasts .
You will conform .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I worked for a large ISP in the UK.
We regularly received requests to take down user websites.
The requests usually came from organisations which specialised in tracking down pornographic material of one form or another, or from injured parties who objected to content.
Sometimes the police would contact us and ask for user details, though that was less common.We (the ISP) would always take a look, and if there was any doubt about the material, it would be taken down.
I recall one incident when one user posted an obviously mock threat to cause harm to a well known person.
The police asked for and were given the address of the account associated with the IP of the person who posted the comment.
There was no court intervention and the word of the police was accepted at face value.
Don't kid yourselves.
If you post salacious comments or questionable material but do not get a knock at the door, it isn't because your privacy is being protected.
It is because there is too much material out there for the police to deal with.Governments around the world are moving to implement legislation to allow the automatic blocking of specific websites (Australia is there already) and you can be sure that when the population is used to that, the ratchet will be tightened a notch or two more.The days of freedom on the Internet are limited.
Enjoy it while it lasts.
You will conform.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620804</id>
	<title>Go Blizzard</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262428200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Suspect was found by the help of Blizzard... if he is innocent, so be it, he will be found innocent. in such case he can stop playing WOW if he wants to. Otherwise, he is found guilty and Blizzard help find a criminal... either way, i say go Blizzard. If your a criminal and your playing WOW, they might give you up if asked so beware.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Suspect was found by the help of Blizzard... if he is innocent , so be it , he will be found innocent .
in such case he can stop playing WOW if he wants to .
Otherwise , he is found guilty and Blizzard help find a criminal... either way , i say go Blizzard .
If your a criminal and your playing WOW , they might give you up if asked so beware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Suspect was found by the help of Blizzard... if he is innocent, so be it, he will be found innocent.
in such case he can stop playing WOW if he wants to.
Otherwise, he is found guilty and Blizzard help find a criminal... either way, i say go Blizzard.
If your a criminal and your playing WOW, they might give you up if asked so beware.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620382</id>
	<title>Hmm.. that name..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262465340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hightower? Is he related to Reno Hightower, van specialist?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hightower ?
Is he related to Reno Hightower , van specialist ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hightower?
Is he related to Reno Hightower, van specialist?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620304</id>
	<title>So...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262464320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just one drug dealer ratting out another.  Move along, nothing to see here...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just one drug dealer ratting out another .
Move along , nothing to see here.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just one drug dealer ratting out another.
Move along, nothing to see here...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621572</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262440560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is Slashdot- Dry up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is Slashdot- Dry up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is Slashdot- Dry up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620378</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30644410</id>
	<title>Wow</title>
	<author>ozzehmgaow</author>
	<datestamp>1262635860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>WoW, doesn't sound too good, but it was a drug dealer so I don't care. Long as they don' give out info on everyone.</htmltext>
<tokenext>WoW , does n't sound too good , but it was a drug dealer so I do n't care .
Long as they don ' give out info on everyone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WoW, doesn't sound too good, but it was a drug dealer so I don't care.
Long as they don' give out info on everyone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30623282</id>
	<title>Another lying Sheriff gets applauded</title>
	<author>fluffy99</author>
	<datestamp>1262454240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Roberson&rsquo;s subpoena was nothing more than a politely worded request"</p></div><p>So basically this Sheriff lied and misrepresented himself in order to trick Blizzard into revealing personal data?  That is illegal in itself, btw.  Or was there an actual court issued subpoena involved?  I which case the court probably overstepped its authority.</p><p>I guess the cop also isn't as internet savvy as he thinks, since an IP address doesn't necessarily located a physical address.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Talbert explained that this online manhunt isn&rsquo;t the first time his department has ventured onto the Internet to track down a suspect. Earlier this year, sheriff&rsquo;s deputies used a phone number look-up Web site to find a man in North Carolina who was wanted on charges in Howard County. In that case, authorities found their suspect through an online classified ad on Craig&rsquo;s List.</p></div><p>Wow.  They discovered how to google a phone number!  Are they really bragging about coming out of the dark ages?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Roberson    s subpoena was nothing more than a politely worded request " So basically this Sheriff lied and misrepresented himself in order to trick Blizzard into revealing personal data ?
That is illegal in itself , btw .
Or was there an actual court issued subpoena involved ?
I which case the court probably overstepped its authority.I guess the cop also is n't as internet savvy as he thinks , since an IP address does n't necessarily located a physical address.Talbert explained that this online manhunt isn    t the first time his department has ventured onto the Internet to track down a suspect .
Earlier this year , sheriff    s deputies used a phone number look-up Web site to find a man in North Carolina who was wanted on charges in Howard County .
In that case , authorities found their suspect through an online classified ad on Craig    s List.Wow .
They discovered how to google a phone number !
Are they really bragging about coming out of the dark ages ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Roberson’s subpoena was nothing more than a politely worded request"So basically this Sheriff lied and misrepresented himself in order to trick Blizzard into revealing personal data?
That is illegal in itself, btw.
Or was there an actual court issued subpoena involved?
I which case the court probably overstepped its authority.I guess the cop also isn't as internet savvy as he thinks, since an IP address doesn't necessarily located a physical address.Talbert explained that this online manhunt isn’t the first time his department has ventured onto the Internet to track down a suspect.
Earlier this year, sheriff’s deputies used a phone number look-up Web site to find a man in North Carolina who was wanted on charges in Howard County.
In that case, authorities found their suspect through an online classified ad on Craig’s List.Wow.
They discovered how to google a phone number!
Are they really bragging about coming out of the dark ages?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620284</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>scapermoya</author>
	<datestamp>1262463900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>you'd think they'd want a subpoena to cover their own butts in the event that the cops got it wrong and the guy sues them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>you 'd think they 'd want a subpoena to cover their own butts in the event that the cops got it wrong and the guy sues them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you'd think they'd want a subpoena to cover their own butts in the event that the cops got it wrong and the guy sues them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30624050</id>
	<title>Re:So he's not a drug dealer.</title>
	<author>findoutmoretoday</author>
	<datestamp>1262458140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>As long as the alleged drug dealer is not found guilty,&nbsp; the alleged drugs are no drugs,&nbsp; and I am cheated? Are quantum physics taking over the world?</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>As long as the alleged drug dealer is not found guilty ,   the alleged drugs are no drugs ,   and I am cheated ?
Are quantum physics taking over the world ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As long as the alleged drug dealer is not found guilty,  the alleged drugs are no drugs,  and I am cheated?
Are quantum physics taking over the world?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621652</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>BodhiCat</author>
	<datestamp>1262441700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The agreement says that Blizzard may give information to the police "if you are violating the Terms of Service or Use Agreements for a Blizzard site or product, or may be causing injury to or interference (intentionally or unintentionally) with Blizzard's rights or property, other users of a Blizzard site or product, or anyone else who could be harmed by your activities."

</p><p>Although dealing drugs is illegal in the country, I don't think it violates the Terms of Service of Blizzard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The agreement says that Blizzard may give information to the police " if you are violating the Terms of Service or Use Agreements for a Blizzard site or product , or may be causing injury to or interference ( intentionally or unintentionally ) with Blizzard 's rights or property , other users of a Blizzard site or product , or anyone else who could be harmed by your activities .
" Although dealing drugs is illegal in the country , I do n't think it violates the Terms of Service of Blizzard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The agreement says that Blizzard may give information to the police "if you are violating the Terms of Service or Use Agreements for a Blizzard site or product, or may be causing injury to or interference (intentionally or unintentionally) with Blizzard's rights or property, other users of a Blizzard site or product, or anyone else who could be harmed by your activities.
"

Although dealing drugs is illegal in the country, I don't think it violates the Terms of Service of Blizzard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30625330</id>
	<title>Re:Too much black-and-white thinking here</title>
	<author>Totenglocke</author>
	<datestamp>1262465580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Complying with the police already has loopholes - like client-attorney / patient-doctor / parishioner-priest confidentiality.  Companies should by law have this same thing built in, where they cannot rat you out to the government just for using their service which is unrelated to a crime.  Blizzard had no business getting involved because the crime he is accused of is completely unrelated to WoW.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Complying with the police already has loopholes - like client-attorney / patient-doctor / parishioner-priest confidentiality .
Companies should by law have this same thing built in , where they can not rat you out to the government just for using their service which is unrelated to a crime .
Blizzard had no business getting involved because the crime he is accused of is completely unrelated to WoW .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Complying with the police already has loopholes - like client-attorney / patient-doctor / parishioner-priest confidentiality.
Companies should by law have this same thing built in, where they cannot rat you out to the government just for using their service which is unrelated to a crime.
Blizzard had no business getting involved because the crime he is accused of is completely unrelated to WoW.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262464260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>They were upfront about it: it's in the <a href="http://us.blizzard.com/en-us/company/about/privacy.html" title="blizzard.com">privacy policy</a> [blizzard.com]. In general it says they won't give out your information to third parties without informing you, but they do make an exception for law enforcement:<p><div class="quote"><p>We reserve the right to disclose your personal information as required by law or in special cases when we have reason to believe that disclosing such information is necessary to identify, contact, or bring legal action against you if you are violating the Terms of Service or Use Agreements for a Blizzard site or product, or may be causing injury to or interference (intentionally or unintentionally) with Blizzard's rights or property, other users of a Blizzard site or product, or anyone else who could be harmed by your activities.</p></div><p>They basically say if the police come, they'll have no problem giving up your information.  I guess that is a problem for some people, but so far it doesn't bother me enough to make me stop playing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They were upfront about it : it 's in the privacy policy [ blizzard.com ] .
In general it says they wo n't give out your information to third parties without informing you , but they do make an exception for law enforcement : We reserve the right to disclose your personal information as required by law or in special cases when we have reason to believe that disclosing such information is necessary to identify , contact , or bring legal action against you if you are violating the Terms of Service or Use Agreements for a Blizzard site or product , or may be causing injury to or interference ( intentionally or unintentionally ) with Blizzard 's rights or property , other users of a Blizzard site or product , or anyone else who could be harmed by your activities.They basically say if the police come , they 'll have no problem giving up your information .
I guess that is a problem for some people , but so far it does n't bother me enough to make me stop playing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They were upfront about it: it's in the privacy policy [blizzard.com].
In general it says they won't give out your information to third parties without informing you, but they do make an exception for law enforcement:We reserve the right to disclose your personal information as required by law or in special cases when we have reason to believe that disclosing such information is necessary to identify, contact, or bring legal action against you if you are violating the Terms of Service or Use Agreements for a Blizzard site or product, or may be causing injury to or interference (intentionally or unintentionally) with Blizzard's rights or property, other users of a Blizzard site or product, or anyone else who could be harmed by your activities.They basically say if the police come, they'll have no problem giving up your information.
I guess that is a problem for some people, but so far it doesn't bother me enough to make me stop playing.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30623600</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>Snaller</author>
	<datestamp>1262455800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"They basically say if the police come, they'll have no problem giving up your information. I guess that is a problem for some people, but so far it doesn't bother me enough to make me stop playing."</p><p>It will the day they come for you. You didn't do it, but someone made a mistake in the paper trail, and nobody believes you - because after all - the police (and Blizzard) never make mistakes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" They basically say if the police come , they 'll have no problem giving up your information .
I guess that is a problem for some people , but so far it does n't bother me enough to make me stop playing .
" It will the day they come for you .
You did n't do it , but someone made a mistake in the paper trail , and nobody believes you - because after all - the police ( and Blizzard ) never make mistakes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"They basically say if the police come, they'll have no problem giving up your information.
I guess that is a problem for some people, but so far it doesn't bother me enough to make me stop playing.
"It will the day they come for you.
You didn't do it, but someone made a mistake in the paper trail, and nobody believes you - because after all - the police (and Blizzard) never make mistakes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30625634</id>
	<title>...end of discussion...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262424000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>he is horrible at WoW thats for sure...but here is my question...</p><p>why are we even discussing this? everyone that plays WoW agrees that blizzard is allowed to do what they did. if you click ACCEPT on the license agreements, then you have no argument against them doing what is stated in the agreement...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>he is horrible at WoW thats for sure...but here is my question...why are we even discussing this ?
everyone that plays WoW agrees that blizzard is allowed to do what they did .
if you click ACCEPT on the license agreements , then you have no argument against them doing what is stated in the agreement.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>he is horrible at WoW thats for sure...but here is my question...why are we even discussing this?
everyone that plays WoW agrees that blizzard is allowed to do what they did.
if you click ACCEPT on the license agreements, then you have no argument against them doing what is stated in the agreement...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620378</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262465340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone who has a problem with this should simply not use their services. There is certainly no law that states a company cannot cooperate with police without a search warrant. Especially when they disclose this in their terms of service.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone who has a problem with this should simply not use their services .
There is certainly no law that states a company can not cooperate with police without a search warrant .
Especially when they disclose this in their terms of service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone who has a problem with this should simply not use their services.
There is certainly no law that states a company cannot cooperate with police without a search warrant.
Especially when they disclose this in their terms of service.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30622262</id>
	<title>Re:So he's not a drug dealer.</title>
	<author>SurlyJest</author>
	<datestamp>1262447760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Which means precisely nothing.  He is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.  That doesn't give him any rights at all with respect to avoiding that judgement in the proper jurisdiction.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Which means precisely nothing .
He is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law .
That does n't give him any rights at all with respect to avoiding that judgement in the proper jurisdiction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which means precisely nothing.
He is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
That doesn't give him any rights at all with respect to avoiding that judgement in the proper jurisdiction.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620336</id>
	<title>Your answer is right there in the Terms of Use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262464920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>One has to wonder, if Blizzard goes that far above and beyond requests of law enforcement and gives mountains of data in response to polite requests-- not even subpoenas-- how seriously do they take the privacy of *your* personal information?</p></div><p>Well, though people do tend to gloss over the fine details in things like EULAs and Terms of Service, it's not as if Blizzard is hiding anything from its users. From the <a href="http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/legal/termsofuse.shtml" title="worldofwarcraft.com">WoW Terms of Use:</a> [worldofwarcraft.com] </p><p><div class="quote"><p>C. Blizzard may, with or without notice to you, disclose your Internet Protocol (IP) address(es), personal information, Chat logs, and other information about you and your activities: (a) in response to a request by law enforcement, a court order or other legal process; or (b) if Blizzard believes that doing so may protect your safety or the safety of others.</p> </div><p>Blizzard gets a request from law enforcement, Blizzard hands over the info, simple as that. (And actually, if it were my company I'd probably have a similar policy. A "polite request" is just about the <i>only</i> contact I'd ever want to have with law enforcement, and the sooner they disappear from my life the better.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>One has to wonder , if Blizzard goes that far above and beyond requests of law enforcement and gives mountains of data in response to polite requests-- not even subpoenas-- how seriously do they take the privacy of * your * personal information ? Well , though people do tend to gloss over the fine details in things like EULAs and Terms of Service , it 's not as if Blizzard is hiding anything from its users .
From the WoW Terms of Use : [ worldofwarcraft.com ] C. Blizzard may , with or without notice to you , disclose your Internet Protocol ( IP ) address ( es ) , personal information , Chat logs , and other information about you and your activities : ( a ) in response to a request by law enforcement , a court order or other legal process ; or ( b ) if Blizzard believes that doing so may protect your safety or the safety of others .
Blizzard gets a request from law enforcement , Blizzard hands over the info , simple as that .
( And actually , if it were my company I 'd probably have a similar policy .
A " polite request " is just about the only contact I 'd ever want to have with law enforcement , and the sooner they disappear from my life the better .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One has to wonder, if Blizzard goes that far above and beyond requests of law enforcement and gives mountains of data in response to polite requests-- not even subpoenas-- how seriously do they take the privacy of *your* personal information?Well, though people do tend to gloss over the fine details in things like EULAs and Terms of Service, it's not as if Blizzard is hiding anything from its users.
From the WoW Terms of Use: [worldofwarcraft.com] C. Blizzard may, with or without notice to you, disclose your Internet Protocol (IP) address(es), personal information, Chat logs, and other information about you and your activities: (a) in response to a request by law enforcement, a court order or other legal process; or (b) if Blizzard believes that doing so may protect your safety or the safety of others.
Blizzard gets a request from law enforcement, Blizzard hands over the info, simple as that.
(And actually, if it were my company I'd probably have a similar policy.
A "polite request" is just about the only contact I'd ever want to have with law enforcement, and the sooner they disappear from my life the better.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620802</id>
	<title>Re:Heh.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262428140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It doesn't even have to be that "bad". What if it's a bad cop trying to find someone that ran off before they can blow the whistle. Or is this even worse?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It does n't even have to be that " bad " .
What if it 's a bad cop trying to find someone that ran off before they can blow the whistle .
Or is this even worse ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It doesn't even have to be that "bad".
What if it's a bad cop trying to find someone that ran off before they can blow the whistle.
Or is this even worse?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620346</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620480</id>
	<title>You insens1t1ve clod..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262423340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">everything else America. you, learn what mistakes</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>everything else America .
you , learn what mistakes [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>everything else America.
you, learn what mistakes [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620358</id>
	<title>You're the idiot.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262465160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did <b>YOU</b> read the summary?</p><p>How about this part:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>"Roberson&rsquo;s subpoena was nothing more than a politely worded request, considering the limits of his law enforcement jurisdiction and the ambiguity of the online world. 'They don&rsquo;t have to respond to us, and I was under the assumption that they wouldn&rsquo;t,' said Roberson.</p></div><p>If you bothered to read the article, it's repeated there, as well.  If it's just a "politely worded request" then use of the word subpoena was in error.</p><p>Definition of subpoena:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>A subpoena (pronounced<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/sbpin/ or pronounced<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/spin/) is a writ issued by a court that commands the presence of a witness to testify, under a penalty for failure.</p></div><p>If they were able to legally enforce this, I doubt they would have bothered with said "politely worded request" - look at the TSA's use of subpoenas, for example.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did YOU read the summary ? How about this part : " Roberson    s subpoena was nothing more than a politely worded request , considering the limits of his law enforcement jurisdiction and the ambiguity of the online world .
'They don    t have to respond to us , and I was under the assumption that they wouldn    t, ' said Roberson.If you bothered to read the article , it 's repeated there , as well .
If it 's just a " politely worded request " then use of the word subpoena was in error.Definition of subpoena : A subpoena ( pronounced /sbpin/ or pronounced /spin/ ) is a writ issued by a court that commands the presence of a witness to testify , under a penalty for failure.If they were able to legally enforce this , I doubt they would have bothered with said " politely worded request " - look at the TSA 's use of subpoenas , for example .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did YOU read the summary?How about this part:"Roberson’s subpoena was nothing more than a politely worded request, considering the limits of his law enforcement jurisdiction and the ambiguity of the online world.
'They don’t have to respond to us, and I was under the assumption that they wouldn’t,' said Roberson.If you bothered to read the article, it's repeated there, as well.
If it's just a "politely worded request" then use of the word subpoena was in error.Definition of subpoena:A subpoena (pronounced /sbpin/ or pronounced /spin/) is a writ issued by a court that commands the presence of a witness to testify, under a penalty for failure.If they were able to legally enforce this, I doubt they would have bothered with said "politely worded request" - look at the TSA's use of subpoenas, for example.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621328</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>BlackBloq</author>
	<datestamp>1262436420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's NOT what that says if you stop to read. It says "as required by law" not "as requested by law enforcement". Big diff holmes. The second statement has a "we" so that covers when blizzard has to identify you internally. And "to bring legal action" says to forward for criminal actions taken in the realms or relating to one in the realms. You leave out this "Blizzard Entertainment adheres to the Safe Harbor Principles that were established by the U.S. Department of Commerce in consultation" They won't entrap you but if you use their property for criminal means (sell drugs on WOW<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,try cybermolest kids on WOW whatever) The they can release info to the law. There is also this" all of our websites have been reviewed and certified by ESRB Privacy Online to meet established online information collection and use practices. As part of this privacy program, we are subject to frequent audits of our sites and other enforcement and accountability mechanisms administered independently by the ESRB" Sounds like they do a good job with our trusted info to me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's NOT what that says if you stop to read .
It says " as required by law " not " as requested by law enforcement " .
Big diff holmes .
The second statement has a " we " so that covers when blizzard has to identify you internally .
And " to bring legal action " says to forward for criminal actions taken in the realms or relating to one in the realms .
You leave out this " Blizzard Entertainment adheres to the Safe Harbor Principles that were established by the U.S. Department of Commerce in consultation " They wo n't entrap you but if you use their property for criminal means ( sell drugs on WOW ,try cybermolest kids on WOW whatever ) The they can release info to the law .
There is also this " all of our websites have been reviewed and certified by ESRB Privacy Online to meet established online information collection and use practices .
As part of this privacy program , we are subject to frequent audits of our sites and other enforcement and accountability mechanisms administered independently by the ESRB " Sounds like they do a good job with our trusted info to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's NOT what that says if you stop to read.
It says "as required by law" not "as requested by law enforcement".
Big diff holmes.
The second statement has a "we" so that covers when blizzard has to identify you internally.
And "to bring legal action" says to forward for criminal actions taken in the realms or relating to one in the realms.
You leave out this "Blizzard Entertainment adheres to the Safe Harbor Principles that were established by the U.S. Department of Commerce in consultation" They won't entrap you but if you use their property for criminal means (sell drugs on WOW ,try cybermolest kids on WOW whatever) The they can release info to the law.
There is also this" all of our websites have been reviewed and certified by ESRB Privacy Online to meet established online information collection and use practices.
As part of this privacy program, we are subject to frequent audits of our sites and other enforcement and accountability mechanisms administered independently by the ESRB" Sounds like they do a good job with our trusted info to me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620438</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>RobVB</author>
	<datestamp>1262422920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From your quote:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>We reserve the right to disclose your personal information as required by law or in special cases when we have reason to believe that disclosing such information is necessary to identify, contact, or bring legal action against you if you are violating the Terms of Service or Use Agreements for a Blizzard site or product, or may be causing injury to or interference (intentionally or unintentionally) with Blizzard's rights or property, other users of a Blizzard site or product, or anyone else who could be harmed by your activities.</p></div><p>Let's analyze.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>as required by law</p></div><p>As opposed to "as requested by law". They were not legally required to hand over this guy's information, merely requested.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>if you are violating the Terms of Service or Use Agreements</p></div><p>Quite clearly not the case here.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>or may be causing injury to or interference (intentionally or unintentionally) with Blizzard's rights or property, other users of a Blizzard site or product</p></div><p>This isn't it either... it must be something in the last part.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>or anyone else who could be harmed by your activities.</p></div><p>Surely, this is vague enough that it could include anything. However, it gives me the impression that they assume he's still committing crimes. A quote from the original article:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>In this case, online gamers were playing alongside Alfred Hightower, a man wanted on charges of dealing in a schedule III controlled substance and dealing in a schedule IV controlled substance, and two charges of dealing in marijuana. A warrant was issued for his arrest in 2007.</p></div><p>So he was dealing drugs over two years ago. And to be honest, I'm not impressed by the kinds of drugs he was dealing either. Examples are taken from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled\_Substances\_Act#Schedule\_III\_controlled\_substances" title="wikipedia.org">this Wikipedia page</a> [wikipedia.org]: </p><p>He was charged with dealing in a schedule III controlled substance, which could be something like <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anabolic\_steroid" title="wikipedia.org">anabolic steroids</a> [wikipedia.org]. This is what gets people thrown out of the Olympic Games or the Tour de France, not violently killed. He was also charged with dealing in a schedule IV controlled substance, the list of which includes <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valium" title="wikipedia.org">Valium</a> [wikipedia.org]. And last but not least, two charges of dealing pot.</p><p>To me, these drugs seem as harmful or as harmless as many over-the-counter drugs, and most of them are commercially available if you find a doctor that will write you a prescription. I'm not defending drug dealers here, just pointing out the difference between a criminal like this and someone that's actually worth tracking down.</p><p>So this warrant was issued two years ago, he fled the country, started a new life, and there is (as far as I can tell) no evidence of him dealing drugs after that. So about the part where people could be harmed by his activities... I don't know. Which re-opens the question about what part of the privacy agreement would cover Blizzard if the guy would sue them.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From your quote : We reserve the right to disclose your personal information as required by law or in special cases when we have reason to believe that disclosing such information is necessary to identify , contact , or bring legal action against you if you are violating the Terms of Service or Use Agreements for a Blizzard site or product , or may be causing injury to or interference ( intentionally or unintentionally ) with Blizzard 's rights or property , other users of a Blizzard site or product , or anyone else who could be harmed by your activities.Let 's analyze.as required by lawAs opposed to " as requested by law " .
They were not legally required to hand over this guy 's information , merely requested.if you are violating the Terms of Service or Use AgreementsQuite clearly not the case here.or may be causing injury to or interference ( intentionally or unintentionally ) with Blizzard 's rights or property , other users of a Blizzard site or productThis is n't it either... it must be something in the last part.or anyone else who could be harmed by your activities.Surely , this is vague enough that it could include anything .
However , it gives me the impression that they assume he 's still committing crimes .
A quote from the original article : In this case , online gamers were playing alongside Alfred Hightower , a man wanted on charges of dealing in a schedule III controlled substance and dealing in a schedule IV controlled substance , and two charges of dealing in marijuana .
A warrant was issued for his arrest in 2007.So he was dealing drugs over two years ago .
And to be honest , I 'm not impressed by the kinds of drugs he was dealing either .
Examples are taken from this Wikipedia page [ wikipedia.org ] : He was charged with dealing in a schedule III controlled substance , which could be something like anabolic steroids [ wikipedia.org ] .
This is what gets people thrown out of the Olympic Games or the Tour de France , not violently killed .
He was also charged with dealing in a schedule IV controlled substance , the list of which includes Valium [ wikipedia.org ] .
And last but not least , two charges of dealing pot.To me , these drugs seem as harmful or as harmless as many over-the-counter drugs , and most of them are commercially available if you find a doctor that will write you a prescription .
I 'm not defending drug dealers here , just pointing out the difference between a criminal like this and someone that 's actually worth tracking down.So this warrant was issued two years ago , he fled the country , started a new life , and there is ( as far as I can tell ) no evidence of him dealing drugs after that .
So about the part where people could be harmed by his activities... I do n't know .
Which re-opens the question about what part of the privacy agreement would cover Blizzard if the guy would sue them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From your quote:We reserve the right to disclose your personal information as required by law or in special cases when we have reason to believe that disclosing such information is necessary to identify, contact, or bring legal action against you if you are violating the Terms of Service or Use Agreements for a Blizzard site or product, or may be causing injury to or interference (intentionally or unintentionally) with Blizzard's rights or property, other users of a Blizzard site or product, or anyone else who could be harmed by your activities.Let's analyze.as required by lawAs opposed to "as requested by law".
They were not legally required to hand over this guy's information, merely requested.if you are violating the Terms of Service or Use AgreementsQuite clearly not the case here.or may be causing injury to or interference (intentionally or unintentionally) with Blizzard's rights or property, other users of a Blizzard site or productThis isn't it either... it must be something in the last part.or anyone else who could be harmed by your activities.Surely, this is vague enough that it could include anything.
However, it gives me the impression that they assume he's still committing crimes.
A quote from the original article:In this case, online gamers were playing alongside Alfred Hightower, a man wanted on charges of dealing in a schedule III controlled substance and dealing in a schedule IV controlled substance, and two charges of dealing in marijuana.
A warrant was issued for his arrest in 2007.So he was dealing drugs over two years ago.
And to be honest, I'm not impressed by the kinds of drugs he was dealing either.
Examples are taken from this Wikipedia page [wikipedia.org]: He was charged with dealing in a schedule III controlled substance, which could be something like anabolic steroids [wikipedia.org].
This is what gets people thrown out of the Olympic Games or the Tour de France, not violently killed.
He was also charged with dealing in a schedule IV controlled substance, the list of which includes Valium [wikipedia.org].
And last but not least, two charges of dealing pot.To me, these drugs seem as harmful or as harmless as many over-the-counter drugs, and most of them are commercially available if you find a doctor that will write you a prescription.
I'm not defending drug dealers here, just pointing out the difference between a criminal like this and someone that's actually worth tracking down.So this warrant was issued two years ago, he fled the country, started a new life, and there is (as far as I can tell) no evidence of him dealing drugs after that.
So about the part where people could be harmed by his activities... I don't know.
Which re-opens the question about what part of the privacy agreement would cover Blizzard if the guy would sue them.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620668</id>
	<title>FTA</title>
	<author>delta98</author>
	<datestamp>1262426040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>&ldquo;They don&rsquo;t have to respond to us, and I was under the assumption that they wouldn&rsquo;t,&rdquo; said Roberson. &ldquo;It had been three or four months since I had sent the subpoena."
Bullshit. Three or four months....Really. Given the current news <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/teen-found-after-meeting-his-42-year-old-online-soulmate/article1416257/" title="theglobeandmail.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/teen-found-after-meeting-his-42-year-old-online-soulmate/article1416257/</a> [theglobeandmail.com]
I have to wonder what we are not hearing about. I almost suspect Blizzard is in the process of cutting deals to keep out of trouble here in the states.</htmltext>
<tokenext>   They don    t have to respond to us , and I was under the assumption that they wouldn    t ,    said Roberson .
   It had been three or four months since I had sent the subpoena .
" Bullshit .
Three or four months....Really .
Given the current news http : //www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/teen-found-after-meeting-his-42-year-old-online-soulmate/article1416257/ [ theglobeandmail.com ] I have to wonder what we are not hearing about .
I almost suspect Blizzard is in the process of cutting deals to keep out of trouble here in the states .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>“They don’t have to respond to us, and I was under the assumption that they wouldn’t,” said Roberson.
“It had been three or four months since I had sent the subpoena.
"
Bullshit.
Three or four months....Really.
Given the current news http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/teen-found-after-meeting-his-42-year-old-online-soulmate/article1416257/ [theglobeandmail.com]
I have to wonder what we are not hearing about.
I almost suspect Blizzard is in the process of cutting deals to keep out of trouble here in the states.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620296</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262464140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;Or rather, that such information is their property, not yours</p><p>Are people really so naive in 2010 that this isn't plainly obvious?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Or rather , that such information is their property , not yoursAre people really so naive in 2010 that this is n't plainly obvious ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;Or rather, that such information is their property, not yoursAre people really so naive in 2010 that this isn't plainly obvious?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30622694</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262451180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Take a look at your quote again.  Their TOS says "required by law", not "requested by law"  That is a big difference.  Law enforcement requested the information, but did not require it with a subpoena.</p><p>Also, the special cases section of their TOS refers to violations against Blizzards rights or property.  Which, again, does not apply to this case.</p><p>In short, blizzard broke their own TOS by handing over the information without a subpoena.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Take a look at your quote again .
Their TOS says " required by law " , not " requested by law " That is a big difference .
Law enforcement requested the information , but did not require it with a subpoena.Also , the special cases section of their TOS refers to violations against Blizzards rights or property .
Which , again , does not apply to this case.In short , blizzard broke their own TOS by handing over the information without a subpoena .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take a look at your quote again.
Their TOS says "required by law", not "requested by law"  That is a big difference.
Law enforcement requested the information, but did not require it with a subpoena.Also, the special cases section of their TOS refers to violations against Blizzards rights or property.
Which, again, does not apply to this case.In short, blizzard broke their own TOS by handing over the information without a subpoena.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30625140</id>
	<title>Re:Too much black-and-white thinking here</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1262464500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think most of us would agree that law enforcement is necessary</p></div><p>It may be necessary <i>at some level</i>, but IMHO it has grown to include far more than is strictly necessary to protect us. Combine this with numerous, superfluous and overreaching laws and you have a recipe for the modern mess in which we know find ourselves presently ensnared. Its enough to make one nostalgic for the days of the old west when everyone walked around armed, scores were settled outside of town, and people were generally more polite because being an insulting, rude, and annoying busybody was hazardous to one's continued breathing. These days people just can't seem to live and let live when people are different or have different preferences and it causes no end of trouble for society trying to regulate morals through aggressive law enforcement.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think most of us would agree that law enforcement is necessaryIt may be necessary at some level , but IMHO it has grown to include far more than is strictly necessary to protect us .
Combine this with numerous , superfluous and overreaching laws and you have a recipe for the modern mess in which we know find ourselves presently ensnared .
Its enough to make one nostalgic for the days of the old west when everyone walked around armed , scores were settled outside of town , and people were generally more polite because being an insulting , rude , and annoying busybody was hazardous to one 's continued breathing .
These days people just ca n't seem to live and let live when people are different or have different preferences and it causes no end of trouble for society trying to regulate morals through aggressive law enforcement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think most of us would agree that law enforcement is necessaryIt may be necessary at some level, but IMHO it has grown to include far more than is strictly necessary to protect us.
Combine this with numerous, superfluous and overreaching laws and you have a recipe for the modern mess in which we know find ourselves presently ensnared.
Its enough to make one nostalgic for the days of the old west when everyone walked around armed, scores were settled outside of town, and people were generally more polite because being an insulting, rude, and annoying busybody was hazardous to one's continued breathing.
These days people just can't seem to live and let live when people are different or have different preferences and it causes no end of trouble for society trying to regulate morals through aggressive law enforcement.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30623506</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>DurendalMac</author>
	<datestamp>1262455380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Did you (or any other idiot commenting here) read the damned article at all? THEY DID SEND A SUBPOENA! Blizzard could have probably ignored it, but they risked opening up a huge can of worms as a result.

And you gave "your" personal information to them when you signed up and every time you logged on. If they have that info, it isn't just "yours" anymore, and if you read their TOS, you'll find that they have no problem giving that up to law enforcement.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did you ( or any other idiot commenting here ) read the damned article at all ?
THEY DID SEND A SUBPOENA !
Blizzard could have probably ignored it , but they risked opening up a huge can of worms as a result .
And you gave " your " personal information to them when you signed up and every time you logged on .
If they have that info , it is n't just " yours " anymore , and if you read their TOS , you 'll find that they have no problem giving that up to law enforcement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did you (or any other idiot commenting here) read the damned article at all?
THEY DID SEND A SUBPOENA!
Blizzard could have probably ignored it, but they risked opening up a huge can of worms as a result.
And you gave "your" personal information to them when you signed up and every time you logged on.
If they have that info, it isn't just "yours" anymore, and if you read their TOS, you'll find that they have no problem giving that up to law enforcement.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620642</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>houghi</author>
	<datestamp>1262425620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Belgium that could mean that the data was obtained illegally and the case could be thrown out. You need a court order to get privacy data, even if you are a cop and walk into the building. Well, especially if you are a cop, as you should know what the procedure was.</p><p>Not only would it be possible to get the case thrown out, it would also be possible to sue the company for giving out personal information. There is a reason for this and even now it happens that in individual cases police abuse the knowledge they have for personal gain.</p><p>The positive part is that it should be clear to everybody involved what you can give out when and when you can't. "If you can't produce the correct papers, I can't give you anything. Now go away and leave the building." and yes, I have seen policemen escorted out of the building because they did not have the correct papers with them and if they would have stayed, we would have filed for trespassing and breaking and entering and what not.</p><p>They came back two hours later with the correct papers and got all the cooperation they needed. From that day on they came with a court order each time and each time got what they asked for in the warrent (nothing more and nothing less).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Belgium that could mean that the data was obtained illegally and the case could be thrown out .
You need a court order to get privacy data , even if you are a cop and walk into the building .
Well , especially if you are a cop , as you should know what the procedure was.Not only would it be possible to get the case thrown out , it would also be possible to sue the company for giving out personal information .
There is a reason for this and even now it happens that in individual cases police abuse the knowledge they have for personal gain.The positive part is that it should be clear to everybody involved what you can give out when and when you ca n't .
" If you ca n't produce the correct papers , I ca n't give you anything .
Now go away and leave the building .
" and yes , I have seen policemen escorted out of the building because they did not have the correct papers with them and if they would have stayed , we would have filed for trespassing and breaking and entering and what not.They came back two hours later with the correct papers and got all the cooperation they needed .
From that day on they came with a court order each time and each time got what they asked for in the warrent ( nothing more and nothing less ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Belgium that could mean that the data was obtained illegally and the case could be thrown out.
You need a court order to get privacy data, even if you are a cop and walk into the building.
Well, especially if you are a cop, as you should know what the procedure was.Not only would it be possible to get the case thrown out, it would also be possible to sue the company for giving out personal information.
There is a reason for this and even now it happens that in individual cases police abuse the knowledge they have for personal gain.The positive part is that it should be clear to everybody involved what you can give out when and when you can't.
"If you can't produce the correct papers, I can't give you anything.
Now go away and leave the building.
" and yes, I have seen policemen escorted out of the building because they did not have the correct papers with them and if they would have stayed, we would have filed for trespassing and breaking and entering and what not.They came back two hours later with the correct papers and got all the cooperation they needed.
From that day on they came with a court order each time and each time got what they asked for in the warrent (nothing more and nothing less).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620574</id>
	<title>Tracking</title>
	<author>andrewbwn</author>
	<datestamp>1262424540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sir, I think we've located him, he's in Orgrimmar. Wait.... he just teleported in Thunder Bluff, he must be a mage, and he's talking to Cairne Bloodhoof.
APB: Be on the look out for a level 65 undead mage wanted for selling Vision Dust and Dream Dust in the Orgrimmar Auction House. Be advised he's speced in Frost.
Sir, I think we should send our undercover Troll Hunter with Humanoid Tracking to catch him.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sir , I think we 've located him , he 's in Orgrimmar .
Wait.... he just teleported in Thunder Bluff , he must be a mage , and he 's talking to Cairne Bloodhoof .
APB : Be on the look out for a level 65 undead mage wanted for selling Vision Dust and Dream Dust in the Orgrimmar Auction House .
Be advised he 's speced in Frost .
Sir , I think we should send our undercover Troll Hunter with Humanoid Tracking to catch him .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sir, I think we've located him, he's in Orgrimmar.
Wait.... he just teleported in Thunder Bluff, he must be a mage, and he's talking to Cairne Bloodhoof.
APB: Be on the look out for a level 65 undead mage wanted for selling Vision Dust and Dream Dust in the Orgrimmar Auction House.
Be advised he's speced in Frost.
Sir, I think we should send our undercover Troll Hunter with Humanoid Tracking to catch him.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620846</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1262428680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let&rsquo;s find out. I&rsquo;m assuming your Slashdot user name is also your WoW name, right? ^^</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let    s find out .
I    m assuming your Slashdot user name is also your WoW name , right ?
^ ^</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let’s find out.
I’m assuming your Slashdot user name is also your WoW name, right?
^^</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620310</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262464440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I'm glad the bad guy got caught, etc, but handing over the keys to the kingdom to law enforcement without a subpoena implies, </i></p><p>Did you even read the article? The part where it says: <b>SUBPOENA</b>?</p><p>Did you even read the SUMMARY on slashdot? The part where it says: <b>SUBPOENA</b>?</p><p>Idiot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm glad the bad guy got caught , etc , but handing over the keys to the kingdom to law enforcement without a subpoena implies , Did you even read the article ?
The part where it says : SUBPOENA ? Did you even read the SUMMARY on slashdot ?
The part where it says : SUBPOENA ? Idiot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm glad the bad guy got caught, etc, but handing over the keys to the kingdom to law enforcement without a subpoena implies, Did you even read the article?
The part where it says: SUBPOENA?Did you even read the SUMMARY on slashdot?
The part where it says: SUBPOENA?Idiot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620446</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>Jah-Wren Ryel</author>
	<datestamp>1262423040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They were upfront about it: it's in the privacy policy. In general it says they won't give out your information to third parties without informing you, but they do make an exception for law enforcement:</p></div><p>Gee, did you even read what you quoted?</p><p>It says "required by law" not "make it easy for the cops."<br>There was no valid subpoena, it was just "a politely worded request."</p><p>And if you are thinking the last part about "causing injury to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... anyone else" is an escape clause - the guy was not causing (present tense) injury, he may have sold illegal drugs in the past, so any possible threat was (a) long past and (b) not a direct result of his actions either as an action simply being illegal does not make it injurious.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They were upfront about it : it 's in the privacy policy .
In general it says they wo n't give out your information to third parties without informing you , but they do make an exception for law enforcement : Gee , did you even read what you quoted ? It says " required by law " not " make it easy for the cops .
" There was no valid subpoena , it was just " a politely worded request .
" And if you are thinking the last part about " causing injury to ... anyone else " is an escape clause - the guy was not causing ( present tense ) injury , he may have sold illegal drugs in the past , so any possible threat was ( a ) long past and ( b ) not a direct result of his actions either as an action simply being illegal does not make it injurious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They were upfront about it: it's in the privacy policy.
In general it says they won't give out your information to third parties without informing you, but they do make an exception for law enforcement:Gee, did you even read what you quoted?It says "required by law" not "make it easy for the cops.
"There was no valid subpoena, it was just "a politely worded request.
"And if you are thinking the last part about "causing injury to ... anyone else" is an escape clause - the guy was not causing (present tense) injury, he may have sold illegal drugs in the past, so any possible threat was (a) long past and (b) not a direct result of his actions either as an action simply being illegal does not make it injurious.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620268</id>
	<title>It starts with drug dealers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262463720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And where does it end? Why not give them ALL the information you have on ALL of your users?</p><p>Blizzard should have given them only what the law compels them to provide. END OF STORY.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And where does it end ?
Why not give them ALL the information you have on ALL of your users ? Blizzard should have given them only what the law compels them to provide .
END OF STORY .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And where does it end?
Why not give them ALL the information you have on ALL of your users?Blizzard should have given them only what the law compels them to provide.
END OF STORY.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620422</id>
	<title>Armory Link</title>
	<author>doomy</author>
	<datestamp>1262465940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He is pretty bad at wow too.</p><p>Look at his Armory.</p><p>http://www.wowarmory.com/character-sheet.xml?r=Bladefist&amp;n=Rastlynn</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He is pretty bad at wow too.Look at his Armory.http : //www.wowarmory.com/character-sheet.xml ? r = Bladefist&amp;n = Rastlynn</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He is pretty bad at wow too.Look at his Armory.http://www.wowarmory.com/character-sheet.xml?r=Bladefist&amp;n=Rastlynn</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621270</id>
	<title>Blizzard aren't a very honest company</title>
	<author>CountBrass</author>
	<datestamp>1262435520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Try complaining about how there admins act in World of Warcraft: you have to jump through all sorts of hoops, including providing a certified copy of a birth certificate or drivers license in order to dispute an email from one of their GMs.

Blizzard have proved over and over that they can't be trusted (see both this story and their recent weasley responses to the Slashdot questions for recent examples).

I've cancelled my WoW account and I dont see myself buying Starcraft 2 or Diablo 3.

Blizzard can't be trusted.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Try complaining about how there admins act in World of Warcraft : you have to jump through all sorts of hoops , including providing a certified copy of a birth certificate or drivers license in order to dispute an email from one of their GMs .
Blizzard have proved over and over that they ca n't be trusted ( see both this story and their recent weasley responses to the Slashdot questions for recent examples ) .
I 've cancelled my WoW account and I dont see myself buying Starcraft 2 or Diablo 3 .
Blizzard ca n't be trusted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try complaining about how there admins act in World of Warcraft: you have to jump through all sorts of hoops, including providing a certified copy of a birth certificate or drivers license in order to dispute an email from one of their GMs.
Blizzard have proved over and over that they can't be trusted (see both this story and their recent weasley responses to the Slashdot questions for recent examples).
I've cancelled my WoW account and I dont see myself buying Starcraft 2 or Diablo 3.
Blizzard can't be trusted.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620666</id>
	<title>bad joke:</title>
	<author>BenphemeR</author>
	<datestamp>1262426040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The cops totally camped this named spawn IRL</htmltext>
<tokenext>The cops totally camped this named spawn IRL</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The cops totally camped this named spawn IRL</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30628012</id>
	<title>Ding, ding!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262439900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We have a winner to settle all this moral posturing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We have a winner to settle all this moral posturing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We have a winner to settle all this moral posturing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620280</id>
	<title>IP address to lat/log? Really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262463780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My DSL provider keeps giving me a dynamic IP address each time I connect. Hard to correlate that to my location (it is traceable to the isp though).</p><p>Frankly, the moral of the story is if you're wanted by the cops, don't use your real name, and don't move to a country with an extradition treaty with the US.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My DSL provider keeps giving me a dynamic IP address each time I connect .
Hard to correlate that to my location ( it is traceable to the isp though ) .Frankly , the moral of the story is if you 're wanted by the cops , do n't use your real name , and do n't move to a country with an extradition treaty with the US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My DSL provider keeps giving me a dynamic IP address each time I connect.
Hard to correlate that to my location (it is traceable to the isp though).Frankly, the moral of the story is if you're wanted by the cops, don't use your real name, and don't move to a country with an extradition treaty with the US.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30713608</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263120840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It says "as required by law". The agent who sent the request said,  "They don&rsquo;t have to respond to us, and I was under the assumption that they wouldn&rsquo;t,".</p><p>That's kinda fucked up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It says " as required by law " .
The agent who sent the request said , " They don    t have to respond to us , and I was under the assumption that they wouldn    t , " .That 's kinda fucked up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It says "as required by law".
The agent who sent the request said,  "They don’t have to respond to us, and I was under the assumption that they wouldn’t,".That's kinda fucked up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248</id>
	<title>Impropriety</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262463540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One has to wonder, if Blizzard goes that far above and beyond requests of law enforcement and gives mountains of data in response to polite requests-- not even subpoenas-- how seriously do they take the privacy of *your* personal information?</p><p>I'm glad the bad guy got caught, etc, but handing over the keys to the kingdom to law enforcement without a subpoena implies, in my mind, that respect for users' privacy is simply not something Blizzard considers when they go about their business. Or rather, that such information is their property, not yours.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One has to wonder , if Blizzard goes that far above and beyond requests of law enforcement and gives mountains of data in response to polite requests-- not even subpoenas-- how seriously do they take the privacy of * your * personal information ? I 'm glad the bad guy got caught , etc , but handing over the keys to the kingdom to law enforcement without a subpoena implies , in my mind , that respect for users ' privacy is simply not something Blizzard considers when they go about their business .
Or rather , that such information is their property , not yours .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One has to wonder, if Blizzard goes that far above and beyond requests of law enforcement and gives mountains of data in response to polite requests-- not even subpoenas-- how seriously do they take the privacy of *your* personal information?I'm glad the bad guy got caught, etc, but handing over the keys to the kingdom to law enforcement without a subpoena implies, in my mind, that respect for users' privacy is simply not something Blizzard considers when they go about their business.
Or rather, that such information is their property, not yours.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620902</id>
	<title>Re:Impropriety</title>
	<author>dontmakemethink</author>
	<datestamp>1262430000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When you give your information away for the purposes of online gaming, no court in the world will consider it ANYONE'S property.  It is effectively ABANDONED.</p><p>See, any information of value cannot be offered in trust to anyone that isn't trustworthy, i.e. licensed by a relevant authority.  If you submit your information to an unlicensed entity of any kind, you have submitted it to public domain.  The "company privacy policy" only offers means for you to sue them if you catch them breaking the policy, which you won't.</p><p>My favorite example - the Canadian "do not call" phone number list found its way onto the open market shortly after its inception.  Penalties?  Zero.</p><p>But the good news is your information isn't so important.  You don't need to live in a bubble to stay out of the rain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When you give your information away for the purposes of online gaming , no court in the world will consider it ANYONE 'S property .
It is effectively ABANDONED.See , any information of value can not be offered in trust to anyone that is n't trustworthy , i.e .
licensed by a relevant authority .
If you submit your information to an unlicensed entity of any kind , you have submitted it to public domain .
The " company privacy policy " only offers means for you to sue them if you catch them breaking the policy , which you wo n't.My favorite example - the Canadian " do not call " phone number list found its way onto the open market shortly after its inception .
Penalties ? Zero.But the good news is your information is n't so important .
You do n't need to live in a bubble to stay out of the rain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When you give your information away for the purposes of online gaming, no court in the world will consider it ANYONE'S property.
It is effectively ABANDONED.See, any information of value cannot be offered in trust to anyone that isn't trustworthy, i.e.
licensed by a relevant authority.
If you submit your information to an unlicensed entity of any kind, you have submitted it to public domain.
The "company privacy policy" only offers means for you to sue them if you catch them breaking the policy, which you won't.My favorite example - the Canadian "do not call" phone number list found its way onto the open market shortly after its inception.
Penalties?  Zero.But the good news is your information isn't so important.
You don't need to live in a bubble to stay out of the rain.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620398</id>
	<title>So he's not a drug dealer.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262465580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He's an alleged drug dealer.</p><p>Which means he is not a drug dealer.</p><p>He is innocent.</p><p>(until proven guilty in a court of law, but that bit always gets left out)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He 's an alleged drug dealer.Which means he is not a drug dealer.He is innocent .
( until proven guilty in a court of law , but that bit always gets left out )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He's an alleged drug dealer.Which means he is not a drug dealer.He is innocent.
(until proven guilty in a court of law, but that bit always gets left out)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30623682</id>
	<title>This is basic business.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262456280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am not really surprized. One of blizzard little nightmare has to be caught providing criminal networks with "law proof" communications system. The way pagers were used.</p><p>This is an MMO. There is no such thing as privacy in a MMO. You name, address, phone number, IP address and screen name are public information.</p><p>Next time you make a joke about child abuse/porn, drug or any kind of crime in chat... Think about the fact that it may be reviewed by people with humor deficit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am not really surprized .
One of blizzard little nightmare has to be caught providing criminal networks with " law proof " communications system .
The way pagers were used.This is an MMO .
There is no such thing as privacy in a MMO .
You name , address , phone number , IP address and screen name are public information.Next time you make a joke about child abuse/porn , drug or any kind of crime in chat... Think about the fact that it may be reviewed by people with humor deficit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am not really surprized.
One of blizzard little nightmare has to be caught providing criminal networks with "law proof" communications system.
The way pagers were used.This is an MMO.
There is no such thing as privacy in a MMO.
You name, address, phone number, IP address and screen name are public information.Next time you make a joke about child abuse/porn, drug or any kind of crime in chat... Think about the fact that it may be reviewed by people with humor deficit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620224</id>
	<title>conundrum</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262463240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not sure what is worse, the dealer, or Blizzard. I'd hazard a guess that Blizzard has ruined more lives than this dealer has. Though the cops will word a request to sound like a subpoena to the uninitiated.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not sure what is worse , the dealer , or Blizzard .
I 'd hazard a guess that Blizzard has ruined more lives than this dealer has .
Though the cops will word a request to sound like a subpoena to the uninitiated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not sure what is worse, the dealer, or Blizzard.
I'd hazard a guess that Blizzard has ruined more lives than this dealer has.
Though the cops will word a request to sound like a subpoena to the uninitiated.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620802
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620346
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30628134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620422
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30626090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620422
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30623506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30713608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30624112
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30622262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30625330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621340
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30628304
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620642
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620638
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30622694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620784
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620438
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30624050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30628012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621340
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30623600
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_0310211_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30625140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621340
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_0310211.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620370
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_0310211.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620804
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_0310211.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620346
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620802
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_0310211.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620248
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620336
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621680
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621432
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30624112
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620806
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620902
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620784
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620284
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620298
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621328
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621652
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620438
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620562
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620642
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620446
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620870
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621442
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30623600
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30622694
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620486
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30713608
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620378
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621572
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621028
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620638
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621024
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30623506
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620296
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620310
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620358
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_0310211.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30622420
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_0310211.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620224
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_0310211.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620304
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621610
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_0310211.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621340
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30625140
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30628012
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30625330
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_0310211.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620422
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30626090
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30628134
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_0310211.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30622262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30624050
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30621776
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30628304
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_0310211.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30622294
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_0310211.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_0310211.30620668
</commentlist>
</conversation>
