<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_05_2359237</id>
	<title>China Faces Piracy Suit Over Censorship Software</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1262702400000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.goodgearguide.com.au/" rel="nofollow">angry tapir</a> writes <i>"Web software filtering vendor CyberSitter has filed a <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009\_3-10425599-83.html">$2.2B lawsuit against the Chinese government</a>, two Chinese software makers, and seven major computer manufacturers for their distribution of Green Dam Youth Escort, a controversial Web filtering package the Chinese government had mandated to be installed on computers sold there. Researchers at the University of Michigan found that Green Dam copied code from CyberSitter."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>angry tapir writes " Web software filtering vendor CyberSitter has filed a $ 2.2B lawsuit against the Chinese government , two Chinese software makers , and seven major computer manufacturers for their distribution of Green Dam Youth Escort , a controversial Web filtering package the Chinese government had mandated to be installed on computers sold there .
Researchers at the University of Michigan found that Green Dam copied code from CyberSitter .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>angry tapir writes "Web software filtering vendor CyberSitter has filed a $2.2B lawsuit against the Chinese government, two Chinese software makers, and seven major computer manufacturers for their distribution of Green Dam Youth Escort, a controversial Web filtering package the Chinese government had mandated to be installed on computers sold there.
Researchers at the University of Michigan found that Green Dam copied code from CyberSitter.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665678</id>
	<title>The irony is killing me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262713320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So the short version is that an American company is suing the Chinese government because China is violating the basic human rights of its citizens without having a proper software license?</p><p>I'm not sure which circle of Hell is reserved for a complete and total inversion of priorities, but I'm sure CyberSitter will find out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So the short version is that an American company is suing the Chinese government because China is violating the basic human rights of its citizens without having a proper software license ? I 'm not sure which circle of Hell is reserved for a complete and total inversion of priorities , but I 'm sure CyberSitter will find out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So the short version is that an American company is suing the Chinese government because China is violating the basic human rights of its citizens without having a proper software license?I'm not sure which circle of Hell is reserved for a complete and total inversion of priorities, but I'm sure CyberSitter will find out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665294</id>
	<title>Re:I'll take Sovereign Immunity for the block</title>
	<author>Trepidity</author>
	<datestamp>1262710140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sovereign immunity really does mean that you cannot sue the government for monetary damages for any reason, unless they explicitly consent to it. The reason Microsoft could sue the U.S. government for copyright violation is that the U.S. federal government has waived its immunity in advance, for wide classes of torts, via the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tucker\_Act" title="wikipedia.org">Tucker Act</a> [wikipedia.org] and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal\_Tort\_Claims\_Act" title="wikipedia.org">Federal Tort Claims Act</a> [wikipedia.org].</p><p>In a much earlier era, the standard way for someone with a grievance against the U.S. government to collect on it was to file a petition with Congress, which would pass special-case legislation agreeing to pay them, if Congress felt that the person in question was indeed owed redress. The fundamental separation-of-powers justification is that an individual claiming that they're owed money is a request for money from the U.S. Treasury, and only Congress may appropriate such money.</p><p>This obviously became rather tedious as the volume of claims increased, and didn't give a great perception of fairness, so in 1855 Congress delegated the hearing of most such claims to a newly created <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court\_of\_Claims\_(United\_States)" title="wikipedia.org">Court of Claims</a> [wikipedia.org], a special court that served as essentially a claims-hearing arm of Congress (a "legislative" or "Article I" court, not a part of the judicial branch), which would report a recommendation back to Congress; Congress typically then appropriated the money as a sort of rubber-stamp, but was still technically in charge. The system gradually shifted to a more and more judicial one, first by having the U.S. Treasurer automatically dispense judgments from pre-appropriated money, and later increasingly by consenting to have claims heard in regular courts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sovereign immunity really does mean that you can not sue the government for monetary damages for any reason , unless they explicitly consent to it .
The reason Microsoft could sue the U.S. government for copyright violation is that the U.S. federal government has waived its immunity in advance , for wide classes of torts , via the Tucker Act [ wikipedia.org ] and Federal Tort Claims Act [ wikipedia.org ] .In a much earlier era , the standard way for someone with a grievance against the U.S. government to collect on it was to file a petition with Congress , which would pass special-case legislation agreeing to pay them , if Congress felt that the person in question was indeed owed redress .
The fundamental separation-of-powers justification is that an individual claiming that they 're owed money is a request for money from the U.S. Treasury , and only Congress may appropriate such money.This obviously became rather tedious as the volume of claims increased , and did n't give a great perception of fairness , so in 1855 Congress delegated the hearing of most such claims to a newly created Court of Claims [ wikipedia.org ] , a special court that served as essentially a claims-hearing arm of Congress ( a " legislative " or " Article I " court , not a part of the judicial branch ) , which would report a recommendation back to Congress ; Congress typically then appropriated the money as a sort of rubber-stamp , but was still technically in charge .
The system gradually shifted to a more and more judicial one , first by having the U.S. Treasurer automatically dispense judgments from pre-appropriated money , and later increasingly by consenting to have claims heard in regular courts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sovereign immunity really does mean that you cannot sue the government for monetary damages for any reason, unless they explicitly consent to it.
The reason Microsoft could sue the U.S. government for copyright violation is that the U.S. federal government has waived its immunity in advance, for wide classes of torts, via the Tucker Act [wikipedia.org] and Federal Tort Claims Act [wikipedia.org].In a much earlier era, the standard way for someone with a grievance against the U.S. government to collect on it was to file a petition with Congress, which would pass special-case legislation agreeing to pay them, if Congress felt that the person in question was indeed owed redress.
The fundamental separation-of-powers justification is that an individual claiming that they're owed money is a request for money from the U.S. Treasury, and only Congress may appropriate such money.This obviously became rather tedious as the volume of claims increased, and didn't give a great perception of fairness, so in 1855 Congress delegated the hearing of most such claims to a newly created Court of Claims [wikipedia.org], a special court that served as essentially a claims-hearing arm of Congress (a "legislative" or "Article I" court, not a part of the judicial branch), which would report a recommendation back to Congress; Congress typically then appropriated the money as a sort of rubber-stamp, but was still technically in charge.
The system gradually shifted to a more and more judicial one, first by having the U.S. Treasurer automatically dispense judgments from pre-appropriated money, and later increasingly by consenting to have claims heard in regular courts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665580</id>
	<title>uhhh</title>
	<author>Pix Pocketts</author>
	<datestamp>1262712420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What's to stop someone from just reinstalling Windows when they get their new pc home anyways?  How retarded.  I bet every Chinese kid from age 5 up can do that.  lol</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's to stop someone from just reinstalling Windows when they get their new pc home anyways ?
How retarded .
I bet every Chinese kid from age 5 up can do that .
lol</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's to stop someone from just reinstalling Windows when they get their new pc home anyways?
How retarded.
I bet every Chinese kid from age 5 up can do that.
lol</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30666298</id>
	<title>Re:"Intellectual Property" hampers economic growth</title>
	<author>stephanruby</author>
	<datestamp>1262719500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>For those who try to start a business, think twice. A single tiny wrong move means you will go to bankruptcy, lose your house, and end up bring your family into suicide.</p></div></blockquote><p>
That's a load of bollocks. If you have assets to begin with, there are many ways to protect them from bankruptcy. Just ask Maddoff or O.J. Simpson. Create an LLC, create a Trust, start a Foundation, buy property in Florida (and stop making payments on your current house), take insurance, max out your pension/401K plan, put your assets under the name of your hooker/mom/girlfriend/children's name, mail your relatives all your jewelry, gamble online, keep a car that's below a certain value, etc.
</p><p>
You just have to do your homework, that's all (the earlier, the better obviously).And no, I don't know which parts are really feasible, or even legal, in the United States or even anywhere for that matter. I'm not a lawyer, nor a financial adviser. I just repeat what I've seen on the news, that's all.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For those who try to start a business , think twice .
A single tiny wrong move means you will go to bankruptcy , lose your house , and end up bring your family into suicide .
That 's a load of bollocks .
If you have assets to begin with , there are many ways to protect them from bankruptcy .
Just ask Maddoff or O.J .
Simpson. Create an LLC , create a Trust , start a Foundation , buy property in Florida ( and stop making payments on your current house ) , take insurance , max out your pension/401K plan , put your assets under the name of your hooker/mom/girlfriend/children 's name , mail your relatives all your jewelry , gamble online , keep a car that 's below a certain value , etc .
You just have to do your homework , that 's all ( the earlier , the better obviously ) .And no , I do n't know which parts are really feasible , or even legal , in the United States or even anywhere for that matter .
I 'm not a lawyer , nor a financial adviser .
I just repeat what I 've seen on the news , that 's all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For those who try to start a business, think twice.
A single tiny wrong move means you will go to bankruptcy, lose your house, and end up bring your family into suicide.
That's a load of bollocks.
If you have assets to begin with, there are many ways to protect them from bankruptcy.
Just ask Maddoff or O.J.
Simpson. Create an LLC, create a Trust, start a Foundation, buy property in Florida (and stop making payments on your current house), take insurance, max out your pension/401K plan, put your assets under the name of your hooker/mom/girlfriend/children's name, mail your relatives all your jewelry, gamble online, keep a car that's below a certain value, etc.
You just have to do your homework, that's all (the earlier, the better obviously).And no, I don't know which parts are really feasible, or even legal, in the United States or even anywhere for that matter.
I'm not a lawyer, nor a financial adviser.
I just repeat what I've seen on the news, that's all.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664784</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30666406</id>
	<title>Silly silly CyberSitter</title>
	<author>Inf0phreak</author>
	<datestamp>1262720760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't they understand that in China, the Chinese are virtually never guilty of copyright violations and foreign entities are almost automatically guilty upon accusation?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't they understand that in China , the Chinese are virtually never guilty of copyright violations and foreign entities are almost automatically guilty upon accusation ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't they understand that in China, the Chinese are virtually never guilty of copyright violations and foreign entities are almost automatically guilty upon accusation?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664956</id>
	<title>FUCK YOU CAMPBELL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262708160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's right bitches, now we're tied. CA-NA-DA! CA-NA-DA!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's right bitches , now we 're tied .
CA-NA-DA ! CA-NA-DA !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's right bitches, now we're tied.
CA-NA-DA! CA-NA-DA!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665328</id>
	<title>The other 9 defendants</title>
	<author>Jenming</author>
	<datestamp>1262710440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems like the other defendants (at least the US ones) could be much easier targets than the Chinese government. Possibly the supply chain could be stopped at that level if China is unwilling to settle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems like the other defendants ( at least the US ones ) could be much easier targets than the Chinese government .
Possibly the supply chain could be stopped at that level if China is unwilling to settle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems like the other defendants (at least the US ones) could be much easier targets than the Chinese government.
Possibly the supply chain could be stopped at that level if China is unwilling to settle.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665424</id>
	<title>It's just like...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262711160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...pissing in a sea of piss...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...pissing in a sea of piss.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...pissing in a sea of piss...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665318</id>
	<title>What's the future for "Intellectual Property"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262710260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Business in North America has realized that they can no longer compete with the developing world in resources, manufacturing or services, and the only way they can make money is by selling access to the intellectual and cultural property they have acquired rights to. So the movies, music, code, patents and any idea that business can get their hands on is something to be exploited for money. This is the reason for the ACTA negotiations: To create a world where such "intellectual property" created in North America can be peddled to the developing world to get the money back that we have been sending them for their cheap goods and cheap services.
<br>
<br>
The problem is that average people in both the developing world and the developed world simply don't believe that draconian rules about so-called "intellectual property" are justified. Why do "artists" get to perform once and get paid over and over when regular people need to go to work every day to make a living? Is it not absurd to fine some 14-year old hundreds of thousands of dollars for a few songs on Kazaa? Why is it OK that copyright duration keeps getting extended over and over just so W*lt D*sney can keep making money recycling the same old tired stuff? It also seems that young people see no problem with sharing music with their friends, or making mix CDs or other reasonable use of music, since that music is broadcast free over the radio anyway. This is not to advocate piracy or law-breaking, but if people think that laws are too restrictive and unjust on what people can do with their copies of software, music and video and what they can do with new ideas they hear about then they will ignore those laws and do what's best for themselves.
<br>
<br>
I understand the reason for this lawsuit and I wish the plaintiff well, but I suspect that in the long run there will be much more of this "intellectual property theft" and people will eventually realize that most people don't agree that it is a terrible crime to steal ideas or music or videos that can be easily shared or freely copied. Eventually the laws that try to enforce huge penalties for such "theft" will make about as much sense to the public as the old "Red Flag" laws that tried to nobble the automobile in a desperate attempt to protect the vested horse, stagecoach and railroad industries.
<br>
<br>
the USA has a lot of debt in the hands of China. The only way to get out from under that debt in the USA is to figure out what they can sell to the Chinese to bring back all the $$$ that USA has paid for goods and services. I don't see how "intellectual property" can be the product that the Chinese want to pay for as it's easy to copy and share and historically that's what citizens and business are used to doing, both in the USA and in China.
<br>
<br>
There ain't no easy answers.
<br>
<br>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting\_Trade\_Agreement" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting\_Trade\_Agreement</a> [wikipedia.org] <br>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red\_flag\_laws" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red\_flag\_laws</a> [wikipedia.org] <br>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United\_States\_public\_debt" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United\_States\_public\_debt</a> [wikipedia.org] <br>
<br>
(Yeah, I know it's only Wikipedia but I am AC after all)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Business in North America has realized that they can no longer compete with the developing world in resources , manufacturing or services , and the only way they can make money is by selling access to the intellectual and cultural property they have acquired rights to .
So the movies , music , code , patents and any idea that business can get their hands on is something to be exploited for money .
This is the reason for the ACTA negotiations : To create a world where such " intellectual property " created in North America can be peddled to the developing world to get the money back that we have been sending them for their cheap goods and cheap services .
The problem is that average people in both the developing world and the developed world simply do n't believe that draconian rules about so-called " intellectual property " are justified .
Why do " artists " get to perform once and get paid over and over when regular people need to go to work every day to make a living ?
Is it not absurd to fine some 14-year old hundreds of thousands of dollars for a few songs on Kazaa ?
Why is it OK that copyright duration keeps getting extended over and over just so W * lt D * sney can keep making money recycling the same old tired stuff ?
It also seems that young people see no problem with sharing music with their friends , or making mix CDs or other reasonable use of music , since that music is broadcast free over the radio anyway .
This is not to advocate piracy or law-breaking , but if people think that laws are too restrictive and unjust on what people can do with their copies of software , music and video and what they can do with new ideas they hear about then they will ignore those laws and do what 's best for themselves .
I understand the reason for this lawsuit and I wish the plaintiff well , but I suspect that in the long run there will be much more of this " intellectual property theft " and people will eventually realize that most people do n't agree that it is a terrible crime to steal ideas or music or videos that can be easily shared or freely copied .
Eventually the laws that try to enforce huge penalties for such " theft " will make about as much sense to the public as the old " Red Flag " laws that tried to nobble the automobile in a desperate attempt to protect the vested horse , stagecoach and railroad industries .
the USA has a lot of debt in the hands of China .
The only way to get out from under that debt in the USA is to figure out what they can sell to the Chinese to bring back all the $ $ $ that USA has paid for goods and services .
I do n't see how " intellectual property " can be the product that the Chinese want to pay for as it 's easy to copy and share and historically that 's what citizens and business are used to doing , both in the USA and in China .
There ai n't no easy answers .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting \ _Trade \ _Agreement [ wikipedia.org ] http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red \ _flag \ _laws [ wikipedia.org ] http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United \ _States \ _public \ _debt [ wikipedia.org ] ( Yeah , I know it 's only Wikipedia but I am AC after all )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Business in North America has realized that they can no longer compete with the developing world in resources, manufacturing or services, and the only way they can make money is by selling access to the intellectual and cultural property they have acquired rights to.
So the movies, music, code, patents and any idea that business can get their hands on is something to be exploited for money.
This is the reason for the ACTA negotiations: To create a world where such "intellectual property" created in North America can be peddled to the developing world to get the money back that we have been sending them for their cheap goods and cheap services.
The problem is that average people in both the developing world and the developed world simply don't believe that draconian rules about so-called "intellectual property" are justified.
Why do "artists" get to perform once and get paid over and over when regular people need to go to work every day to make a living?
Is it not absurd to fine some 14-year old hundreds of thousands of dollars for a few songs on Kazaa?
Why is it OK that copyright duration keeps getting extended over and over just so W*lt D*sney can keep making money recycling the same old tired stuff?
It also seems that young people see no problem with sharing music with their friends, or making mix CDs or other reasonable use of music, since that music is broadcast free over the radio anyway.
This is not to advocate piracy or law-breaking, but if people think that laws are too restrictive and unjust on what people can do with their copies of software, music and video and what they can do with new ideas they hear about then they will ignore those laws and do what's best for themselves.
I understand the reason for this lawsuit and I wish the plaintiff well, but I suspect that in the long run there will be much more of this "intellectual property theft" and people will eventually realize that most people don't agree that it is a terrible crime to steal ideas or music or videos that can be easily shared or freely copied.
Eventually the laws that try to enforce huge penalties for such "theft" will make about as much sense to the public as the old "Red Flag" laws that tried to nobble the automobile in a desperate attempt to protect the vested horse, stagecoach and railroad industries.
the USA has a lot of debt in the hands of China.
The only way to get out from under that debt in the USA is to figure out what they can sell to the Chinese to bring back all the $$$ that USA has paid for goods and services.
I don't see how "intellectual property" can be the product that the Chinese want to pay for as it's easy to copy and share and historically that's what citizens and business are used to doing, both in the USA and in China.
There ain't no easy answers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting\_Trade\_Agreement [wikipedia.org] 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red\_flag\_laws [wikipedia.org] 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United\_States\_public\_debt [wikipedia.org] 

(Yeah, I know it's only Wikipedia but I am AC after all)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30666702</id>
	<title>Quote Cory Doctorow:</title>
	<author>cheros</author>
	<datestamp>1262811000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The USA was a pirate nation for the first 100 years of its existence, ripping off the patents and trademarks of the imperial European powers it had liberated itself from with blood. By keeping their GDP at home, the US revolutionaries were able to bootstrap their nation into an industrial powerhouse. Now, it seems, their descendants are bent on ensuring that no other country can pull the same trick off.</i></p><p>I could not have said it better, other than summarising it: hypocrites..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The USA was a pirate nation for the first 100 years of its existence , ripping off the patents and trademarks of the imperial European powers it had liberated itself from with blood .
By keeping their GDP at home , the US revolutionaries were able to bootstrap their nation into an industrial powerhouse .
Now , it seems , their descendants are bent on ensuring that no other country can pull the same trick off.I could not have said it better , other than summarising it : hypocrites. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The USA was a pirate nation for the first 100 years of its existence, ripping off the patents and trademarks of the imperial European powers it had liberated itself from with blood.
By keeping their GDP at home, the US revolutionaries were able to bootstrap their nation into an industrial powerhouse.
Now, it seems, their descendants are bent on ensuring that no other country can pull the same trick off.I could not have said it better, other than summarising it: hypocrites..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30669206</id>
	<title>Re:What's the future for "Intellectual Property"?</title>
	<author>khchung</author>
	<datestamp>1262791920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The only way to get out from under that debt in the USA is to figure out what they can sell to the Chinese to bring back all the $$$ that USA has paid for goods and services.</p></div><p>There are lots of things the Chinese would want to buy from the USA, e.g. high tech stuff.  The problem is, the US govt refuse to let Chinese buy them (national security, etc) through export restrictions.</p><p>Unfortunately for the US, they are no longer *the* leader in science and technology, and the Chinese can just buy the same stuff from Europe or Russia.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only way to get out from under that debt in the USA is to figure out what they can sell to the Chinese to bring back all the $ $ $ that USA has paid for goods and services.There are lots of things the Chinese would want to buy from the USA , e.g .
high tech stuff .
The problem is , the US govt refuse to let Chinese buy them ( national security , etc ) through export restrictions.Unfortunately for the US , they are no longer * the * leader in science and technology , and the Chinese can just buy the same stuff from Europe or Russia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only way to get out from under that debt in the USA is to figure out what they can sell to the Chinese to bring back all the $$$ that USA has paid for goods and services.There are lots of things the Chinese would want to buy from the USA, e.g.
high tech stuff.
The problem is, the US govt refuse to let Chinese buy them (national security, etc) through export restrictions.Unfortunately for the US, they are no longer *the* leader in science and technology, and the Chinese can just buy the same stuff from Europe or Russia.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664862</id>
	<title>Re:I'll take Sovereign Immunity for the block</title>
	<author>BitterOak</author>
	<datestamp>1262707440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If the USA did this, it could remove itself from the lawsuit claiming "Sovereign Immunity" and it's game over. Are you telling us that China doesn't have this out clause?</p></div><p>Actually, sovereign immunity means you can't sue the government if they pass a law that affects you in a negative way.  It doesn't give the government free reign to ignore existing laws.  The government has to pay license fees for copyrighted material just like everyone else.  Do you think the U.S. government didn't pay for all the copies of Microsoft Office it uses.  (Granted they probably get a great deal on some sort of bulk licensing agreement, but still, I'm sure Microsoft gets paid.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the USA did this , it could remove itself from the lawsuit claiming " Sovereign Immunity " and it 's game over .
Are you telling us that China does n't have this out clause ? Actually , sovereign immunity means you ca n't sue the government if they pass a law that affects you in a negative way .
It does n't give the government free reign to ignore existing laws .
The government has to pay license fees for copyrighted material just like everyone else .
Do you think the U.S. government did n't pay for all the copies of Microsoft Office it uses .
( Granted they probably get a great deal on some sort of bulk licensing agreement , but still , I 'm sure Microsoft gets paid .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the USA did this, it could remove itself from the lawsuit claiming "Sovereign Immunity" and it's game over.
Are you telling us that China doesn't have this out clause?Actually, sovereign immunity means you can't sue the government if they pass a law that affects you in a negative way.
It doesn't give the government free reign to ignore existing laws.
The government has to pay license fees for copyrighted material just like everyone else.
Do you think the U.S. government didn't pay for all the copies of Microsoft Office it uses.
(Granted they probably get a great deal on some sort of bulk licensing agreement, but still, I'm sure Microsoft gets paid.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664618</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30666482</id>
	<title>Re:They may have solved the puzzle...</title>
	<author>sydneyfong</author>
	<datestamp>1262808180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From what I've heard this is a fairly common business model in China.</p><p>Also, I'm pretty sure at some point #1 s/Get/Bribe/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From what I 've heard this is a fairly common business model in China.Also , I 'm pretty sure at some point # 1 s/Get/Bribe/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From what I've heard this is a fairly common business model in China.Also, I'm pretty sure at some point #1 s/Get/Bribe/</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664684</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665282</id>
	<title>Re:"Intellectual Property" hampers economic growth</title>
	<author>cpghost</author>
	<datestamp>1262710020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Patents have done nothing except preventing truly creative inventions.</p></div></blockquote><p>

Some inventions deserve to be prevented by patents. This case being an excellent illustration.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Patents have done nothing except preventing truly creative inventions .
Some inventions deserve to be prevented by patents .
This case being an excellent illustration .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Patents have done nothing except preventing truly creative inventions.
Some inventions deserve to be prevented by patents.
This case being an excellent illustration.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664784</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664988</id>
	<title>court gives paper tiger judgement...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262708400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>plaintiff gets paid in paper tiger bond redeemable in 2019, missing the coupons<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;p</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>plaintiff gets paid in paper tiger bond redeemable in 2019 , missing the coupons ; p</tokentext>
<sentencetext>plaintiff gets paid in paper tiger bond redeemable in 2019, missing the coupons ;p</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664632</id>
	<title>Hahahahah!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262706240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They expect the Chinese government to respect software piracy laws! Hahahahahah! That's rich! Hahahahahah!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-D</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They expect the Chinese government to respect software piracy laws !
Hahahahahah ! That 's rich !
Hahahahahah ! : -D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They expect the Chinese government to respect software piracy laws!
Hahahahahah! That's rich!
Hahahahahah! :-D</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665316</id>
	<title>Re:IN SOVIET CHINA... wait, they still are!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262710260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's literally trillions of dollars of Chinese government money in the US, it wouldn't be too tough to get whatever amount was won out of one of those sources. Or just seize it at the border as somebody's trying to take it back to China.<br> <br>

They could try that, however, the Chinese need us a lot more than what you're suggesting. We're currently in a situation where we really can't afford to piss each other off too much. Evaporating those dollars would be devastating to the US, and calling the debt would cause most of the economic progress that China's made to evaporate as well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's literally trillions of dollars of Chinese government money in the US , it would n't be too tough to get whatever amount was won out of one of those sources .
Or just seize it at the border as somebody 's trying to take it back to China .
They could try that , however , the Chinese need us a lot more than what you 're suggesting .
We 're currently in a situation where we really ca n't afford to piss each other off too much .
Evaporating those dollars would be devastating to the US , and calling the debt would cause most of the economic progress that China 's made to evaporate as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's literally trillions of dollars of Chinese government money in the US, it wouldn't be too tough to get whatever amount was won out of one of those sources.
Or just seize it at the border as somebody's trying to take it back to China.
They could try that, however, the Chinese need us a lot more than what you're suggesting.
We're currently in a situation where we really can't afford to piss each other off too much.
Evaporating those dollars would be devastating to the US, and calling the debt would cause most of the economic progress that China's made to evaporate as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664638</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30666864</id>
	<title>Classic</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262770200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>either cybersitter is really brave or foolish, the human rights violation aspect in this case is purely coincidental, the fact is that their code was ripped and they want a the chinese gov to pay...If an investigation was done into all the copyright violations, idea theft etc that goes on in china the world would have to sue china for like a gazillion bucks</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>either cybersitter is really brave or foolish , the human rights violation aspect in this case is purely coincidental , the fact is that their code was ripped and they want a the chinese gov to pay...If an investigation was done into all the copyright violations , idea theft etc that goes on in china the world would have to sue china for like a gazillion bucks</tokentext>
<sentencetext>either cybersitter is really brave or foolish, the human rights violation aspect in this case is purely coincidental, the fact is that their code was ripped and they want a the chinese gov to pay...If an investigation was done into all the copyright violations, idea theft etc that goes on in china the world would have to sue china for like a gazillion bucks</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665670</id>
	<title>Re:"Intellectual Property" hampers economic growth</title>
	<author>Zenzilla</author>
	<datestamp>1262713200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's why you start a business behind a LLC.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's why you start a business behind a LLC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's why you start a business behind a LLC.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664784</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665278</id>
	<title>Seriously? This is your example?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262710020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah yes, if only we abandoned the terror of "Intellectual Property", we too could have oppressive censorship software forced upon us. Why must we languish in such outdated technology as an uncensored Internet?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah yes , if only we abandoned the terror of " Intellectual Property " , we too could have oppressive censorship software forced upon us .
Why must we languish in such outdated technology as an uncensored Internet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah yes, if only we abandoned the terror of "Intellectual Property", we too could have oppressive censorship software forced upon us.
Why must we languish in such outdated technology as an uncensored Internet?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664784</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665432</id>
	<title>Re:"Intellectual Property" hampers economic growth</title>
	<author>matzahboy</author>
	<datestamp>1262711160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This has nothing to do with patents...

Also, how can anything in the digital world survive without intellectual property laws? They are what makes pirating illegal. One company thinks of a brilliant idea, and suddenly all their competitors have copied it identically. There would be 0 reason to put any money into R&amp;D.

I agree with you that patent law needs help. But you can't completely get rid of all intellectual property rights. Most companies innovate to make money. There is no economic reason to innovate if your competitors will get the same benefits and not have to spend any R&amp;D money/time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This has nothing to do with patents.. . Also , how can anything in the digital world survive without intellectual property laws ?
They are what makes pirating illegal .
One company thinks of a brilliant idea , and suddenly all their competitors have copied it identically .
There would be 0 reason to put any money into R&amp;D .
I agree with you that patent law needs help .
But you ca n't completely get rid of all intellectual property rights .
Most companies innovate to make money .
There is no economic reason to innovate if your competitors will get the same benefits and not have to spend any R&amp;D money/time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This has nothing to do with patents...

Also, how can anything in the digital world survive without intellectual property laws?
They are what makes pirating illegal.
One company thinks of a brilliant idea, and suddenly all their competitors have copied it identically.
There would be 0 reason to put any money into R&amp;D.
I agree with you that patent law needs help.
But you can't completely get rid of all intellectual property rights.
Most companies innovate to make money.
There is no economic reason to innovate if your competitors will get the same benefits and not have to spend any R&amp;D money/time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664784</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664840</id>
	<title>That's why you always put</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262707320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...a backdoor in your proprietary software. They could sell unblocking software that way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...a backdoor in your proprietary software .
They could sell unblocking software that way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...a backdoor in your proprietary software.
They could sell unblocking software that way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664618</id>
	<title>I'll take Sovereign Immunity for the block</title>
	<author>LostCluster</author>
	<datestamp>1262706180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>If the USA did this, it could remove itself from the lawsuit claiming "Sovereign Immunity" and it's game over. Are you telling us that China doesn't have this out clause?</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the USA did this , it could remove itself from the lawsuit claiming " Sovereign Immunity " and it 's game over .
Are you telling us that China does n't have this out clause ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the USA did this, it could remove itself from the lawsuit claiming "Sovereign Immunity" and it's game over.
Are you telling us that China doesn't have this out clause?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30666098</id>
	<title>Re:I'll take Sovereign Immunity for the block</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1262717700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Are you telling us that China doesn't have this out clause?</p></div><p>They don't need a "clause". China is an aggressive authoritarian communist government; they do whatever they want until someone threatens to start shooting if they don't stop. I predict that the response will basically be "piss off" (albeit a bit more politely worded). If they are trying to embarrass the Chinese government then they will also achieve nothing. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if someone in the US government called CyberSitter and asked them to quietly drop it in the interest of not harming US-Chinese relations (the Chinese take a <i>very</i> dim view of foreigners making negative comments about the "Chinese way" of doing things).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you telling us that China does n't have this out clause ? They do n't need a " clause " .
China is an aggressive authoritarian communist government ; they do whatever they want until someone threatens to start shooting if they do n't stop .
I predict that the response will basically be " piss off " ( albeit a bit more politely worded ) .
If they are trying to embarrass the Chinese government then they will also achieve nothing .
In fact , I would n't be surprised if someone in the US government called CyberSitter and asked them to quietly drop it in the interest of not harming US-Chinese relations ( the Chinese take a very dim view of foreigners making negative comments about the " Chinese way " of doing things ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you telling us that China doesn't have this out clause?They don't need a "clause".
China is an aggressive authoritarian communist government; they do whatever they want until someone threatens to start shooting if they don't stop.
I predict that the response will basically be "piss off" (albeit a bit more politely worded).
If they are trying to embarrass the Chinese government then they will also achieve nothing.
In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if someone in the US government called CyberSitter and asked them to quietly drop it in the interest of not harming US-Chinese relations (the Chinese take a very dim view of foreigners making negative comments about the "Chinese way" of doing things).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664618</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665556</id>
	<title>Re:"Intellectual Property" hampers economic growth</title>
	<author>ridgecritter</author>
	<datestamp>1262712240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Spoken as someone who has never had a patentable or patented idea, I'll wager...and doubtless as someone who has never made money on his own IP.  Bet your tune will change the moment you actually get a patent for something you invented.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Spoken as someone who has never had a patentable or patented idea , I 'll wager...and doubtless as someone who has never made money on his own IP .
Bet your tune will change the moment you actually get a patent for something you invented .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spoken as someone who has never had a patentable or patented idea, I'll wager...and doubtless as someone who has never made money on his own IP.
Bet your tune will change the moment you actually get a patent for something you invented.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664784</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30667138</id>
	<title>I'm suddenly in favor of IP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262773620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And was THAT ever a sentence I didn't expect to be uttering.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And was THAT ever a sentence I did n't expect to be uttering .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And was THAT ever a sentence I didn't expect to be uttering.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30677216</id>
	<title>Dupe alert</title>
	<author>jhylkema</author>
	<datestamp>1262784420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/10/07/1221207" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">Old as the hills</a> [slashdot.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Old as the hills [ slashdot.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Old as the hills [slashdot.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664684</id>
	<title>They may have solved the puzzle...</title>
	<author>LostCluster</author>
	<datestamp>1262706480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1. Get the government to require your product be shipped with all computers, and used by all households with children.<br>2. Make your product by stealing code to save on development costs.<br>3. Bill the computer makers for license rights to the program you stole and the government requires, they can't turn you down or they're out of the PC business.<br>4. PROFIT!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
Get the government to require your product be shipped with all computers , and used by all households with children.2 .
Make your product by stealing code to save on development costs.3 .
Bill the computer makers for license rights to the program you stole and the government requires , they ca n't turn you down or they 're out of the PC business.4 .
PROFIT ! ! !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
Get the government to require your product be shipped with all computers, and used by all households with children.2.
Make your product by stealing code to save on development costs.3.
Bill the computer makers for license rights to the program you stole and the government requires, they can't turn you down or they're out of the PC business.4.
PROFIT!!!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664774</id>
	<title>Serious Challenges Remain</title>
	<author>RobGTX</author>
	<datestamp>1262706900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Going all the way back to 2005, China stated that it would take steps to comply with, and enforce copyright laws. See #1 under "Serious Challenges Remain" in this article.

<a href="http://www.copyright.gov/docs/regstat052505.html" title="copyright.gov" rel="nofollow">http://www.copyright.gov/docs/regstat052505.html</a> [copyright.gov]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Going all the way back to 2005 , China stated that it would take steps to comply with , and enforce copyright laws .
See # 1 under " Serious Challenges Remain " in this article .
http : //www.copyright.gov/docs/regstat052505.html [ copyright.gov ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Going all the way back to 2005, China stated that it would take steps to comply with, and enforce copyright laws.
See #1 under "Serious Challenges Remain" in this article.
http://www.copyright.gov/docs/regstat052505.html [copyright.gov]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665760</id>
	<title>Re:"Intellectual Property" hampers economic growth</title>
	<author>Jeff DeMaagd</author>
	<datestamp>1262714460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For those who try to start a business, think twice. A single tiny wrong move means you will go to bankruptcy, lose your house, and end up bring your family into suicide.</p></div><p>Hyperbole much?  Sure, things can go wrong, but it's quite rare that it ends in suicide.</p><p>And yes, it's best to not bet the house on it.</p><p>Also, China has a bit of a Machiavellian attitude about things, more so than any major power, even the US, IMO.  Economic freedom is largely the main freedom there is in China.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For those who try to start a business , think twice .
A single tiny wrong move means you will go to bankruptcy , lose your house , and end up bring your family into suicide.Hyperbole much ?
Sure , things can go wrong , but it 's quite rare that it ends in suicide.And yes , it 's best to not bet the house on it.Also , China has a bit of a Machiavellian attitude about things , more so than any major power , even the US , IMO .
Economic freedom is largely the main freedom there is in China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For those who try to start a business, think twice.
A single tiny wrong move means you will go to bankruptcy, lose your house, and end up bring your family into suicide.Hyperbole much?
Sure, things can go wrong, but it's quite rare that it ends in suicide.And yes, it's best to not bet the house on it.Also, China has a bit of a Machiavellian attitude about things, more so than any major power, even the US, IMO.
Economic freedom is largely the main freedom there is in China.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664784</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664674</id>
	<title>Good luck with that</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262706420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do you really think that they will pay this?  They copy everything with total disregard for IP rights.  Even if they succeed with this suit, how would they enforce it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you really think that they will pay this ?
They copy everything with total disregard for IP rights .
Even if they succeed with this suit , how would they enforce it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you really think that they will pay this?
They copy everything with total disregard for IP rights.
Even if they succeed with this suit, how would they enforce it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665540</id>
	<title>Really?</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1262712180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do you have proof that USA can do that? I mean they can in NATIONAL SECURITY issues, but they still pay "fair market value". At any other time, they pay what the market for a large company pays. So, where is your proof about America?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you have proof that USA can do that ?
I mean they can in NATIONAL SECURITY issues , but they still pay " fair market value " .
At any other time , they pay what the market for a large company pays .
So , where is your proof about America ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you have proof that USA can do that?
I mean they can in NATIONAL SECURITY issues, but they still pay "fair market value".
At any other time, they pay what the market for a large company pays.
So, where is your proof about America?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664618</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664638</id>
	<title>IN SOVIET CHINA... wait, they still are!</title>
	<author>LostCluster</author>
	<datestamp>1262706300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems odd that a Chinese government-run effort would have to respect the American copyright laws... couldn't China just declare the work to be in the public domain as far as they're concerned?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems odd that a Chinese government-run effort would have to respect the American copyright laws... could n't China just declare the work to be in the public domain as far as they 're concerned ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems odd that a Chinese government-run effort would have to respect the American copyright laws... couldn't China just declare the work to be in the public domain as far as they're concerned?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665330</id>
	<title>Re:I'll take Sovereign Immunity for the block</title>
	<author>Zero\_\_Kelvin</author>
	<datestamp>1262710440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"Actually, sovereign immunity means you can't sue the government if they pass a law that affects you in a negative way. It doesn't give the government free reign to ignore existing laws."</p></div></blockquote><p>Maybe the OP was confusing Sovereign Immunity with The Supreme Court<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Actually , sovereign immunity means you ca n't sue the government if they pass a law that affects you in a negative way .
It does n't give the government free reign to ignore existing laws .
" Maybe the OP was confusing Sovereign Immunity with The Supreme Court ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Actually, sovereign immunity means you can't sue the government if they pass a law that affects you in a negative way.
It doesn't give the government free reign to ignore existing laws.
"Maybe the OP was confusing Sovereign Immunity with The Supreme Court ;-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664762</id>
	<title>Re:IN SOVIET CHINA... wait, they still are!</title>
	<author>Antique Geekmeister</author>
	<datestamp>1262706840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A lot of copyright laws are international, and China is a signatory. There are good business reasons to do this, even though such laws are frequently and casually violated in China, even moreso than in the USA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A lot of copyright laws are international , and China is a signatory .
There are good business reasons to do this , even though such laws are frequently and casually violated in China , even moreso than in the USA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A lot of copyright laws are international, and China is a signatory.
There are good business reasons to do this, even though such laws are frequently and casually violated in China, even moreso than in the USA.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664638</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30666458</id>
	<title>Re:IN SOVIET CHINA... wait, they still are!</title>
	<author>sydneyfong</author>
	<datestamp>1262721360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>China is signatory to the TRIPS [1] agreement, which is an international treaty on Intellectual Property rights. TRIPS is in turn a prerequisite requirement for WTO membership. In this case China really can't ignore copyright unless it's prepared to say good bye to the WTO -- which considering the amount of vested interests there, is close to impossible.</p><p>[1] <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreement\_on\_Trade-Related\_Aspects\_of\_Intellectual\_Property\_Rights" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreement\_on\_Trade-Related\_Aspects\_of\_Intellectual\_Property\_Rights</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>China is signatory to the TRIPS [ 1 ] agreement , which is an international treaty on Intellectual Property rights .
TRIPS is in turn a prerequisite requirement for WTO membership .
In this case China really ca n't ignore copyright unless it 's prepared to say good bye to the WTO -- which considering the amount of vested interests there , is close to impossible .
[ 1 ] http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreement \ _on \ _Trade-Related \ _Aspects \ _of \ _Intellectual \ _Property \ _Rights [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China is signatory to the TRIPS [1] agreement, which is an international treaty on Intellectual Property rights.
TRIPS is in turn a prerequisite requirement for WTO membership.
In this case China really can't ignore copyright unless it's prepared to say good bye to the WTO -- which considering the amount of vested interests there, is close to impossible.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreement\_on\_Trade-Related\_Aspects\_of\_Intellectual\_Property\_Rights [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664638</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664962</id>
	<title>Re:IN SOVIET CHINA... wait, they still are!</title>
	<author>toastar</author>
	<datestamp>1262708220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They are a WIPO member, I think they've signed a couple copyright treaties</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are a WIPO member , I think they 've signed a couple copyright treaties</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are a WIPO member, I think they've signed a couple copyright treaties</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664762</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665188</id>
	<title>Re:I'll take Sovereign Immunity for the block</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262709540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign\_immunity#In\_the\_United\_States" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">"In the United States, the federal government has sovereign immunity and may not be sued unless it has waived its immunity or consented to suit."</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>As far as I understand it, Microsoft could not sue the US Government if they used Office without license. But they could sue anyone who installed it on the computers, the guy who ordered them to install it, etc. Generally, if this guy is following orders, he'd be compensated by the Government for any losses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" In the United States , the federal government has sovereign immunity and may not be sued unless it has waived its immunity or consented to suit .
" [ wikipedia.org ] As far as I understand it , Microsoft could not sue the US Government if they used Office without license .
But they could sue anyone who installed it on the computers , the guy who ordered them to install it , etc .
Generally , if this guy is following orders , he 'd be compensated by the Government for any losses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"In the United States, the federal government has sovereign immunity and may not be sued unless it has waived its immunity or consented to suit.
" [wikipedia.org]As far as I understand it, Microsoft could not sue the US Government if they used Office without license.
But they could sue anyone who installed it on the computers, the guy who ordered them to install it, etc.
Generally, if this guy is following orders, he'd be compensated by the Government for any losses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664784</id>
	<title>"Intellectual Property" hampers economic growth</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262706960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is why China continues to have growth in GNP year after year.</p><p>Time to reform the U.S. patent system, or even the entire legal system in general.  Patents have done nothing except preventing truly creative inventions, especially when you have too many lawyers on the streets right now.</p><p>For those who try to start a business, think twice. A single tiny wrong move means you will go to bankruptcy, lose your house, and end up bring your family into suicide.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is why China continues to have growth in GNP year after year.Time to reform the U.S. patent system , or even the entire legal system in general .
Patents have done nothing except preventing truly creative inventions , especially when you have too many lawyers on the streets right now.For those who try to start a business , think twice .
A single tiny wrong move means you will go to bankruptcy , lose your house , and end up bring your family into suicide .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is why China continues to have growth in GNP year after year.Time to reform the U.S. patent system, or even the entire legal system in general.
Patents have done nothing except preventing truly creative inventions, especially when you have too many lawyers on the streets right now.For those who try to start a business, think twice.
A single tiny wrong move means you will go to bankruptcy, lose your house, and end up bring your family into suicide.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664670</id>
	<title>Tag this with goodluckwiththat</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262706420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The title says it all. So how would something like this be enforced to the losing party? Yeah I thought so.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The title says it all .
So how would something like this be enforced to the losing party ?
Yeah I thought so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The title says it all.
So how would something like this be enforced to the losing party?
Yeah I thought so.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665332</id>
	<title>Re:Tag this with goodluckwiththat</title>
	<author>hedwards</author>
	<datestamp>1262710440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You do realize that the Chinese state owns most of our debt, right? All the court would have to do is order the institutions holding the cash to release the appropriate sum to the winning party.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You do realize that the Chinese state owns most of our debt , right ?
All the court would have to do is order the institutions holding the cash to release the appropriate sum to the winning party .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You do realize that the Chinese state owns most of our debt, right?
All the court would have to do is order the institutions holding the cash to release the appropriate sum to the winning party.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664670</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_2359237_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30666098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_2359237_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30666458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_2359237_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_2359237_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_2359237_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30669206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665318
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_2359237_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664962
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664762
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_2359237_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664784
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_2359237_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664784
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_2359237_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664784
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_2359237_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_2359237_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30666482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_2359237_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664784
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_2359237_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664784
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_2359237_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665188
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_2359237_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_2359237_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_2359237_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664784
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_2359237_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30666298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664784
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_2359237.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664670
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665332
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_2359237.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665678
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_2359237.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664684
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30666482
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_2359237.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664774
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_2359237.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664674
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_2359237.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664784
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665670
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665432
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665282
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665278
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30666298
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665760
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665556
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_2359237.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30666702
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_2359237.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664632
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_2359237.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665318
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30669206
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_2359237.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664618
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30666098
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665540
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664862
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665330
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665188
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665294
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_2359237.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664638
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30666458
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30665316
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664762
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_2359237.30664962
</commentlist>
</conversation>
