<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_11_2148236</id>
	<title>Microsoft Pulls Office From Its Own Online Store</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1263238800000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>CWmike writes <i>"Microsoft has <a href="http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9143818/Microsoft\_pulls\_Office\_from\_own\_online\_store\_">pulled almost every version of Office from its own online store</a> to comply with a <a href="https://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/12/22/1936214/Microsoft-Ordered-To-Pay-290M-Stop-Selling-Word">court order</a> requiring it to remove custom XML technology from its popular Word software that starts on Monday. As of mid-day, the only edition available from the Microsoft Store was Office Ultimate 2007, a $670 'full-version' suite. All other Windows editions, as well as Office 2008 for Mac, were accompanied by the message: 'This product is currently unavailable while we update versions on our site. We expect it to be available soon.' Microsoft confirmed that the disappearance of Office was related to the injunction that came out of a patent infringement case the company lost in 2009. 'We've taken steps to comply with the court's ruling and we're introducing the revised software into the US market," said Michael Croan, a senior marketing manager, in an e-mail. He also downplayed the move. 'This process will be imperceptible to the vast majority of customers, who will find both trial and purchase options readily available.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>CWmike writes " Microsoft has pulled almost every version of Office from its own online store to comply with a court order requiring it to remove custom XML technology from its popular Word software that starts on Monday .
As of mid-day , the only edition available from the Microsoft Store was Office Ultimate 2007 , a $ 670 'full-version ' suite .
All other Windows editions , as well as Office 2008 for Mac , were accompanied by the message : 'This product is currently unavailable while we update versions on our site .
We expect it to be available soon .
' Microsoft confirmed that the disappearance of Office was related to the injunction that came out of a patent infringement case the company lost in 2009 .
'We 've taken steps to comply with the court 's ruling and we 're introducing the revised software into the US market , " said Michael Croan , a senior marketing manager , in an e-mail .
He also downplayed the move .
'This process will be imperceptible to the vast majority of customers , who will find both trial and purchase options readily available .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CWmike writes "Microsoft has pulled almost every version of Office from its own online store to comply with a court order requiring it to remove custom XML technology from its popular Word software that starts on Monday.
As of mid-day, the only edition available from the Microsoft Store was Office Ultimate 2007, a $670 'full-version' suite.
All other Windows editions, as well as Office 2008 for Mac, were accompanied by the message: 'This product is currently unavailable while we update versions on our site.
We expect it to be available soon.
' Microsoft confirmed that the disappearance of Office was related to the injunction that came out of a patent infringement case the company lost in 2009.
'We've taken steps to comply with the court's ruling and we're introducing the revised software into the US market," said Michael Croan, a senior marketing manager, in an e-mail.
He also downplayed the move.
'This process will be imperceptible to the vast majority of customers, who will find both trial and purchase options readily available.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734434</id>
	<title>Re:Pulling it from the store isn't enough ...</title>
	<author>harlows\_monkeys</author>
	<datestamp>1263288600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>... they should also have to deactivate every (legal) copy that's currently out in the wild. </p></div><p>A large part of the damage award is to cover those copies. That's why they don't have to be disabled. They pay damages to cover the copies already out there, and have to stop selling new copies that infringe.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... they should also have to deactivate every ( legal ) copy that 's currently out in the wild .
A large part of the damage award is to cover those copies .
That 's why they do n't have to be disabled .
They pay damages to cover the copies already out there , and have to stop selling new copies that infringe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... they should also have to deactivate every (legal) copy that's currently out in the wild.
A large part of the damage award is to cover those copies.
That's why they don't have to be disabled.
They pay damages to cover the copies already out there, and have to stop selling new copies that infringe.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30748034</id>
	<title>Re:The news I'm waiting for.</title>
	<author>uninformedLuddite</author>
	<datestamp>1263416160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Makes my eyes red just thinking about it</htmltext>
<tokenext>Makes my eyes red just thinking about it</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Makes my eyes red just thinking about it</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734806</id>
	<title>Re:Another harrasment to free software</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263293520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>harr harr free from home users since version one, thepiratebay as a MS distributor... good one harr harr</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>harr harr free from home users since version one , thepiratebay as a MS distributor... good one harr harr</tokentext>
<sentencetext>harr harr free from home users since version one, thepiratebay as a MS distributor... good one harr harr</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734314</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734404</id>
	<title>Re: here$ the new$</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263288120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>MS complied with the EU ruling, and note... immediately took full vengeance on: the USERS. $670 for an Office Cocktail to burn down your desktop. Smallchange, maybe to those driving a Veyron. I think it is finally time for those users (and their bosses) to "move on" to Open Office, even on the MS platform, and ultimately migrate to Linux desktop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MS complied with the EU ruling , and note... immediately took full vengeance on : the USERS .
$ 670 for an Office Cocktail to burn down your desktop .
Smallchange , maybe to those driving a Veyron .
I think it is finally time for those users ( and their bosses ) to " move on " to Open Office , even on the MS platform , and ultimately migrate to Linux desktop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MS complied with the EU ruling, and note... immediately took full vengeance on: the USERS.
$670 for an Office Cocktail to burn down your desktop.
Smallchange, maybe to those driving a Veyron.
I think it is finally time for those users (and their bosses) to "move on" to Open Office, even on the MS platform, and ultimately migrate to Linux desktop.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30736680</id>
	<title>Bravo !</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263310140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They have a long history of using other people's innovation without permission, and this case is no exception.</p></div><p>This is funny. Open source has an even longer list of creating knockoffs of existing successful PROPRIETARY (and possibly patent-protected) products. I wonder if you can think of any... loonix? lunex? linux?</p><p>I'm pretty sure OpenOffice might infringe on some MS Office and related  patents. I'm pretty sure KDevelop, Eclipse and others might possibly infringe on Visual Studio patents. I'm pretty sure WINE infringes on Windows platform and related patents and so on.</p><p>Ofcource if M$ decides to sue, I wonder which side tin-foil nuts like you will be on?</p><p>But hey, don't get objectivity or facts bother you. I enjoy reading uneducated angst filled comments from F/OSS zealots. Maybe I can get you a more comfortable chair so we can witness more of your gems..</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They have a long history of using other people 's innovation without permission , and this case is no exception.This is funny .
Open source has an even longer list of creating knockoffs of existing successful PROPRIETARY ( and possibly patent-protected ) products .
I wonder if you can think of any... loonix ? lunex ?
linux ? I 'm pretty sure OpenOffice might infringe on some MS Office and related patents .
I 'm pretty sure KDevelop , Eclipse and others might possibly infringe on Visual Studio patents .
I 'm pretty sure WINE infringes on Windows platform and related patents and so on.Ofcource if M $ decides to sue , I wonder which side tin-foil nuts like you will be on ? But hey , do n't get objectivity or facts bother you .
I enjoy reading uneducated angst filled comments from F/OSS zealots .
Maybe I can get you a more comfortable chair so we can witness more of your gems. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They have a long history of using other people's innovation without permission, and this case is no exception.This is funny.
Open source has an even longer list of creating knockoffs of existing successful PROPRIETARY (and possibly patent-protected) products.
I wonder if you can think of any... loonix? lunex?
linux?I'm pretty sure OpenOffice might infringe on some MS Office and related  patents.
I'm pretty sure KDevelop, Eclipse and others might possibly infringe on Visual Studio patents.
I'm pretty sure WINE infringes on Windows platform and related patents and so on.Ofcource if M$ decides to sue, I wonder which side tin-foil nuts like you will be on?But hey, don't get objectivity or facts bother you.
I enjoy reading uneducated angst filled comments from F/OSS zealots.
Maybe I can get you a more comfortable chair so we can witness more of your gems..
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735972</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734368</id>
	<title>Re:Inside job?</title>
	<author>Techman83</author>
	<datestamp>1263287460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I highly doubt it, i4i (ironic sounding name IMO) has a very specific patent on a specific XML function, not XML in it's entirety. Which is why  they haven't sued other office packages like OO.org. <br> <br> It's probably a similar scenario to the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ric\_Richardson" title="wikipedia.org">Uniloc case</a> [wikipedia.org]. i4i offers a licensing deal for their patent, Microsoft says bugger off, then implements it anyway.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I highly doubt it , i4i ( ironic sounding name IMO ) has a very specific patent on a specific XML function , not XML in it 's entirety .
Which is why they have n't sued other office packages like OO.org .
It 's probably a similar scenario to the Uniloc case [ wikipedia.org ] .
i4i offers a licensing deal for their patent , Microsoft says bugger off , then implements it anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I highly doubt it, i4i (ironic sounding name IMO) has a very specific patent on a specific XML function, not XML in it's entirety.
Which is why  they haven't sued other office packages like OO.org.
It's probably a similar scenario to the Uniloc case [wikipedia.org].
i4i offers a licensing deal for their patent, Microsoft says bugger off, then implements it anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734330</id>
	<title>A lesson to Microsoft</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263286980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't mess with a company whose name is <b> <a href="http://www.i4i.com/" title="i4i.com" rel="nofollow">eye for (an) eye</a> [i4i.com] </b>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't mess with a company whose name is eye for ( an ) eye [ i4i.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't mess with a company whose name is  eye for (an) eye [i4i.com] .</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735972</id>
	<title>Re:wheres the news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263305820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>So anyone that makes good points that are a bit more level headed than the usual hate based anti-Microsoft drivel is an apologist?</i>
<p>
Recognizing that Microsoft is a bad corporate citizen is not "hate based anti-Microsoft drivel".
</p><p>
They have a long history of using other people's innovation without permission, and this case is no exception. I4i is no patent troll, they produced, sold and still sell an XML editing tool. They have a very specific patent, specific enough that other implementations (like ODF) don't infringe.
</p><p>
Sopssa <b>is</b> an apologist. He participated in the original discussion, and has to be aware that this patent suit is fair and valid, and yet is still dismissive of i4i's efforts. That isn't reasonable behavour, it's fanboism or worse.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So anyone that makes good points that are a bit more level headed than the usual hate based anti-Microsoft drivel is an apologist ?
Recognizing that Microsoft is a bad corporate citizen is not " hate based anti-Microsoft drivel " .
They have a long history of using other people 's innovation without permission , and this case is no exception .
I4i is no patent troll , they produced , sold and still sell an XML editing tool .
They have a very specific patent , specific enough that other implementations ( like ODF ) do n't infringe .
Sopssa is an apologist .
He participated in the original discussion , and has to be aware that this patent suit is fair and valid , and yet is still dismissive of i4i 's efforts .
That is n't reasonable behavour , it 's fanboism or worse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So anyone that makes good points that are a bit more level headed than the usual hate based anti-Microsoft drivel is an apologist?
Recognizing that Microsoft is a bad corporate citizen is not "hate based anti-Microsoft drivel".
They have a long history of using other people's innovation without permission, and this case is no exception.
I4i is no patent troll, they produced, sold and still sell an XML editing tool.
They have a very specific patent, specific enough that other implementations (like ODF) don't infringe.
Sopssa is an apologist.
He participated in the original discussion, and has to be aware that this patent suit is fair and valid, and yet is still dismissive of i4i's efforts.
That isn't reasonable behavour, it's fanboism or worse.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735206</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734530</id>
	<title>Re:Perfect opportunity for Open Office to gain...</title>
	<author>Antiocheian</author>
	<datestamp>1263289500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And you also get Java as a bonus!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And you also get Java as a bonus !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And you also get Java as a bonus!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734320</id>
	<title>Pulling it from the store isn't enough ...</title>
	<author>Daniel Dvorkin</author>
	<datestamp>1263286800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... they should also have to deactivate every (legal) copy that's currently out in the wild.  After all, the software industry has been telling us for years that we don't really get to buy software, just rent it.  So surely it can't be legal for Microsoft to continue to rent out software that violates someone else's patent!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... they should also have to deactivate every ( legal ) copy that 's currently out in the wild .
After all , the software industry has been telling us for years that we do n't really get to buy software , just rent it .
So surely it ca n't be legal for Microsoft to continue to rent out software that violates someone else 's patent !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... they should also have to deactivate every (legal) copy that's currently out in the wild.
After all, the software industry has been telling us for years that we don't really get to buy software, just rent it.
So surely it can't be legal for Microsoft to continue to rent out software that violates someone else's patent!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30739110</id>
	<title>Re: here$ the new$</title>
	<author>ultranova</author>
	<datestamp>1263319020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Did you also think that food stores pay off the stealing users from their own pockets, and don't increase prices to get it back from users?</p></div> </blockquote><p>A food store, like any other store, sets the price of the food it sells to the point that brings it the most profit. Rising the price will <em>decrease</em>, not increase, profits. So yes, it pays for any stolen items out of its own pockets, since it has no other options.</p><p>I wish people stopped perpetuating the PR-invented myth that companies are somehow impervious to fines because they can simply get more money from their customers to cover it. They <em>can't</em>, because if they could, they'd already be doing so. Any company blaming a price increase to fines, theft or anything like that is flat out lying.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did you also think that food stores pay off the stealing users from their own pockets , and do n't increase prices to get it back from users ?
A food store , like any other store , sets the price of the food it sells to the point that brings it the most profit .
Rising the price will decrease , not increase , profits .
So yes , it pays for any stolen items out of its own pockets , since it has no other options.I wish people stopped perpetuating the PR-invented myth that companies are somehow impervious to fines because they can simply get more money from their customers to cover it .
They ca n't , because if they could , they 'd already be doing so .
Any company blaming a price increase to fines , theft or anything like that is flat out lying .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did you also think that food stores pay off the stealing users from their own pockets, and don't increase prices to get it back from users?
A food store, like any other store, sets the price of the food it sells to the point that brings it the most profit.
Rising the price will decrease, not increase, profits.
So yes, it pays for any stolen items out of its own pockets, since it has no other options.I wish people stopped perpetuating the PR-invented myth that companies are somehow impervious to fines because they can simply get more money from their customers to cover it.
They can't, because if they could, they'd already be doing so.
Any company blaming a price increase to fines, theft or anything like that is flat out lying.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734998</id>
	<title>Re:Pulling it from the store isn't enough ...</title>
	<author>sa1lnr</author>
	<datestamp>1263296100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would have that that the $300 million covered this?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would have that that the $ 300 million covered this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would have that that the $300 million covered this?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30737382</id>
	<title>in the mean time....</title>
	<author>Sfing\_ter</author>
	<datestamp>1263312840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the mean time, we would rather you pop on over to your favorite torrent site and get a virus infested pirated copy of our lovely office suite rather than trudging over to the damned dingy open office site and use that... thanks, Steve</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the mean time , we would rather you pop on over to your favorite torrent site and get a virus infested pirated copy of our lovely office suite rather than trudging over to the damned dingy open office site and use that... thanks , Steve</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the mean time, we would rather you pop on over to your favorite torrent site and get a virus infested pirated copy of our lovely office suite rather than trudging over to the damned dingy open office site and use that... thanks, Steve</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30737294</id>
	<title>Re:The news I'm waiting for.</title>
	<author>Xest</author>
	<datestamp>1263312480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"What I want to know is what will i4i do with its 300 million from Microsoft."</p><p>Retire I would imagine<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" What I want to know is what will i4i do with its 300 million from Microsoft .
" Retire I would imagine ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"What I want to know is what will i4i do with its 300 million from Microsoft.
"Retire I would imagine ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734720</id>
	<title>Re:Pulling it from the store isn't enough ...</title>
	<author>MichaelSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1263292440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well maybe they have to do that but what would that do to business? Practically every business in the western world would grind to a halt if suddenly denied Microsoft Office, even the business of managing patents.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well maybe they have to do that but what would that do to business ?
Practically every business in the western world would grind to a halt if suddenly denied Microsoft Office , even the business of managing patents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well maybe they have to do that but what would that do to business?
Practically every business in the western world would grind to a halt if suddenly denied Microsoft Office, even the business of managing patents.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734456</id>
	<title>Re: here$ the new$</title>
	<author>sopssa</author>
	<datestamp>1263288840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did you also think that food stores pay off the stealing users from their own pockets, and don't increase prices to get it back from users?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did you also think that food stores pay off the stealing users from their own pockets , and do n't increase prices to get it back from users ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did you also think that food stores pay off the stealing users from their own pockets, and don't increase prices to get it back from users?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734236</id>
	<title>Perfect opportunity for Open Office to gain...</title>
	<author>Laser\_iCE</author>
	<datestamp>1263328980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Perfect opportunity for Open Office to gain some ground. You and I may not know the people, but there will be someone out there who needs to download Office during the week for an assignment or work task, and will be unable to buy their legitimate version online. So the person goes to google and types in "office suite" and what comes up first? OO.org</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perfect opportunity for Open Office to gain some ground .
You and I may not know the people , but there will be someone out there who needs to download Office during the week for an assignment or work task , and will be unable to buy their legitimate version online .
So the person goes to google and types in " office suite " and what comes up first ?
OO.org</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perfect opportunity for Open Office to gain some ground.
You and I may not know the people, but there will be someone out there who needs to download Office during the week for an assignment or work task, and will be unable to buy their legitimate version online.
So the person goes to google and types in "office suite" and what comes up first?
OO.org</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734796</id>
	<title>Re:Another harrasment to free software</title>
	<author>KibibyteBrain</author>
	<datestamp>1263293340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can sue anyone who uses the patented technology. So you can sue all major users for royalties for each infringement(use) of the patent. The author and distributors would be most endangered by having users of the software legally assault him for a plethora of liabilities related to their being sued, but can also be sued for IP infringement himself. Unless you are someone like Microsoft with well known deep pockets, you would most likely be forced to settle the suit as you'd have no way to handle the legal Apocalypse that would await you if the rights holders decided to unleash it. This is actually what Microsoft threatened to do with their pile of patents they alleged Linux infringed upon; go after the [major] users, and totally discredit and overwhelm the major distributors of the product.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can sue anyone who uses the patented technology .
So you can sue all major users for royalties for each infringement ( use ) of the patent .
The author and distributors would be most endangered by having users of the software legally assault him for a plethora of liabilities related to their being sued , but can also be sued for IP infringement himself .
Unless you are someone like Microsoft with well known deep pockets , you would most likely be forced to settle the suit as you 'd have no way to handle the legal Apocalypse that would await you if the rights holders decided to unleash it .
This is actually what Microsoft threatened to do with their pile of patents they alleged Linux infringed upon ; go after the [ major ] users , and totally discredit and overwhelm the major distributors of the product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can sue anyone who uses the patented technology.
So you can sue all major users for royalties for each infringement(use) of the patent.
The author and distributors would be most endangered by having users of the software legally assault him for a plethora of liabilities related to their being sued, but can also be sued for IP infringement himself.
Unless you are someone like Microsoft with well known deep pockets, you would most likely be forced to settle the suit as you'd have no way to handle the legal Apocalypse that would await you if the rights holders decided to unleash it.
This is actually what Microsoft threatened to do with their pile of patents they alleged Linux infringed upon; go after the [major] users, and totally discredit and overwhelm the major distributors of the product.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30736198</id>
	<title>Oh please. Not the same bullshit again.</title>
	<author>jotaeleemeese</author>
	<datestamp>1263307200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Microsoft have done a lot of things wrong"</p><p>Like breaking the law in pretty much all major localities around the planet.</p><p>What are you? A masochist?</p><p>If you hear a chorus of disapproval maybe, just maybe, there is a frigging reason of why people feel so aggravated.</p><p>Google and Apple now have quite a dominance in the markets that will matter in the future and people are far more cool about them because they are not complete and utter unethical bastards.</p><p>Do I need to clarify the point any further?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Microsoft have done a lot of things wrong " Like breaking the law in pretty much all major localities around the planet.What are you ?
A masochist ? If you hear a chorus of disapproval maybe , just maybe , there is a frigging reason of why people feel so aggravated.Google and Apple now have quite a dominance in the markets that will matter in the future and people are far more cool about them because they are not complete and utter unethical bastards.Do I need to clarify the point any further ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Microsoft have done a lot of things wrong"Like breaking the law in pretty much all major localities around the planet.What are you?
A masochist?If you hear a chorus of disapproval maybe, just maybe, there is a frigging reason of why people feel so aggravated.Google and Apple now have quite a dominance in the markets that will matter in the future and people are far more cool about them because they are not complete and utter unethical bastards.Do I need to clarify the point any further?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735206</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735770</id>
	<title>In Bill Gate's own words</title>
	<author>cenc</author>
	<datestamp>1263304260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>AN OPEN LETTER TO HOBBYISTS<br>By William Henry Gates III</p><p>February 3, 1976</p><p>An Open Letter to Hobbyists</p><p>To me, the most critical thing in the hobby market right now is the lack of good software courses, books and software itself. Without good software and an owner who understands programming, a hobby computer is wasted. Will quality software be written for the hobby market?</p><p>Almost a year ago, Paul Allen and myself, expecting the hobby market to expand, hired Monte Davidoff and developed Altair BASIC. Though the initial work took only two months, the three of us have spent most of the last year documenting, improving and adding features to BASIC. Now we have 4K, 8K, EXTENDED, ROM and DISK BASIC. The value of the computer time we have used exceeds $40,000.</p><p>The feedback we have gotten from the hundreds of people who say they are using BASIC has all been positive. Two surprising things are apparent, however, 1) Most of these "users" never bought BASIC (less than 10\% of all Altair owners have bought BASIC), and 2) The amount of royalties we have received from sales to hobbyists makes the time spent on Altair BASIC worth less than $2 an hour.</p><p>Why is this? As the majority of hobbyists must be aware, most of you steal your software. Hardware must be paid for, but software is something to share. Who cares if the people who worked on it get paid?</p><p>Is this fair? One thing you don't do by stealing software is get back at MITS for some problem you may have had. MITS doesn't make money selling software. The royalty paid to us, the manual, the tape and the overhead make it a break-even operation. One thing you do do is prevent good software from being written. Who can afford to do professional work for nothing? What hobbyist can put 3-man years into programming, finding all bugs, documenting his product and distribute for free? The fact is, no one besides us has invested a lot of money in hobby software. We have written 6800 BASIC, and are writing 8080 APL and 6800 APL, but there is very little incentive to make this software available to hobbyists. Most directly, the thing you do is theft.</p><p>What about the guys who re-sell Altair BASIC, aren't they making money on hobby software? Yes, but those who have been reported to us may lose in the end. They are the ones who give hobbyists a bad name, and should be kicked out of any club meeting they show up at.</p><p>I would appreciate letters from any one who wants to pay up, or has a suggestion or comment. Just write to me at 1180 Alvarado SE, #114, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87108. Nothing would please me more than being able to hire ten programmers and deluge the hobby market with good software.</p><p>Bill Gates</p><p>General Partner, Micro-Soft</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>AN OPEN LETTER TO HOBBYISTSBy William Henry Gates IIIFebruary 3 , 1976An Open Letter to HobbyistsTo me , the most critical thing in the hobby market right now is the lack of good software courses , books and software itself .
Without good software and an owner who understands programming , a hobby computer is wasted .
Will quality software be written for the hobby market ? Almost a year ago , Paul Allen and myself , expecting the hobby market to expand , hired Monte Davidoff and developed Altair BASIC .
Though the initial work took only two months , the three of us have spent most of the last year documenting , improving and adding features to BASIC .
Now we have 4K , 8K , EXTENDED , ROM and DISK BASIC .
The value of the computer time we have used exceeds $ 40,000.The feedback we have gotten from the hundreds of people who say they are using BASIC has all been positive .
Two surprising things are apparent , however , 1 ) Most of these " users " never bought BASIC ( less than 10 \ % of all Altair owners have bought BASIC ) , and 2 ) The amount of royalties we have received from sales to hobbyists makes the time spent on Altair BASIC worth less than $ 2 an hour.Why is this ?
As the majority of hobbyists must be aware , most of you steal your software .
Hardware must be paid for , but software is something to share .
Who cares if the people who worked on it get paid ? Is this fair ?
One thing you do n't do by stealing software is get back at MITS for some problem you may have had .
MITS does n't make money selling software .
The royalty paid to us , the manual , the tape and the overhead make it a break-even operation .
One thing you do do is prevent good software from being written .
Who can afford to do professional work for nothing ?
What hobbyist can put 3-man years into programming , finding all bugs , documenting his product and distribute for free ?
The fact is , no one besides us has invested a lot of money in hobby software .
We have written 6800 BASIC , and are writing 8080 APL and 6800 APL , but there is very little incentive to make this software available to hobbyists .
Most directly , the thing you do is theft.What about the guys who re-sell Altair BASIC , are n't they making money on hobby software ?
Yes , but those who have been reported to us may lose in the end .
They are the ones who give hobbyists a bad name , and should be kicked out of any club meeting they show up at.I would appreciate letters from any one who wants to pay up , or has a suggestion or comment .
Just write to me at 1180 Alvarado SE , # 114 , Albuquerque , New Mexico , 87108 .
Nothing would please me more than being able to hire ten programmers and deluge the hobby market with good software.Bill GatesGeneral Partner , Micro-Soft</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AN OPEN LETTER TO HOBBYISTSBy William Henry Gates IIIFebruary 3, 1976An Open Letter to HobbyistsTo me, the most critical thing in the hobby market right now is the lack of good software courses, books and software itself.
Without good software and an owner who understands programming, a hobby computer is wasted.
Will quality software be written for the hobby market?Almost a year ago, Paul Allen and myself, expecting the hobby market to expand, hired Monte Davidoff and developed Altair BASIC.
Though the initial work took only two months, the three of us have spent most of the last year documenting, improving and adding features to BASIC.
Now we have 4K, 8K, EXTENDED, ROM and DISK BASIC.
The value of the computer time we have used exceeds $40,000.The feedback we have gotten from the hundreds of people who say they are using BASIC has all been positive.
Two surprising things are apparent, however, 1) Most of these "users" never bought BASIC (less than 10\% of all Altair owners have bought BASIC), and 2) The amount of royalties we have received from sales to hobbyists makes the time spent on Altair BASIC worth less than $2 an hour.Why is this?
As the majority of hobbyists must be aware, most of you steal your software.
Hardware must be paid for, but software is something to share.
Who cares if the people who worked on it get paid?Is this fair?
One thing you don't do by stealing software is get back at MITS for some problem you may have had.
MITS doesn't make money selling software.
The royalty paid to us, the manual, the tape and the overhead make it a break-even operation.
One thing you do do is prevent good software from being written.
Who can afford to do professional work for nothing?
What hobbyist can put 3-man years into programming, finding all bugs, documenting his product and distribute for free?
The fact is, no one besides us has invested a lot of money in hobby software.
We have written 6800 BASIC, and are writing 8080 APL and 6800 APL, but there is very little incentive to make this software available to hobbyists.
Most directly, the thing you do is theft.What about the guys who re-sell Altair BASIC, aren't they making money on hobby software?
Yes, but those who have been reported to us may lose in the end.
They are the ones who give hobbyists a bad name, and should be kicked out of any club meeting they show up at.I would appreciate letters from any one who wants to pay up, or has a suggestion or comment.
Just write to me at 1180 Alvarado SE, #114, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87108.
Nothing would please me more than being able to hire ten programmers and deluge the hobby market with good software.Bill GatesGeneral Partner, Micro-Soft</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30738446</id>
	<title>Re:wheres the news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263316860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The problem with Slashdot (which really is a problem that stems from the FOSS community) is that it often has a zealotry to it that does it more harm than good in the eyes of anyone looking for objective comments.</p></div><p>KILL THE INFIDEL!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with Slashdot ( which really is a problem that stems from the FOSS community ) is that it often has a zealotry to it that does it more harm than good in the eyes of anyone looking for objective comments.KILL THE INFIDEL !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with Slashdot (which really is a problem that stems from the FOSS community) is that it often has a zealotry to it that does it more harm than good in the eyes of anyone looking for objective comments.KILL THE INFIDEL!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735206</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735596</id>
	<title>To create the perfect image, shape fashion.</title>
	<author>COBB1986</author>
	<datestamp>1263302520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.allbyer.com/" title="allbyer.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.allbyer.com/</a> [allbyer.com]
Hi,Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,Here are the most popular, most stylish and avant-garde shoes,handbags,Tshirts, jacket,Tracksuit w ect...NIKE SHOX,JORDAN SHOES 1-24,AF,DUNK,SB,PUMA<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,R4,NZ,OZ,T1-TL3) $35HANDBGAS(COACH,L V, DG, ED HARDY) $35TSHIRTS (POLO<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,ED HARDY, LACOSTE) $16
thanks... For details, please consult <a href="http://www.allbyer.com/" title="allbyer.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.allbyer.com/</a> [allbyer.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.allbyer.com/ [ allbyer.com ] Hi,Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,Here are the most popular , most stylish and avant-garde shoes,handbags,Tshirts , jacket,Tracksuit w ect...NIKE SHOX,JORDAN SHOES 1-24,AF,DUNK,SB,PUMA ,R4,NZ,OZ,T1-TL3 ) $ 35HANDBGAS ( COACH,L V , DG , ED HARDY ) $ 35TSHIRTS ( POLO ,ED HARDY , LACOSTE ) $ 16 thanks... For details , please consult http : //www.allbyer.com/ [ allbyer.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.allbyer.com/ [allbyer.com]
Hi,Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,Here are the most popular, most stylish and avant-garde shoes,handbags,Tshirts, jacket,Tracksuit w ect...NIKE SHOX,JORDAN SHOES 1-24,AF,DUNK,SB,PUMA ,R4,NZ,OZ,T1-TL3) $35HANDBGAS(COACH,L V, DG, ED HARDY) $35TSHIRTS (POLO ,ED HARDY, LACOSTE) $16
thanks... For details, please consult http://www.allbyer.com/ [allbyer.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30737484</id>
	<title>Re:wheres the news</title>
	<author>Jesus\_666</author>
	<datestamp>1263313260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A big issue people have with Microsoft DRM vs. Apple DRM is that Microsoft screwed up with DRM big time. Some people are still bitter about PlaysForSure.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A big issue people have with Microsoft DRM vs. Apple DRM is that Microsoft screwed up with DRM big time .
Some people are still bitter about PlaysForSure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A big issue people have with Microsoft DRM vs. Apple DRM is that Microsoft screwed up with DRM big time.
Some people are still bitter about PlaysForSure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735206</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734440</id>
	<title>I am sympathetic to Microsoft on this issue</title>
	<author>Alain Williams</author>
	<datestamp>1263288660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am no MS fan boy but I think that this action by the patent parasites i4i is completely wrong. We all know that the US patent system needs to be reformed, especially in the area of software patents -- this is just another example of how it is broken.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am no MS fan boy but I think that this action by the patent parasites i4i is completely wrong .
We all know that the US patent system needs to be reformed , especially in the area of software patents -- this is just another example of how it is broken .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am no MS fan boy but I think that this action by the patent parasites i4i is completely wrong.
We all know that the US patent system needs to be reformed, especially in the area of software patents -- this is just another example of how it is broken.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734292</id>
	<title>Haven't they pulled the offending code yet?</title>
	<author>NixieBunny</author>
	<datestamp>1263329700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>You'd think that Microsoft could manage to remove the XML extensions that the judge didn't like by now. Perhaps the regression testing for Windows 98 on a 286 slowed them down?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 'd think that Microsoft could manage to remove the XML extensions that the judge did n't like by now .
Perhaps the regression testing for Windows 98 on a 286 slowed them down ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You'd think that Microsoft could manage to remove the XML extensions that the judge didn't like by now.
Perhaps the regression testing for Windows 98 on a 286 slowed them down?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734314</id>
	<title>Another harrasment to free software</title>
	<author>santax</author>
	<datestamp>1263329940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am getting so sick of these companies misusing the hard work of others. Microsoft Office has been free for home-users since version 1, same goes for their OS, windows 1 to 7. All free to the average home user and then some business that never created a damn thing comes in, demands more cash than 99.9\% of startups would make in total in 200 years (look it up... it's true<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D ) and kills a great product while doing so. This is why open source and free software just doesn't work. The patentbitches wait silent for a couple of years and then they come... And they come hard.

Man, I sure hope that MS will do the right thing, and "forget" to inform Thepiratebay that they need to stop distributing MS Office.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am getting so sick of these companies misusing the hard work of others .
Microsoft Office has been free for home-users since version 1 , same goes for their OS , windows 1 to 7 .
All free to the average home user and then some business that never created a damn thing comes in , demands more cash than 99.9 \ % of startups would make in total in 200 years ( look it up... it 's true : D ) and kills a great product while doing so .
This is why open source and free software just does n't work .
The patentbitches wait silent for a couple of years and then they come... And they come hard .
Man , I sure hope that MS will do the right thing , and " forget " to inform Thepiratebay that they need to stop distributing MS Office .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am getting so sick of these companies misusing the hard work of others.
Microsoft Office has been free for home-users since version 1, same goes for their OS, windows 1 to 7.
All free to the average home user and then some business that never created a damn thing comes in, demands more cash than 99.9\% of startups would make in total in 200 years (look it up... it's true :D ) and kills a great product while doing so.
This is why open source and free software just doesn't work.
The patentbitches wait silent for a couple of years and then they come... And they come hard.
Man, I sure hope that MS will do the right thing, and "forget" to inform Thepiratebay that they need to stop distributing MS Office.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734350</id>
	<title>Re:wheres the news</title>
	<author>Anci3nt of Days</author>
	<datestamp>1263287220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>M$ complying with the law <b>is</b> news.</htmltext>
<tokenext>M $ complying with the law is news .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>M$ complying with the law is news.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734364</id>
	<title>Re:Inside job?</title>
	<author>EvanED</author>
	<datestamp>1263287460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Huh? Don't worry, 99.9\% of the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.x XML stuff is sticking around. It's only one particular, apparently rarely-used feature that is covered by this injunction.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Huh ?
Do n't worry , 99.9 \ % of the .x XML stuff is sticking around .
It 's only one particular , apparently rarely-used feature that is covered by this injunction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Huh?
Don't worry, 99.9\% of the .x XML stuff is sticking around.
It's only one particular, apparently rarely-used feature that is covered by this injunction.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734896</id>
	<title>Re:Inside job?</title>
	<author>makomk</author>
	<datestamp>1263294720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nope. Microsoft's attempt to stop their own use of XML being open is patenting their XML document format (designed with extra patentability in mind...)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nope .
Microsoft 's attempt to stop their own use of XML being open is patenting their XML document format ( designed with extra patentability in mind... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nope.
Microsoft's attempt to stop their own use of XML being open is patenting their XML document format (designed with extra patentability in mind...)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734728</id>
	<title>Compliance</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263292500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your Honor, Microsoft will comply with the courts wishes, I give you my Word.... bundled with Excel and Powerpoint and....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your Honor , Microsoft will comply with the courts wishes , I give you my Word.... bundled with Excel and Powerpoint and... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your Honor, Microsoft will comply with the courts wishes, I give you my Word.... bundled with Excel and Powerpoint and....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734518</id>
	<title>Re:Inside job?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263289380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is most similar to the "spreadsheet as database table" patent in the sense that in both cases the patent covered something pretty obvious, about something which users were starting to need, something that was hanging in the air so to speak. In both cases the patent covered *any* thinkable solution to something users might want, that was easily implementable by any competent programmer, which is probably why Microsoft said bugger off in the first place. (The spreadsheet patent was also reality-denying by the way, since spreadsheets and database tables are mathematically equivalent.) And then a judge who has never written a single line of code in his entire life decides that Microsoft has to pay $270e6 to people who haven't contributed anything to society at all. I'm an OOo user and have little love for Microsoft, nor the crash party that is Word, but I know that Microsoft isn't the bad party in this case. Imagine getting $270e6 for doing nothing...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is most similar to the " spreadsheet as database table " patent in the sense that in both cases the patent covered something pretty obvious , about something which users were starting to need , something that was hanging in the air so to speak .
In both cases the patent covered * any * thinkable solution to something users might want , that was easily implementable by any competent programmer , which is probably why Microsoft said bugger off in the first place .
( The spreadsheet patent was also reality-denying by the way , since spreadsheets and database tables are mathematically equivalent .
) And then a judge who has never written a single line of code in his entire life decides that Microsoft has to pay $ 270e6 to people who have n't contributed anything to society at all .
I 'm an OOo user and have little love for Microsoft , nor the crash party that is Word , but I know that Microsoft is n't the bad party in this case .
Imagine getting $ 270e6 for doing nothing.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is most similar to the "spreadsheet as database table" patent in the sense that in both cases the patent covered something pretty obvious, about something which users were starting to need, something that was hanging in the air so to speak.
In both cases the patent covered *any* thinkable solution to something users might want, that was easily implementable by any competent programmer, which is probably why Microsoft said bugger off in the first place.
(The spreadsheet patent was also reality-denying by the way, since spreadsheets and database tables are mathematically equivalent.
) And then a judge who has never written a single line of code in his entire life decides that Microsoft has to pay $270e6 to people who haven't contributed anything to society at all.
I'm an OOo user and have little love for Microsoft, nor the crash party that is Word, but I know that Microsoft isn't the bad party in this case.
Imagine getting $270e6 for doing nothing...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734368</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734462</id>
	<title>Re: here$ the new$</title>
	<author>JackieBrown</author>
	<datestamp>1263288900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is wrong.  They have the trial version availble while the other versions are updated and re-released.</p><p>What, surely you don't think they would offer a trial version just to try to lock you into to their products?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is wrong .
They have the trial version availble while the other versions are updated and re-released.What , surely you do n't think they would offer a trial version just to try to lock you into to their products ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is wrong.
They have the trial version availble while the other versions are updated and re-released.What, surely you don't think they would offer a trial version just to try to lock you into to their products?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734676</id>
	<title>Same price?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263291900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>from online store and regular store is still same price?<br><a href="http://www.nhile.net/" title="nhile.net" rel="nofollow">Nhile</a> [nhile.net]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>from online store and regular store is still same price ? Nhile [ nhile.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>from online store and regular store is still same price?Nhile [nhile.net]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734288</id>
	<title>The news I'm waiting for.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263329700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What I want to know is what will i4i do with its 300 million from Microsoft.<br>And will Microsoft pay-up?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What I want to know is what will i4i do with its 300 million from Microsoft.And will Microsoft pay-up ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I want to know is what will i4i do with its 300 million from Microsoft.And will Microsoft pay-up?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734452</id>
	<title>Re:wheres the news</title>
	<author>ozmanjusri</author>
	<datestamp>1263288840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>I'm always up for a good bashing,</i>
<p>
WTF kind of bullshit is this?
</p><p>
You're the biggest apologist Microsoft has! If Ballmer himself stood up and admitted they were selling Win 7 backdoors to the Russian mafia, you'd have a first post touting it as a feature!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm always up for a good bashing , WTF kind of bullshit is this ?
You 're the biggest apologist Microsoft has !
If Ballmer himself stood up and admitted they were selling Win 7 backdoors to the Russian mafia , you 'd have a first post touting it as a feature !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm always up for a good bashing,

WTF kind of bullshit is this?
You're the biggest apologist Microsoft has!
If Ballmer himself stood up and admitted they were selling Win 7 backdoors to the Russian mafia, you'd have a first post touting it as a feature!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734556</id>
	<title>Re:wheres the news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263290040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Whats the news here? That MS complied to laws and judge orders?</p></div><p>If you're conforming to Slashdot's usual biases, then yes.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Whats the news here ?
That MS complied to laws and judge orders ? If you 're conforming to Slashdot 's usual biases , then yes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whats the news here?
That MS complied to laws and judge orders?If you're conforming to Slashdot's usual biases, then yes.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735374</id>
	<title>Re:Pulling it from the store isn't enough ...</title>
	<author>HyperQuantum</author>
	<datestamp>1263300180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>... they should also have to deactivate every (legal) copy that's currently out in the wild. </p></div><p>A large part of the damage award is to cover those copies. That's why they don't have to be disabled. They pay damages to cover the copies already out there, and have to stop selling new copies that infringe.</p></div><p>What's funny is that most of the users of those 'infringing copies' probably don't even know about or use the infringing functionality.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... they should also have to deactivate every ( legal ) copy that 's currently out in the wild .
A large part of the damage award is to cover those copies .
That 's why they do n't have to be disabled .
They pay damages to cover the copies already out there , and have to stop selling new copies that infringe.What 's funny is that most of the users of those 'infringing copies ' probably do n't even know about or use the infringing functionality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... they should also have to deactivate every (legal) copy that's currently out in the wild.
A large part of the damage award is to cover those copies.
That's why they don't have to be disabled.
They pay damages to cover the copies already out there, and have to stop selling new copies that infringe.What's funny is that most of the users of those 'infringing copies' probably don't even know about or use the infringing functionality.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734434</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30736126</id>
	<title>Information please</title>
	<author>140Mandak262Jamuna</author>
	<datestamp>1263306780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just because it hits Microsoft, I am not going to overboard and root for that gold digger who claims to have patented some XML tags or whatever. XML is by definition extensible. How can anyone patent a tag?<p>

Let us say this patent claim can potentially hurt all ODF vendors, but right now the patent troll is going after Microsoft. Can Microsoft pay some huge award and thus validate the patent claim and use it as a weapon against other competitors. Remember how the Automobile Manufacturers' Association in 1890 willingly paid invalid patent claims to raise the barrier of entry for new players?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just because it hits Microsoft , I am not going to overboard and root for that gold digger who claims to have patented some XML tags or whatever .
XML is by definition extensible .
How can anyone patent a tag ?
Let us say this patent claim can potentially hurt all ODF vendors , but right now the patent troll is going after Microsoft .
Can Microsoft pay some huge award and thus validate the patent claim and use it as a weapon against other competitors .
Remember how the Automobile Manufacturers ' Association in 1890 willingly paid invalid patent claims to raise the barrier of entry for new players ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just because it hits Microsoft, I am not going to overboard and root for that gold digger who claims to have patented some XML tags or whatever.
XML is by definition extensible.
How can anyone patent a tag?
Let us say this patent claim can potentially hurt all ODF vendors, but right now the patent troll is going after Microsoft.
Can Microsoft pay some huge award and thus validate the patent claim and use it as a weapon against other competitors.
Remember how the Automobile Manufacturers' Association in 1890 willingly paid invalid patent claims to raise the barrier of entry for new players?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734254</id>
	<title>First joke</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263329160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've had this problem for a long time:<br>$ bash microsoft<br>bash: microsoft: No such file or directory<br>$ bash office<br>bash: office: No such file or directory<br>$ bash word<br>bash: word: No such file or directory</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've had this problem for a long time : $ bash microsoftbash : microsoft : No such file or directory $ bash officebash : office : No such file or directory $ bash wordbash : word : No such file or directory</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've had this problem for a long time:$ bash microsoftbash: microsoft: No such file or directory$ bash officebash: office: No such file or directory$ bash wordbash: word: No such file or directory</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734312</id>
	<title>MS can always torrent for some new copies to sell.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263329940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Microsoft has run out of copies then they can try the torrent networks and use a keygen. Hey, I'm just trying to help out the big guy here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Microsoft has run out of copies then they can try the torrent networks and use a keygen .
Hey , I 'm just trying to help out the big guy here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Microsoft has run out of copies then they can try the torrent networks and use a keygen.
Hey, I'm just trying to help out the big guy here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735118</id>
	<title>sopssa is a faggot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263297600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well known M$ corporate apologist loves to gobble Gates' cock and slurp up Ballmer's jizz.  News at 11.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well known M $ corporate apologist loves to gobble Gates ' cock and slurp up Ballmer 's jizz .
News at 11 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well known M$ corporate apologist loves to gobble Gates' cock and slurp up Ballmer's jizz.
News at 11.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735206</id>
	<title>Re:wheres the news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263298560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So anyone that makes good points that are a bit more level headed than the usual hate based anti-Microsoft drivel is an apologist?</p><p>The problem with Slashdot (which really is a problem that stems from the FOSS community) is that it often has a zealotry to it that does it more harm than good in the eyes of anyone looking for objective comments. You read some of the anti-MS stuff here and if you were an outsider it'd give you the impression the site is full of nutjobs.</p><p>Microsoft have done a lot of things wrong, but they've also done a lot of things right. The issue is that Apple is guilty of doing as much wrong as Microsoft nowadays, yet because they base MacOS X on BSD they're often given a free ride. Despite Job's insistence otherwise, Apple has been the biggest proponent of DRM over the last decade for example and ironically it's platforms like the iPhone are more closed than even Microsoft's.</p><p>The hate for Microsoft here is usually 50\% understandable, 50\% utterly irrational, yet when someone like sopssa comes along and manages to post with only the understandable portion of hate without the stupid irrationality he's attacked for it? It's a shame there aren't more posters like him here so that we can have discussions that make sense, rather than an orgy of mutual reassurance that it's okay to attack Microsoft in the most irrational ways possible which just reinforce the nonsensical trash that is so often repeated.</p><p>There are of course fanboys that lean in completely the other direction, Microsoft fanboys who take things too far the other way and refuse to recognise when Microsoft does wrong. These people deserve to be chastised too, but the day I see one with a +5 insightful mod is the day Slashdot is taken over by MS so they're less of a problem here. It's not like I even agree with sopssa on some of his pro-Microsoft views all the time, but for the most part, his posts make a lot more sense from an objective viewpoint that those caught up in their own rabid fanboyism.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So anyone that makes good points that are a bit more level headed than the usual hate based anti-Microsoft drivel is an apologist ? The problem with Slashdot ( which really is a problem that stems from the FOSS community ) is that it often has a zealotry to it that does it more harm than good in the eyes of anyone looking for objective comments .
You read some of the anti-MS stuff here and if you were an outsider it 'd give you the impression the site is full of nutjobs.Microsoft have done a lot of things wrong , but they 've also done a lot of things right .
The issue is that Apple is guilty of doing as much wrong as Microsoft nowadays , yet because they base MacOS X on BSD they 're often given a free ride .
Despite Job 's insistence otherwise , Apple has been the biggest proponent of DRM over the last decade for example and ironically it 's platforms like the iPhone are more closed than even Microsoft 's.The hate for Microsoft here is usually 50 \ % understandable , 50 \ % utterly irrational , yet when someone like sopssa comes along and manages to post with only the understandable portion of hate without the stupid irrationality he 's attacked for it ?
It 's a shame there are n't more posters like him here so that we can have discussions that make sense , rather than an orgy of mutual reassurance that it 's okay to attack Microsoft in the most irrational ways possible which just reinforce the nonsensical trash that is so often repeated.There are of course fanboys that lean in completely the other direction , Microsoft fanboys who take things too far the other way and refuse to recognise when Microsoft does wrong .
These people deserve to be chastised too , but the day I see one with a + 5 insightful mod is the day Slashdot is taken over by MS so they 're less of a problem here .
It 's not like I even agree with sopssa on some of his pro-Microsoft views all the time , but for the most part , his posts make a lot more sense from an objective viewpoint that those caught up in their own rabid fanboyism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So anyone that makes good points that are a bit more level headed than the usual hate based anti-Microsoft drivel is an apologist?The problem with Slashdot (which really is a problem that stems from the FOSS community) is that it often has a zealotry to it that does it more harm than good in the eyes of anyone looking for objective comments.
You read some of the anti-MS stuff here and if you were an outsider it'd give you the impression the site is full of nutjobs.Microsoft have done a lot of things wrong, but they've also done a lot of things right.
The issue is that Apple is guilty of doing as much wrong as Microsoft nowadays, yet because they base MacOS X on BSD they're often given a free ride.
Despite Job's insistence otherwise, Apple has been the biggest proponent of DRM over the last decade for example and ironically it's platforms like the iPhone are more closed than even Microsoft's.The hate for Microsoft here is usually 50\% understandable, 50\% utterly irrational, yet when someone like sopssa comes along and manages to post with only the understandable portion of hate without the stupid irrationality he's attacked for it?
It's a shame there aren't more posters like him here so that we can have discussions that make sense, rather than an orgy of mutual reassurance that it's okay to attack Microsoft in the most irrational ways possible which just reinforce the nonsensical trash that is so often repeated.There are of course fanboys that lean in completely the other direction, Microsoft fanboys who take things too far the other way and refuse to recognise when Microsoft does wrong.
These people deserve to be chastised too, but the day I see one with a +5 insightful mod is the day Slashdot is taken over by MS so they're less of a problem here.
It's not like I even agree with sopssa on some of his pro-Microsoft views all the time, but for the most part, his posts make a lot more sense from an objective viewpoint that those caught up in their own rabid fanboyism.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734452</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734898</id>
	<title>Patent evil ideas</title>
	<author>SoopahCell</author>
	<datestamp>1263294720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It appears there's a very twisted opportunity here: patent as many evil ideas as you can then wait for companies to pursue those strategies by patent trolling them. How about starting by patenting violations of net neutrality like "a system and method for filtering internet content to prevent civil unrest." Or protecting an emerging tech like SVG: "System and method to extend svg-format files with any non-svg content."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It appears there 's a very twisted opportunity here : patent as many evil ideas as you can then wait for companies to pursue those strategies by patent trolling them .
How about starting by patenting violations of net neutrality like " a system and method for filtering internet content to prevent civil unrest .
" Or protecting an emerging tech like SVG : " System and method to extend svg-format files with any non-svg content .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It appears there's a very twisted opportunity here: patent as many evil ideas as you can then wait for companies to pursue those strategies by patent trolling them.
How about starting by patenting violations of net neutrality like "a system and method for filtering internet content to prevent civil unrest.
" Or protecting an emerging tech like SVG: "System and method to extend svg-format files with any non-svg content.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735082</id>
	<title>Re:Inside job?</title>
	<author>LordLucless</author>
	<datestamp>1263297180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>XML doesn't magically make something compliant and open. Mostly it just makes it bloated. Well-documented formats unencumbered by patents are what makes something open, and that doesn't depend on the latest flavour-of-the-month serialization format.</htmltext>
<tokenext>XML does n't magically make something compliant and open .
Mostly it just makes it bloated .
Well-documented formats unencumbered by patents are what makes something open , and that does n't depend on the latest flavour-of-the-month serialization format .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>XML doesn't magically make something compliant and open.
Mostly it just makes it bloated.
Well-documented formats unencumbered by patents are what makes something open, and that doesn't depend on the latest flavour-of-the-month serialization format.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30736052</id>
	<title>Apple gets a free ride? Not likely.</title>
	<author>TimHunter</author>
	<datestamp>1263306360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Apple is guilty of doing as much wrong as Microsoft nowadays, yet because they base MacOS X on BSD they're often given a free ride.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

You must be new here. Any Apple-related story draws 10x as many Apple-hating comments as it does Apple-friendly comments.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple is guilty of doing as much wrong as Microsoft nowadays , yet because they base MacOS X on BSD they 're often given a free ride .
You must be new here .
Any Apple-related story draws 10x as many Apple-hating comments as it does Apple-friendly comments .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple is guilty of doing as much wrong as Microsoft nowadays, yet because they base MacOS X on BSD they're often given a free ride.
You must be new here.
Any Apple-related story draws 10x as many Apple-hating comments as it does Apple-friendly comments.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735206</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734604</id>
	<title>Re:Another harrasment to free software</title>
	<author>rtb61</author>
	<datestamp>1263290880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> Ultimately the tricky problem is who do you actually sue with open source. Technically every person on the planet owns the code and is free to use the application that the code creates. So sue the planet, you can't really sue companies providing service and support, nor companies providing manuals, not even companies that supply you with a copy of the completed application that you technically already owned before you even approached the company. </p><p> I am trying to imagine the patent cops trying to enter every place of business and residence to ensure every infringing copy is removed and, that's world wide, even if for some insane reason they actually tried, you can;t bet it would end up having the exact opposite effect and drive up popularity. </p><p> As for M$ it's just another embarrassing management debacle, more funny than interesting but definately news worthy. Perhaps M$ can distribute copies of OpenOffice.org in the interim so that they don't leave their customers in the lurch, they are even entitled to label their version as MicroSoft OpenOffice as long as they adhere to licence requirements (oddly enough it would likely have positive marketing benefits for M$).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ultimately the tricky problem is who do you actually sue with open source .
Technically every person on the planet owns the code and is free to use the application that the code creates .
So sue the planet , you ca n't really sue companies providing service and support , nor companies providing manuals , not even companies that supply you with a copy of the completed application that you technically already owned before you even approached the company .
I am trying to imagine the patent cops trying to enter every place of business and residence to ensure every infringing copy is removed and , that 's world wide , even if for some insane reason they actually tried , you can ; t bet it would end up having the exact opposite effect and drive up popularity .
As for M $ it 's just another embarrassing management debacle , more funny than interesting but definately news worthy .
Perhaps M $ can distribute copies of OpenOffice.org in the interim so that they do n't leave their customers in the lurch , they are even entitled to label their version as MicroSoft OpenOffice as long as they adhere to licence requirements ( oddly enough it would likely have positive marketing benefits for M $ ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Ultimately the tricky problem is who do you actually sue with open source.
Technically every person on the planet owns the code and is free to use the application that the code creates.
So sue the planet, you can't really sue companies providing service and support, nor companies providing manuals, not even companies that supply you with a copy of the completed application that you technically already owned before you even approached the company.
I am trying to imagine the patent cops trying to enter every place of business and residence to ensure every infringing copy is removed and, that's world wide, even if for some insane reason they actually tried, you can;t bet it would end up having the exact opposite effect and drive up popularity.
As for M$ it's just another embarrassing management debacle, more funny than interesting but definately news worthy.
Perhaps M$ can distribute copies of OpenOffice.org in the interim so that they don't leave their customers in the lurch, they are even entitled to label their version as MicroSoft OpenOffice as long as they adhere to licence requirements (oddly enough it would likely have positive marketing benefits for M$).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734314</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734790</id>
	<title>Re:Pulling it from the store isn't enough ...</title>
	<author>Chief Camel Breeder</author>
	<datestamp>1263293220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or they could just post an automatic update to those copies that removes the offending feature.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or they could just post an automatic update to those copies that removes the offending feature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or they could just post an automatic update to those copies that removes the offending feature.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30737514</id>
	<title>Create a new XML</title>
	<author>whitedsepdivine</author>
	<datestamp>1263313380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>If the patent says they cannot use XML just change  and &gt; to  and call it LMX.  Then patent the LMX reader and writer, and screw everyone else from using it.

I'd be pissed if I was microsoft.  A patent that says a Document saved in XML.  Define what a Document is for computers, oh yeah that probably will include the product "Word" in the definition.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the patent says they can not use XML just change and &gt; to and call it LMX .
Then patent the LMX reader and writer , and screw everyone else from using it .
I 'd be pissed if I was microsoft .
A patent that says a Document saved in XML .
Define what a Document is for computers , oh yeah that probably will include the product " Word " in the definition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the patent says they cannot use XML just change  and &gt; to  and call it LMX.
Then patent the LMX reader and writer, and screw everyone else from using it.
I'd be pissed if I was microsoft.
A patent that says a Document saved in XML.
Define what a Document is for computers, oh yeah that probably will include the product "Word" in the definition.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30737340</id>
	<title>Re:wheres the news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263312660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Possibilities:</p><p>1) This is such an oh-so-boring piece of non-news that you felt the need to take time out of your day to make that comment.<br>2) You are a troll.</p><p>If you don't like an article, ignore it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Possibilities : 1 ) This is such an oh-so-boring piece of non-news that you felt the need to take time out of your day to make that comment.2 ) You are a troll.If you do n't like an article , ignore it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Possibilities:1) This is such an oh-so-boring piece of non-news that you felt the need to take time out of your day to make that comment.2) You are a troll.If you don't like an article, ignore it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734510</id>
	<title>office memories</title>
	<author>zmollusc</author>
	<datestamp>1263289320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah, I remember when I used office last. I was trying to make a template for a pamphlet and needed the text to overflow from one page to another to another. I found that it could only flow a suspicious number of times(8 or 16 or 32 or something) even after patching to the latest version. At that point, realising that i would always have to struggle round limitations in applications, I decided to struggle round the ones in free software rather than pay for the privilege like a chump.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah , I remember when I used office last .
I was trying to make a template for a pamphlet and needed the text to overflow from one page to another to another .
I found that it could only flow a suspicious number of times ( 8 or 16 or 32 or something ) even after patching to the latest version .
At that point , realising that i would always have to struggle round limitations in applications , I decided to struggle round the ones in free software rather than pay for the privilege like a chump .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah, I remember when I used office last.
I was trying to make a template for a pamphlet and needed the text to overflow from one page to another to another.
I found that it could only flow a suspicious number of times(8 or 16 or 32 or something) even after patching to the latest version.
At that point, realising that i would always have to struggle round limitations in applications, I decided to struggle round the ones in free software rather than pay for the privilege like a chump.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734300</id>
	<title>Inside job?</title>
	<author>Qbertino</author>
	<datestamp>1263329760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Aren't they supposed to use XML to be compliant and open? And what if they can say: 'Hey, we tried, but this one bad small company threatend <i>de poor liddle MicroSoft</i> with a patent lawsuit and now we have to take XML out, sooo sad!<br>The truth is, MS wants it's formats to stay proprietary and I figure they'd welcome any reason that holds to keep it that way. I wouldn't be suprised if this XML-patent thing was staged.</p><p>My 2 cents.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are n't they supposed to use XML to be compliant and open ?
And what if they can say : 'Hey , we tried , but this one bad small company threatend de poor liddle MicroSoft with a patent lawsuit and now we have to take XML out , sooo sad ! The truth is , MS wants it 's formats to stay proprietary and I figure they 'd welcome any reason that holds to keep it that way .
I would n't be suprised if this XML-patent thing was staged.My 2 cents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Aren't they supposed to use XML to be compliant and open?
And what if they can say: 'Hey, we tried, but this one bad small company threatend de poor liddle MicroSoft with a patent lawsuit and now we have to take XML out, sooo sad!The truth is, MS wants it's formats to stay proprietary and I figure they'd welcome any reason that holds to keep it that way.
I wouldn't be suprised if this XML-patent thing was staged.My 2 cents.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734226</id>
	<title>sopssa said it best</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263328860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>but since it needs to be re-stated:
<br> <br>
This is a nonstory.</htmltext>
<tokenext>but since it needs to be re-stated : This is a nonstory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but since it needs to be re-stated:
 
This is a nonstory.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30738708</id>
	<title>Ultimate remains?</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1263317700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>.I find it interesting that they keep a copy of still infringing software available to purchase, AND its the most expensive version they offer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>.I find it interesting that they keep a copy of still infringing software available to purchase , AND its the most expensive version they offer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.I find it interesting that they keep a copy of still infringing software available to purchase, AND its the most expensive version they offer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30743570</id>
	<title>Re:In Bill Gate's own words</title>
	<author>cenc</author>
	<datestamp>1263294840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who frigen marked this off-topic? It is very much on topic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who frigen marked this off-topic ?
It is very much on topic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who frigen marked this off-topic?
It is very much on topic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216</id>
	<title>wheres the news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263328800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm always up for a good bashing, but eh what? It was already decided in court that MS was violating the patent (which imo is stupid, btw). They were required to stop selling Word, and now they comply. Whats the news here? That MS complied to laws and judge orders?</p><p>Also, how is that "downplaying the move"? They probably worked on non-infringing Word version for long time already and are replacing it soon. In fact;</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Microsoft has posted updates for both Word 2003 and Word 2007 to its download site and told customers in accompanying support documents that those updates are mandatory "only if you have been instructed to do so in a separate communication from Microsoft." The company has also committed to revamping Word 2008 for Mac and Word 2004 for Mac, even though those versions were not named in the injunction.</p></div><p><div class="quote"><p>In the meantime, Microsoft also told potential customers that they can download the free beta of Office 2010, the next-generation suite slated for a June release.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm always up for a good bashing , but eh what ?
It was already decided in court that MS was violating the patent ( which imo is stupid , btw ) .
They were required to stop selling Word , and now they comply .
Whats the news here ?
That MS complied to laws and judge orders ? Also , how is that " downplaying the move " ?
They probably worked on non-infringing Word version for long time already and are replacing it soon .
In fact ; Microsoft has posted updates for both Word 2003 and Word 2007 to its download site and told customers in accompanying support documents that those updates are mandatory " only if you have been instructed to do so in a separate communication from Microsoft .
" The company has also committed to revamping Word 2008 for Mac and Word 2004 for Mac , even though those versions were not named in the injunction.In the meantime , Microsoft also told potential customers that they can download the free beta of Office 2010 , the next-generation suite slated for a June release .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm always up for a good bashing, but eh what?
It was already decided in court that MS was violating the patent (which imo is stupid, btw).
They were required to stop selling Word, and now they comply.
Whats the news here?
That MS complied to laws and judge orders?Also, how is that "downplaying the move"?
They probably worked on non-infringing Word version for long time already and are replacing it soon.
In fact;Microsoft has posted updates for both Word 2003 and Word 2007 to its download site and told customers in accompanying support documents that those updates are mandatory "only if you have been instructed to do so in a separate communication from Microsoft.
" The company has also committed to revamping Word 2008 for Mac and Word 2004 for Mac, even though those versions were not named in the injunction.In the meantime, Microsoft also told potential customers that they can download the free beta of Office 2010, the next-generation suite slated for a June release.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734626</id>
	<title>Yes, "MS complies with the law" is the news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263291240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Whats the news here? That MS complied to laws and judge orders?</p></div><p>Yes, that's exactly it.</p><p>And that's not meant to be a smartass comment about how often Microsoft does and doesn't do that.</p><p>All I'm trying to say is that this Microsoft/XML/Patent story is of interest to the slashdot crowd, and we would like to be informed about how the sequence of events unfold.</p><p>Getting confirmation that Microsoft complies with the law and court orders is an important event in this story---perhaps even <em>the</em> most crucial.</p><p>That's the reason it's on slashdot.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Whats the news here ?
That MS complied to laws and judge orders ? Yes , that 's exactly it.And that 's not meant to be a smartass comment about how often Microsoft does and does n't do that.All I 'm trying to say is that this Microsoft/XML/Patent story is of interest to the slashdot crowd , and we would like to be informed about how the sequence of events unfold.Getting confirmation that Microsoft complies with the law and court orders is an important event in this story---perhaps even the most crucial.That 's the reason it 's on slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whats the news here?
That MS complied to laws and judge orders?Yes, that's exactly it.And that's not meant to be a smartass comment about how often Microsoft does and doesn't do that.All I'm trying to say is that this Microsoft/XML/Patent story is of interest to the slashdot crowd, and we would like to be informed about how the sequence of events unfold.Getting confirmation that Microsoft complies with the law and court orders is an important event in this story---perhaps even the most crucial.That's the reason it's on slashdot.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30736154</id>
	<title>Why do you ask....</title>
	<author>jotaeleemeese</author>
	<datestamp>1263306900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Whats the news here? That MS complied to laws and judge orders?"</p><p>if you know the answer?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Whats the news here ?
That MS complied to laws and judge orders ?
" if you know the answer ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Whats the news here?
That MS complied to laws and judge orders?
"if you know the answer?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734416</id>
	<title>How convenient...</title>
	<author>jimicus</author>
	<datestamp>1263288480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How convenient that the $670 edition should be the one that remains available.</p><p>I can only think of three explanations for this:</p><p>1.  MS are quite happy to put some of the revenue from Office to paying damages, provided the revenue is from the most expensive version.<br>2.  They're holding back on making the cheaper versions compliant intentionally to see if only having the expensive version available dramatically affects sales.<br>3.  They're not as well organised as I'd like to believe - packaging every different edition of Office is a major undertaking which requires a lot of work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How convenient that the $ 670 edition should be the one that remains available.I can only think of three explanations for this : 1 .
MS are quite happy to put some of the revenue from Office to paying damages , provided the revenue is from the most expensive version.2 .
They 're holding back on making the cheaper versions compliant intentionally to see if only having the expensive version available dramatically affects sales.3 .
They 're not as well organised as I 'd like to believe - packaging every different edition of Office is a major undertaking which requires a lot of work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How convenient that the $670 edition should be the one that remains available.I can only think of three explanations for this:1.
MS are quite happy to put some of the revenue from Office to paying damages, provided the revenue is from the most expensive version.2.
They're holding back on making the cheaper versions compliant intentionally to see if only having the expensive version available dramatically affects sales.3.
They're not as well organised as I'd like to believe - packaging every different edition of Office is a major undertaking which requires a lot of work.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734390</id>
	<title>Re:Pulling it from the store isn't enough ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263287880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We're not renting the software, we are granted a license to use it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We 're not renting the software , we are granted a license to use it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We're not renting the software, we are granted a license to use it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734320</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30738446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734314
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30748034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30736154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734530
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734236
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30736052
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734434
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734720
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30736680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30743570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30739110
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734462
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30736198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30737340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30737484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30737294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734368
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_11_2148236_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734796
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734604
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734314
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_11_2148236.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734292
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_11_2148236.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734416
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_11_2148236.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734720
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734390
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734998
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734434
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735374
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_11_2148236.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734226
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_11_2148236.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734314
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734604
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734796
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734806
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_11_2148236.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734300
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734364
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735082
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734896
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734368
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734518
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_11_2148236.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734216
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30737340
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734350
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734452
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735206
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30736052
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735972
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30736680
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30738446
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30737484
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30736198
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735118
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734556
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734626
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30736154
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734404
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734462
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734456
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30739110
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_11_2148236.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30748034
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30737294
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_11_2148236.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734236
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734530
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_11_2148236.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734254
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_11_2148236.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30734728
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_11_2148236.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30735770
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_11_2148236.30743570
</commentlist>
</conversation>
