<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_20_228235</id>
	<title>Microsoft Sues TiVo To Help AT&amp;T</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1263983580000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Julie188 writes <i>"<a href="http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=201001201230dowjonesdjonline000565&amp;title=microsoft-sues-tivo-in-attempt-to-defend-partner-att">Microsoft is suing TiVo, claiming patent infringement</a>. Microsoft is doing this because TiVo has sued AT&amp;T &mdash; and AT&amp;T happens to be Microsoft's largest customer of Microsoft's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediaroom">Mediaroom</a> IPTV technology. Microsoft says that TiVo has copied Microsoft's Mediaroom IPTV technology in its DVRs. If Microsoft wins, it would effectively block TiVo from selling DVRs without a licensing deal with Microsoft."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Julie188 writes " Microsoft is suing TiVo , claiming patent infringement .
Microsoft is doing this because TiVo has sued AT&amp;T    and AT&amp;T happens to be Microsoft 's largest customer of Microsoft 's Mediaroom IPTV technology .
Microsoft says that TiVo has copied Microsoft 's Mediaroom IPTV technology in its DVRs .
If Microsoft wins , it would effectively block TiVo from selling DVRs without a licensing deal with Microsoft .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Julie188 writes "Microsoft is suing TiVo, claiming patent infringement.
Microsoft is doing this because TiVo has sued AT&amp;T — and AT&amp;T happens to be Microsoft's largest customer of Microsoft's Mediaroom IPTV technology.
Microsoft says that TiVo has copied Microsoft's Mediaroom IPTV technology in its DVRs.
If Microsoft wins, it would effectively block TiVo from selling DVRs without a licensing deal with Microsoft.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839114</id>
	<title>Which is it?</title>
	<author>gregg</author>
	<datestamp>1263987720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is this an example of "the enemy of my friend is my enemy" or the beginning of "mutual assured destruction"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this an example of " the enemy of my friend is my enemy " or the beginning of " mutual assured destruction " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this an example of "the enemy of my friend is my enemy" or the beginning of "mutual assured destruction"?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30846976</id>
	<title>Re:As a former ATT U-Verse customer</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1264094400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I switched to DirecTV</p></div><p>If you switch your TV to satellite, where do you switch your Internet access? Cable companies like Comcast have a habit of charging Internet subscribers who don't also get cable TV a "line fee" that's coincidentally the same price as locals-only cable TV.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I switched to DirecTVIf you switch your TV to satellite , where do you switch your Internet access ?
Cable companies like Comcast have a habit of charging Internet subscribers who do n't also get cable TV a " line fee " that 's coincidentally the same price as locals-only cable TV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I switched to DirecTVIf you switch your TV to satellite, where do you switch your Internet access?
Cable companies like Comcast have a habit of charging Internet subscribers who don't also get cable TV a "line fee" that's coincidentally the same price as locals-only cable TV.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840710</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30844500</id>
	<title>Re:Patent infringement is a nuclear weapon</title>
	<author>KaoticEvil</author>
	<datestamp>1264079700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If humans were so smart, you wouldn't have to explain the golden rule to them.</p></div><p>Do unto others before they do unto you?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If humans were so smart , you would n't have to explain the golden rule to them.Do unto others before they do unto you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If humans were so smart, you wouldn't have to explain the golden rule to them.Do unto others before they do unto you?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30845520</id>
	<title>Re:Patent infringement is a nuclear weapon</title>
	<author>kriston</author>
	<datestamp>1264087860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, but honestly Microsoft didn't do anything like this to keep UltimateTV alive.<br>It's a bitter irony that TiVo keeps winning suits like this to eventually be targetted by one of the richest software makers in the world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , but honestly Microsoft did n't do anything like this to keep UltimateTV alive.It 's a bitter irony that TiVo keeps winning suits like this to eventually be targetted by one of the richest software makers in the world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, but honestly Microsoft didn't do anything like this to keep UltimateTV alive.It's a bitter irony that TiVo keeps winning suits like this to eventually be targetted by one of the richest software makers in the world.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839104</id>
	<title>Patent infringement is a nuclear weapon</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263987660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You gotta love how companies have found exactly what to do with patent infringements - put them in a bag and keep them stored away well under room temperature until the right moment when these can be enjoyed - such as, at a time when they can be used to scare or threaten competitors or help achieve a goal. Patent infringement is not patent infringement until such time when it can be exploited to the limit.</p><p>Humans are so damn smart it is scary.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You got ta love how companies have found exactly what to do with patent infringements - put them in a bag and keep them stored away well under room temperature until the right moment when these can be enjoyed - such as , at a time when they can be used to scare or threaten competitors or help achieve a goal .
Patent infringement is not patent infringement until such time when it can be exploited to the limit.Humans are so damn smart it is scary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You gotta love how companies have found exactly what to do with patent infringements - put them in a bag and keep them stored away well under room temperature until the right moment when these can be enjoyed - such as, at a time when they can be used to scare or threaten competitors or help achieve a goal.
Patent infringement is not patent infringement until such time when it can be exploited to the limit.Humans are so damn smart it is scary.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839216</id>
	<title>Circular reasoning</title>
	<author>careysb</author>
	<datestamp>1263988260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>So, what happens if there is a set of law suits with a circular dependency and ALL plaintiffs win? Does that mean we lose?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , what happens if there is a set of law suits with a circular dependency and ALL plaintiffs win ?
Does that mean we lose ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, what happens if there is a set of law suits with a circular dependency and ALL plaintiffs win?
Does that mean we lose?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841014</id>
	<title>Re:Hoist on their own petard...</title>
	<author>canajin56</author>
	<datestamp>1263997800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a person who had an ATI All-In-Wonder, before the TiVo ever got invented, I can tell you, it had the ability to schedule recordings from your TV and save them as an mpeg2 stream, and it had the ability for you to be playing that stream while it was still being written to, allowing you to pause, rewind, and fastforward live TV...So fuck TiVo, they didn't invent shit except the UI on top of it, and it's not that great.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a person who had an ATI All-In-Wonder , before the TiVo ever got invented , I can tell you , it had the ability to schedule recordings from your TV and save them as an mpeg2 stream , and it had the ability for you to be playing that stream while it was still being written to , allowing you to pause , rewind , and fastforward live TV...So fuck TiVo , they did n't invent shit except the UI on top of it , and it 's not that great .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a person who had an ATI All-In-Wonder, before the TiVo ever got invented, I can tell you, it had the ability to schedule recordings from your TV and save them as an mpeg2 stream, and it had the ability for you to be playing that stream while it was still being written to, allowing you to pause, rewind, and fastforward live TV...So fuck TiVo, they didn't invent shit except the UI on top of it, and it's not that great.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839538</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839692</id>
	<title>Collusion?</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1263990360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wouldn't this sort of 'buddy system' be illegal, much like price fixing?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Would n't this sort of 'buddy system ' be illegal , much like price fixing ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wouldn't this sort of 'buddy system' be illegal, much like price fixing?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30847308</id>
	<title>Re:how / why did tivo avoid being acquired?</title>
	<author>danielsfca2</author>
	<datestamp>1264095660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; they couldn't figure out how to be successful.</p><p>That's because they put all their effort into patent suits instead of innovation and/or partnerships</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; they could n't figure out how to be successful.That 's because they put all their effort into patent suits instead of innovation and/or partnerships</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; they couldn't figure out how to be successful.That's because they put all their effort into patent suits instead of innovation and/or partnerships</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30842512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839512</id>
	<title>So now we know</title>
	<author>jvkjvk</author>
	<datestamp>1263989520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, now we know how IP War I(tm) opens on Front #1 (Patents).</p><p>There will at sometime be a situation vital to two implacably opposed large opponents, who draw other companies in to the fray for their own interests.  They will use Patents to attack.  Kind of like all the treaties before WW I drew into two groups, except this will probably be a star configuration, (with the additional bonus of some companies possibly suing others on *both* sides).</p><p>I wonder how Front #2 (Copyright) and Front #3 (Trademark) will fare.</p><p>My bet is Trademark will be like Switzerland.  Everybody wants to own their own rep/name.</p><p>I have no idea how a copyright war would start.  Perhaps cross licensing schemes?  Ah, perhaps not corp vs. corp? Maybe this war will be from human beings to corporations, defining just what is reasonable.  that would be truly a guerrilla war.  right now file sharing and the like is at most, civil disobedience.</p><p>Well, anyway, let's get some popcorn!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , now we know how IP War I ( tm ) opens on Front # 1 ( Patents ) .There will at sometime be a situation vital to two implacably opposed large opponents , who draw other companies in to the fray for their own interests .
They will use Patents to attack .
Kind of like all the treaties before WW I drew into two groups , except this will probably be a star configuration , ( with the additional bonus of some companies possibly suing others on * both * sides ) .I wonder how Front # 2 ( Copyright ) and Front # 3 ( Trademark ) will fare.My bet is Trademark will be like Switzerland .
Everybody wants to own their own rep/name.I have no idea how a copyright war would start .
Perhaps cross licensing schemes ?
Ah , perhaps not corp vs. corp ? Maybe this war will be from human beings to corporations , defining just what is reasonable .
that would be truly a guerrilla war .
right now file sharing and the like is at most , civil disobedience.Well , anyway , let 's get some popcorn !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, now we know how IP War I(tm) opens on Front #1 (Patents).There will at sometime be a situation vital to two implacably opposed large opponents, who draw other companies in to the fray for their own interests.
They will use Patents to attack.
Kind of like all the treaties before WW I drew into two groups, except this will probably be a star configuration, (with the additional bonus of some companies possibly suing others on *both* sides).I wonder how Front #2 (Copyright) and Front #3 (Trademark) will fare.My bet is Trademark will be like Switzerland.
Everybody wants to own their own rep/name.I have no idea how a copyright war would start.
Perhaps cross licensing schemes?
Ah, perhaps not corp vs. corp? Maybe this war will be from human beings to corporations, defining just what is reasonable.
that would be truly a guerrilla war.
right now file sharing and the like is at most, civil disobedience.Well, anyway, let's get some popcorn!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840810</id>
	<title>Re:Tivo</title>
	<author>grcumb</author>
	<datestamp>1263996240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The ATT/Microsoft/Motorola DVR sucks giant donkey dicks.</p></div></blockquote><p>Wouldn't this make a fantastic courtroom defense? I can just see it:</p><p>"<em>Your Honour, We submit that Tivo lacks the defining characteristics of the allegedly infringed software. Our does not suck. We tried to make it suck as much as Microsoft's, but without access to their proprietary process for suckage, were unable to make our software suck in the same way as theirs. If the court will allow, I'll spend the next 6 days demonstrating just how much their software sucks, and ours doesn't.</em>"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The ATT/Microsoft/Motorola DVR sucks giant donkey dicks.Would n't this make a fantastic courtroom defense ?
I can just see it : " Your Honour , We submit that Tivo lacks the defining characteristics of the allegedly infringed software .
Our does not suck .
We tried to make it suck as much as Microsoft 's , but without access to their proprietary process for suckage , were unable to make our software suck in the same way as theirs .
If the court will allow , I 'll spend the next 6 days demonstrating just how much their software sucks , and ours does n't .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The ATT/Microsoft/Motorola DVR sucks giant donkey dicks.Wouldn't this make a fantastic courtroom defense?
I can just see it:"Your Honour, We submit that Tivo lacks the defining characteristics of the allegedly infringed software.
Our does not suck.
We tried to make it suck as much as Microsoft's, but without access to their proprietary process for suckage, were unable to make our software suck in the same way as theirs.
If the court will allow, I'll spend the next 6 days demonstrating just how much their software sucks, and ours doesn't.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30843428</id>
	<title>What golden rule?</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1264065120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If humans were so smart, you wouldn't have to explain the golden rule to them.</p></div><p>Do onto others as you would like to have them do ~1.618 times to you?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If humans were so smart , you would n't have to explain the golden rule to them.Do onto others as you would like to have them do ~ 1.618 times to you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If humans were so smart, you wouldn't have to explain the golden rule to them.Do onto others as you would like to have them do ~1.618 times to you?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839158</id>
	<title>Suing TiVo for delivering content ?</title>
	<author>BlueTrin</author>
	<datestamp>1263987840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Suing TiVo for delivering content ?<br> <br>
Next is Neanderthal suing them for using fire or a wheel ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Suing TiVo for delivering content ?
Next is Neanderthal suing them for using fire or a wheel ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Suing TiVo for delivering content ?
Next is Neanderthal suing them for using fire or a wheel ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30846898</id>
	<title>Explicit use of patents as a deterrent</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1264094040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Most of the companies have patent portfolios as a deterrent only.</p></div><p>Such companies could at least be more up front about it. For example, a company holding a patent could license the patent for all uses, provided that the licensee does not sue the company for patent infringement.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most of the companies have patent portfolios as a deterrent only.Such companies could at least be more up front about it .
For example , a company holding a patent could license the patent for all uses , provided that the licensee does not sue the company for patent infringement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most of the companies have patent portfolios as a deterrent only.Such companies could at least be more up front about it.
For example, a company holding a patent could license the patent for all uses, provided that the licensee does not sue the company for patent infringement.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839240</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30842758</id>
	<title>Re:Hoist on their own petard...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264013280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is a far cry from being best of class product and having what most would call "legitimate" patents. Tivo is certainly best in class, but there patents are absolute garbage that should never have been granted. Personally I hope Tivo are hoisted on their own petard, maybe a multi billion dollar loss would cause them pause in continuing there abusive nature.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a far cry from being best of class product and having what most would call " legitimate " patents .
Tivo is certainly best in class , but there patents are absolute garbage that should never have been granted .
Personally I hope Tivo are hoisted on their own petard , maybe a multi billion dollar loss would cause them pause in continuing there abusive nature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a far cry from being best of class product and having what most would call "legitimate" patents.
Tivo is certainly best in class, but there patents are absolute garbage that should never have been granted.
Personally I hope Tivo are hoisted on their own petard, maybe a multi billion dollar loss would cause them pause in continuing there abusive nature.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840202</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839360</id>
	<title>Microsoft VS. Al Queda</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263988800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why doesn't al queda do some real damage and take on Microsoft and sue them for infringement of some kind. I'm sure Microsoft could sue them for somekind of infringement too. Think of the battle that might ensue. Might do us all a favor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does n't al queda do some real damage and take on Microsoft and sue them for infringement of some kind .
I 'm sure Microsoft could sue them for somekind of infringement too .
Think of the battle that might ensue .
Might do us all a favor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why doesn't al queda do some real damage and take on Microsoft and sue them for infringement of some kind.
I'm sure Microsoft could sue them for somekind of infringement too.
Think of the battle that might ensue.
Might do us all a favor.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841682</id>
	<title>She's An Old Whore</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264003500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>       Reputation should not matter and each case should go to the courts on its own merits. However Microsoft is an old whore with a wicked, dirty, reputation. Judges and juries have got to go into a Microsoft trial with a bit of an urge to tie a hangman's knot and I don't blame them. Considering the several billions in losses that Microsoft has already received in various trials perhaps they should be shy of the court house and not think about dragging people to trial.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Reputation should not matter and each case should go to the courts on its own merits .
However Microsoft is an old whore with a wicked , dirty , reputation .
Judges and juries have got to go into a Microsoft trial with a bit of an urge to tie a hangman 's knot and I do n't blame them .
Considering the several billions in losses that Microsoft has already received in various trials perhaps they should be shy of the court house and not think about dragging people to trial .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>       Reputation should not matter and each case should go to the courts on its own merits.
However Microsoft is an old whore with a wicked, dirty, reputation.
Judges and juries have got to go into a Microsoft trial with a bit of an urge to tie a hangman's knot and I don't blame them.
Considering the several billions in losses that Microsoft has already received in various trials perhaps they should be shy of the court house and not think about dragging people to trial.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841836</id>
	<title>Re:Tivo</title>
	<author>jbengt</author>
	<datestamp>1264005240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree, I used to have DirecTV but switched to ATT Uverse because DiecTV wouldn't switch me to HD (calimed I couldn't get a signal)<br>ATT's menu system/user interface sucks compared to DirecTV.  It's slow, complicated, and clumsy.,</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree , I used to have DirecTV but switched to ATT Uverse because DiecTV would n't switch me to HD ( calimed I could n't get a signal ) ATT 's menu system/user interface sucks compared to DirecTV .
It 's slow , complicated , and clumsy.,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree, I used to have DirecTV but switched to ATT Uverse because DiecTV wouldn't switch me to HD (calimed I couldn't get a signal)ATT's menu system/user interface sucks compared to DirecTV.
It's slow, complicated, and clumsy.,</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841280</id>
	<title>Re:TiVo's suit against AT&amp;T</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264000020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Um, because at the time no one had done it before and put it out to market?</p><p>If you come up with something and go to market with it, I hope someone treats you as badly as these companies have treated TIVO.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , because at the time no one had done it before and put it out to market ? If you come up with something and go to market with it , I hope someone treats you as badly as these companies have treated TIVO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um, because at the time no one had done it before and put it out to market?If you come up with something and go to market with it, I hope someone treats you as badly as these companies have treated TIVO.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839196</id>
	<title>Tivo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263988080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The ATT/Microsoft/Motorola DVR sucks giant donkey dicks.  You can bet that ATT only wished they could use Tivo technology.  We had Uverse installed and ended up using our Tivos downstream of the ATT DVRs, they sucked that bad.  The smart thing would have been for ATT to license the Tivo design instead of the locked-down bogus Microsoft design.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The ATT/Microsoft/Motorola DVR sucks giant donkey dicks .
You can bet that ATT only wished they could use Tivo technology .
We had Uverse installed and ended up using our Tivos downstream of the ATT DVRs , they sucked that bad .
The smart thing would have been for ATT to license the Tivo design instead of the locked-down bogus Microsoft design .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The ATT/Microsoft/Motorola DVR sucks giant donkey dicks.
You can bet that ATT only wished they could use Tivo technology.
We had Uverse installed and ended up using our Tivos downstream of the ATT DVRs, they sucked that bad.
The smart thing would have been for ATT to license the Tivo design instead of the locked-down bogus Microsoft design.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839074</id>
	<title>Surprise Surprise</title>
	<author>Murdoch5</author>
	<datestamp>1263987540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow it looks like Microsoft wants another Monopoly, I'm shocked!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow it looks like Microsoft wants another Monopoly , I 'm shocked !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow it looks like Microsoft wants another Monopoly, I'm shocked!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839418</id>
	<title>Re:Circular reasoning</title>
	<author>japhering</author>
	<datestamp>1263989040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So, what happens if there is a set of law suits with a circular dependency and ALL plaintiffs win? Does that mean we lose?</p></div><p>The only winners in this case will be the lawyers....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , what happens if there is a set of law suits with a circular dependency and ALL plaintiffs win ?
Does that mean we lose ? The only winners in this case will be the lawyers... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, what happens if there is a set of law suits with a circular dependency and ALL plaintiffs win?
Does that mean we lose?The only winners in this case will be the lawyers....
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839018</id>
	<title>Microsnerf!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263987300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsnerf!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsnerf !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsnerf!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840202</id>
	<title>Re:Hoist on their own petard...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263992640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except Tivo wasn't a patent troll - they actually produced a best-of-class product that the courts agreed was being infringed on. I know patent litigation is unpopular (and for good reason), but Tivo appeared to be a case where it was Working As Intended.</p><p>We'll see with Microsoft, although the timing is certainly suspect.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except Tivo was n't a patent troll - they actually produced a best-of-class product that the courts agreed was being infringed on .
I know patent litigation is unpopular ( and for good reason ) , but Tivo appeared to be a case where it was Working As Intended.We 'll see with Microsoft , although the timing is certainly suspect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except Tivo wasn't a patent troll - they actually produced a best-of-class product that the courts agreed was being infringed on.
I know patent litigation is unpopular (and for good reason), but Tivo appeared to be a case where it was Working As Intended.We'll see with Microsoft, although the timing is certainly suspect.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840338</id>
	<title>Re:Patent infringement is a nuclear weapon</title>
	<author>Mikkeles</author>
	<datestamp>1263993420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"He who has the gold makes the rules"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" He who has the gold makes the rules " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"He who has the gold makes the rules"?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839548</id>
	<title>Re:Tivo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263989700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>a number of years ago, Microsoft paid AT&amp;T $5 billion to use Microsoft's embedded OS in their STBs/DVRs. And the partnership was born. Of late, AT&amp;T once again went with the least likely to succeed company, Microsoft, for their front to back solution for IPTV and Microsoft took them to the cleaners. Even Sun, with a server capable of handling thousands of video streams couldn't sell it to AT&amp;T because the contract said it had to run Windows.<br><br>Since this is all Microsofts stuff, a patent case against AT&amp;T is really a patent case against Microsoft and hence we see Microsoft pulling out its guns in a classic Mexican Standoff. A large house of cards falls if Tivo is successful and because the AT&amp;T/Microsoft IPTV stuff is just that, all Microsoft, it would be near impossible to get the Linux based Tivo into that rats nest.  So I sure hope that the Tivo lawyers have an ounce of clue about that which they just entered.<br><br>LoB</htmltext>
<tokenext>a number of years ago , Microsoft paid AT&amp;T $ 5 billion to use Microsoft 's embedded OS in their STBs/DVRs .
And the partnership was born .
Of late , AT&amp;T once again went with the least likely to succeed company , Microsoft , for their front to back solution for IPTV and Microsoft took them to the cleaners .
Even Sun , with a server capable of handling thousands of video streams could n't sell it to AT&amp;T because the contract said it had to run Windows.Since this is all Microsofts stuff , a patent case against AT&amp;T is really a patent case against Microsoft and hence we see Microsoft pulling out its guns in a classic Mexican Standoff .
A large house of cards falls if Tivo is successful and because the AT&amp;T/Microsoft IPTV stuff is just that , all Microsoft , it would be near impossible to get the Linux based Tivo into that rats nest .
So I sure hope that the Tivo lawyers have an ounce of clue about that which they just entered.LoB</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a number of years ago, Microsoft paid AT&amp;T $5 billion to use Microsoft's embedded OS in their STBs/DVRs.
And the partnership was born.
Of late, AT&amp;T once again went with the least likely to succeed company, Microsoft, for their front to back solution for IPTV and Microsoft took them to the cleaners.
Even Sun, with a server capable of handling thousands of video streams couldn't sell it to AT&amp;T because the contract said it had to run Windows.Since this is all Microsofts stuff, a patent case against AT&amp;T is really a patent case against Microsoft and hence we see Microsoft pulling out its guns in a classic Mexican Standoff.
A large house of cards falls if Tivo is successful and because the AT&amp;T/Microsoft IPTV stuff is just that, all Microsoft, it would be near impossible to get the Linux based Tivo into that rats nest.
So I sure hope that the Tivo lawyers have an ounce of clue about that which they just entered.LoB</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839446</id>
	<title>Re:Which is it?</title>
	<author>jonbryce</author>
	<datestamp>1263989160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The beginning of mutally assued destruction.  AT&amp;T licensed the technology it is being sued over from Microsoft, so Microsoft would directly suffer if AT&amp;T lost.  As far as I'm aware, this is the first time Microsoft has actually sued anyone for patent infringement and it is doing so for defensive reasons.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The beginning of mutally assued destruction .
AT&amp;T licensed the technology it is being sued over from Microsoft , so Microsoft would directly suffer if AT&amp;T lost .
As far as I 'm aware , this is the first time Microsoft has actually sued anyone for patent infringement and it is doing so for defensive reasons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The beginning of mutally assued destruction.
AT&amp;T licensed the technology it is being sued over from Microsoft, so Microsoft would directly suffer if AT&amp;T lost.
As far as I'm aware, this is the first time Microsoft has actually sued anyone for patent infringement and it is doing so for defensive reasons.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30844380</id>
	<title>Re:Patent infringement is a nuclear weapon</title>
	<author>TimSSG</author>
	<datestamp>1264078320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Them that has the gold makes the rules.

Tim S.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Them that has the gold makes the rules .
Tim S .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Them that has the gold makes the rules.
Tim S.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840710</id>
	<title>As a former ATT U-Verse customer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263995580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm a former AT&amp;T U-Verse customer, and a former TiVo customer.  I switched to U-Verse from T/W because TimeWarner refused to provide adequate support for the CableCards they supplied in my TiVo - channels would randomly go missing causing difficulty or programs to record an hour of black.  Had TiVo for years and loved it.  Always explained it to people that I'm a tech/programmer who spends all day fighting with computers.  I loved that I could come home and not fight with my TV (until the cablecards, that is).<br> <br>

The U-Verse DVR *sucked*.  If you pressed the "skip ahead" key at just the wrong interval, it would inexplicably jump to the end of the program with the "do you want to delete this?" prompt.  To which I would invariably yell at the DVR "no you dumbass, I just wanted to skip ahead two minutes".  The software, frankly was awful in a multitude of ways.  I switched to DirecTV, and the DVR software is better, but still stinks compared to TiVo.<br> <br>

For me as big of a fan as I am of Linux, etc it wasn't about the OS.  It was about the user experience.  The U-Verse DVR did stupid, unexplainable shit often enough that I cancelled it after a little less than a year.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a former AT&amp;T U-Verse customer , and a former TiVo customer .
I switched to U-Verse from T/W because TimeWarner refused to provide adequate support for the CableCards they supplied in my TiVo - channels would randomly go missing causing difficulty or programs to record an hour of black .
Had TiVo for years and loved it .
Always explained it to people that I 'm a tech/programmer who spends all day fighting with computers .
I loved that I could come home and not fight with my TV ( until the cablecards , that is ) .
The U-Verse DVR * sucked * .
If you pressed the " skip ahead " key at just the wrong interval , it would inexplicably jump to the end of the program with the " do you want to delete this ?
" prompt .
To which I would invariably yell at the DVR " no you dumbass , I just wanted to skip ahead two minutes " .
The software , frankly was awful in a multitude of ways .
I switched to DirecTV , and the DVR software is better , but still stinks compared to TiVo .
For me as big of a fan as I am of Linux , etc it was n't about the OS .
It was about the user experience .
The U-Verse DVR did stupid , unexplainable shit often enough that I cancelled it after a little less than a year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a former AT&amp;T U-Verse customer, and a former TiVo customer.
I switched to U-Verse from T/W because TimeWarner refused to provide adequate support for the CableCards they supplied in my TiVo - channels would randomly go missing causing difficulty or programs to record an hour of black.
Had TiVo for years and loved it.
Always explained it to people that I'm a tech/programmer who spends all day fighting with computers.
I loved that I could come home and not fight with my TV (until the cablecards, that is).
The U-Verse DVR *sucked*.
If you pressed the "skip ahead" key at just the wrong interval, it would inexplicably jump to the end of the program with the "do you want to delete this?
" prompt.
To which I would invariably yell at the DVR "no you dumbass, I just wanted to skip ahead two minutes".
The software, frankly was awful in a multitude of ways.
I switched to DirecTV, and the DVR software is better, but still stinks compared to TiVo.
For me as big of a fan as I am of Linux, etc it wasn't about the OS.
It was about the user experience.
The U-Verse DVR did stupid, unexplainable shit often enough that I cancelled it after a little less than a year.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30854618</id>
	<title>In other news...</title>
	<author>mysidia</author>
	<datestamp>1264080780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Apple sues Google to help Microsoft<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)
</p><p>
Waiting for that one to be the headline.
</p><p>
See, the Nexus One   has a striking similarity to the iPhone.
Google is perhaps one of the biggest threat's  to Microsoft's  solvency,  particular with their superiority in search,  and  their vastly usable  ChromeOS.
</p><p>
And  Microsoft's    Windows product  has a  critical role  in the OS industry  that helps  Apple reach their target market.
</p><p>
It helps Apple, because it means the general population uses a product that actually is far inferior.
</p><p>
Since almost everyone uses Windows,   Linux  doesn't seem too special to the general population.
The average person has difficulty seeing a benefit to Linux  over say Apple.
</p><p>
Apple can continue to justify to people they should buy their product, because it's a "premium OS", better than OS-es that run on less-expensive hardware in every way.
</p><p>
If  Google disrupts  Microsoft's  market  position, it could be a huge threat...
in a world where  ChromeOS  or  Linux are predominant,    MacOS has a lot less value:
</p><p>
The public would have good experience with simple, decent OSes,  and  be unimpressed with MacOS after trying it.
It would make it exceedingly difficult for Apple to successfully sell their  "almost the same"    "100x as expensive"  hardware,   when  the predominant OS in the market is of  reasonable quality and end-user experience.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple sues Google to help Microsoft : ) Waiting for that one to be the headline .
See , the Nexus One has a striking similarity to the iPhone .
Google is perhaps one of the biggest threat 's to Microsoft 's solvency , particular with their superiority in search , and their vastly usable ChromeOS .
And Microsoft 's Windows product has a critical role in the OS industry that helps Apple reach their target market .
It helps Apple , because it means the general population uses a product that actually is far inferior .
Since almost everyone uses Windows , Linux does n't seem too special to the general population .
The average person has difficulty seeing a benefit to Linux over say Apple .
Apple can continue to justify to people they should buy their product , because it 's a " premium OS " , better than OS-es that run on less-expensive hardware in every way .
If Google disrupts Microsoft 's market position , it could be a huge threat.. . in a world where ChromeOS or Linux are predominant , MacOS has a lot less value : The public would have good experience with simple , decent OSes , and be unimpressed with MacOS after trying it .
It would make it exceedingly difficult for Apple to successfully sell their " almost the same " " 100x as expensive " hardware , when the predominant OS in the market is of reasonable quality and end-user experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Apple sues Google to help Microsoft :)

Waiting for that one to be the headline.
See, the Nexus One   has a striking similarity to the iPhone.
Google is perhaps one of the biggest threat's  to Microsoft's  solvency,  particular with their superiority in search,  and  their vastly usable  ChromeOS.
And  Microsoft's    Windows product  has a  critical role  in the OS industry  that helps  Apple reach their target market.
It helps Apple, because it means the general population uses a product that actually is far inferior.
Since almost everyone uses Windows,   Linux  doesn't seem too special to the general population.
The average person has difficulty seeing a benefit to Linux  over say Apple.
Apple can continue to justify to people they should buy their product, because it's a "premium OS", better than OS-es that run on less-expensive hardware in every way.
If  Google disrupts  Microsoft's  market  position, it could be a huge threat...
in a world where  ChromeOS  or  Linux are predominant,    MacOS has a lot less value:

The public would have good experience with simple, decent OSes,  and  be unimpressed with MacOS after trying it.
It would make it exceedingly difficult for Apple to successfully sell their  "almost the same"    "100x as expensive"  hardware,   when  the predominant OS in the market is of  reasonable quality and end-user experience.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841310</id>
	<title>Re:As a former ATT U-Verse customer</title>
	<author>Lershac</author>
	<datestamp>1264000200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thank jeebus that Cox in Baton Rouge seems to be cable card friendly... I have 3 TIVOs in teh house and am in TV heaven.  I rarley watch, but when I do I can watch WHAT I WANT.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank jeebus that Cox in Baton Rouge seems to be cable card friendly... I have 3 TIVOs in teh house and am in TV heaven .
I rarley watch , but when I do I can watch WHAT I WANT .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank jeebus that Cox in Baton Rouge seems to be cable card friendly... I have 3 TIVOs in teh house and am in TV heaven.
I rarley watch, but when I do I can watch WHAT I WANT.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840710</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841174</id>
	<title>Re:Circular reasoning</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263999120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's the case here.</p><p>1) Microsoft is suing Tivo to help AT&amp;T<br>2) Tivo is suing Echostar for similar DVR patent infringements<br>3) Echostar has a reseller agreement with AT&amp;T where AT&amp;T bundles Echostar DVRs and service.</p><p>It's almost a complete circle-jerk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the case here.1 ) Microsoft is suing Tivo to help AT&amp;T2 ) Tivo is suing Echostar for similar DVR patent infringements3 ) Echostar has a reseller agreement with AT&amp;T where AT&amp;T bundles Echostar DVRs and service.It 's almost a complete circle-jerk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the case here.1) Microsoft is suing Tivo to help AT&amp;T2) Tivo is suing Echostar for similar DVR patent infringements3) Echostar has a reseller agreement with AT&amp;T where AT&amp;T bundles Echostar DVRs and service.It's almost a complete circle-jerk.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839688</id>
	<title>Re:Hoist on their own petard...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263990360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What exactly did tivo invent? Recording tv I did with a vcr, playback while recording is a simple as playing an mpeg2 into a file and then playing the file back while still writing to it. That last one is just a function of how real OSes handle files.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What exactly did tivo invent ?
Recording tv I did with a vcr , playback while recording is a simple as playing an mpeg2 into a file and then playing the file back while still writing to it .
That last one is just a function of how real OSes handle files .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What exactly did tivo invent?
Recording tv I did with a vcr, playback while recording is a simple as playing an mpeg2 into a file and then playing the file back while still writing to it.
That last one is just a function of how real OSes handle files.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839538</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839048</id>
	<title>Here we go again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263987420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The gentlemens agreement never dies! They "fight" so we don't see what really goes on behind closed corporate doors.</p><p>Propz to GNAA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The gentlemens agreement never dies !
They " fight " so we do n't see what really goes on behind closed corporate doors.Propz to GNAA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The gentlemens agreement never dies!
They "fight" so we don't see what really goes on behind closed corporate doors.Propz to GNAA.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841482</id>
	<title>Re:Hoist on their own petard...</title>
	<author>jedidiah</author>
	<datestamp>1264001880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This "well earned patent" basically boils down to the following:</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; cat<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/video0 &gt; tivo-patented-computer-concurrency.mpg &amp;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; mplayer n00bs-fanboys-will-buy-into-anything.mpg</p><p>Once the consumer hardware was in place, anyone that wanted to could<br>start cobbling together recorders with spare parts and shell scripts.<br>Some people even started with the old cards that didn't do any sort<br>of compression. This was tricky since a large hard drive in those<br>days was 80G.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This " well earned patent " basically boils down to the following :         cat /dev/video0 &gt; tivo-patented-computer-concurrency.mpg &amp;         mplayer n00bs-fanboys-will-buy-into-anything.mpgOnce the consumer hardware was in place , anyone that wanted to couldstart cobbling together recorders with spare parts and shell scripts.Some people even started with the old cards that did n't do any sortof compression .
This was tricky since a large hard drive in thosedays was 80G .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This "well earned patent" basically boils down to the following:
        cat /dev/video0 &gt; tivo-patented-computer-concurrency.mpg &amp;
        mplayer n00bs-fanboys-will-buy-into-anything.mpgOnce the consumer hardware was in place, anyone that wanted to couldstart cobbling together recorders with spare parts and shell scripts.Some people even started with the old cards that didn't do any sortof compression.
This was tricky since a large hard drive in thosedays was 80G.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840382</id>
	<title>Re:TiVo's suit against AT&amp;T</title>
	<author>mystikkman</author>
	<datestamp>1263993660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shhhh, we're hunting Ballmer's rabbits. Be quiet and don't be a party pooper by injecting truthful facts into the bashing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shhhh , we 're hunting Ballmer 's rabbits .
Be quiet and do n't be a party pooper by injecting truthful facts into the bashing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shhhh, we're hunting Ballmer's rabbits.
Be quiet and don't be a party pooper by injecting truthful facts into the bashing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839546</id>
	<title>TiVo's suit against AT&amp;T</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263989700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So let me get this right... TiVo is suing AT&amp;T (and has sued Dish and Echostar previously) claiming that they infringe on the "time-warping" feature of DVRs? The "pause live tv" feature? How exactly is this novel and unique once you get the video into the computer that runs the DVR?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So let me get this right... TiVo is suing AT&amp;T ( and has sued Dish and Echostar previously ) claiming that they infringe on the " time-warping " feature of DVRs ?
The " pause live tv " feature ?
How exactly is this novel and unique once you get the video into the computer that runs the DVR ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So let me get this right... TiVo is suing AT&amp;T (and has sued Dish and Echostar previously) claiming that they infringe on the "time-warping" feature of DVRs?
The "pause live tv" feature?
How exactly is this novel and unique once you get the video into the computer that runs the DVR?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839258</id>
	<title>Hoist on their own petard...</title>
	<author>jedidiah</author>
	<datestamp>1263988380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Live by the patent, die by the patent...</p><p>The same nonsense that allowed Tivo to run amok is now being turned back against it.</p><p>None of these shenanigans should be tolerated by anyone at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Live by the patent , die by the patent...The same nonsense that allowed Tivo to run amok is now being turned back against it.None of these shenanigans should be tolerated by anyone at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Live by the patent, die by the patent...The same nonsense that allowed Tivo to run amok is now being turned back against it.None of these shenanigans should be tolerated by anyone at all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840266</id>
	<title>Yeah, I've noticed</title>
	<author>DinDaddy</author>
	<datestamp>1263993060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My U-verse DVR is so much more usable than a Tivo because of all it's stupendous theft-worthy features.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My U-verse DVR is so much more usable than a Tivo because of all it 's stupendous theft-worthy features .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My U-verse DVR is so much more usable than a Tivo because of all it's stupendous theft-worthy features.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30846186</id>
	<title>Re:Patent infringement is a nuclear weapon</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264090740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Patent carpaccio anyone..?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Patent carpaccio anyone.. ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Patent carpaccio anyone..?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839620</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839044</id>
	<title>Hahaha, wow.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263987420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I normally hate patent battles but this amuses me greatly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I normally hate patent battles but this amuses me greatly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I normally hate patent battles but this amuses me greatly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839460</id>
	<title>Live Free or Die</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263989220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is exactly why our computer products cost so much.  Someone at the USPTO needs to revise operating procedure because patents are not only being used to protect technology but inhibit it or make it expensive.</p><p>I personally have nothing against Microsoft.  If its the right tool for the right job, no issues.  My gripe is that Microsoft used to be a innovator.  Now it seems all they want to do is patent ideas or buy up old patents then sue the person for infringement.  I personally believe this is why the computer science field is failing.  We are no longer taught how to be innovative but rather double click on a icon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is exactly why our computer products cost so much .
Someone at the USPTO needs to revise operating procedure because patents are not only being used to protect technology but inhibit it or make it expensive.I personally have nothing against Microsoft .
If its the right tool for the right job , no issues .
My gripe is that Microsoft used to be a innovator .
Now it seems all they want to do is patent ideas or buy up old patents then sue the person for infringement .
I personally believe this is why the computer science field is failing .
We are no longer taught how to be innovative but rather double click on a icon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is exactly why our computer products cost so much.
Someone at the USPTO needs to revise operating procedure because patents are not only being used to protect technology but inhibit it or make it expensive.I personally have nothing against Microsoft.
If its the right tool for the right job, no issues.
My gripe is that Microsoft used to be a innovator.
Now it seems all they want to do is patent ideas or buy up old patents then sue the person for infringement.
I personally believe this is why the computer science field is failing.
We are no longer taught how to be innovative but rather double click on a icon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839424</id>
	<title>Simple Solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263989100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Embrace Communism and eliminate capitalism.  This is a prime example of capitalism at work.  Communism does not allow for imaginary property to hold back progress.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Embrace Communism and eliminate capitalism .
This is a prime example of capitalism at work .
Communism does not allow for imaginary property to hold back progress .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Embrace Communism and eliminate capitalism.
This is a prime example of capitalism at work.
Communism does not allow for imaginary property to hold back progress.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840390</id>
	<title>Re:Patent infringement is a nuclear weapon</title>
	<author>mysidia</author>
	<datestamp>1263993720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Except... that sleeping on your rights for that purpose gives them an affirmative defense against you: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Laches\_(equity)&amp;oldid=329468931" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">laches</a> [wikipedia.org]
</p><blockquote><div><p>The person invoking laches is asserting that an opposing party has "slept on its rights," and that, as a result of this delay, that other party is no longer entitled to its original claim. Put another way, failure to assert one&rsquo;s rights in a timely manner can result in a claim's being barred by laches. Laches is a form of estoppel for delay.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<br> <br>
Laches essentially alleges prejudicial delay and unfairness in the context of a particular situation</p></div></blockquote><p>
Still.. even the threat of suing, and the legal fees might (in some cases) be enough incentive for the target to be persuaded to do what you want...
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Except... that sleeping on your rights for that purpose gives them an affirmative defense against you : laches [ wikipedia.org ] The person invoking laches is asserting that an opposing party has " slept on its rights , " and that , as a result of this delay , that other party is no longer entitled to its original claim .
Put another way , failure to assert one    s rights in a timely manner can result in a claim 's being barred by laches .
Laches is a form of estoppel for delay .
.. . Laches essentially alleges prejudicial delay and unfairness in the context of a particular situation Still.. even the threat of suing , and the legal fees might ( in some cases ) be enough incentive for the target to be persuaded to do what you want.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Except... that sleeping on your rights for that purpose gives them an affirmative defense against you: laches [wikipedia.org]
The person invoking laches is asserting that an opposing party has "slept on its rights," and that, as a result of this delay, that other party is no longer entitled to its original claim.
Put another way, failure to assert one’s rights in a timely manner can result in a claim's being barred by laches.
Laches is a form of estoppel for delay.
... 
Laches essentially alleges prejudicial delay and unfairness in the context of a particular situation
Still.. even the threat of suing, and the legal fees might (in some cases) be enough incentive for the target to be persuaded to do what you want...

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30842512</id>
	<title>how / why did tivo avoid being acquired?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264011060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i wish someone could explain how tivo avoided being acquired. their user interface is one of the best i've seen, ever. the writing has been on the wall for them for 5 years. the fact that they still exist is a testament to how good of a device it is. </p><p>whoever is in charge of mergers / acquisitions at tivo really, really, dropped the ball. they should have been an acquisition target for every major cable company, AT&amp;T, and every major dish company. it's essentially over for them. every TV providing entity has their own DVR now, and they are closing the gap with tivo rapidly. i've been thinking about moving to AT&amp;T U-verse to get out from under comcast's boot, and from what i've read their DVR is as good or better than tivo.</p><p>i've had 3 tivo boxes since 2000. i feel an almost brotherly love for them as a company. yes i know how stupid that sounds. it makes me sick they couldn't figure out how to be successful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i wish someone could explain how tivo avoided being acquired .
their user interface is one of the best i 've seen , ever .
the writing has been on the wall for them for 5 years .
the fact that they still exist is a testament to how good of a device it is .
whoever is in charge of mergers / acquisitions at tivo really , really , dropped the ball .
they should have been an acquisition target for every major cable company , AT&amp;T , and every major dish company .
it 's essentially over for them .
every TV providing entity has their own DVR now , and they are closing the gap with tivo rapidly .
i 've been thinking about moving to AT&amp;T U-verse to get out from under comcast 's boot , and from what i 've read their DVR is as good or better than tivo.i 've had 3 tivo boxes since 2000. i feel an almost brotherly love for them as a company .
yes i know how stupid that sounds .
it makes me sick they could n't figure out how to be successful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i wish someone could explain how tivo avoided being acquired.
their user interface is one of the best i've seen, ever.
the writing has been on the wall for them for 5 years.
the fact that they still exist is a testament to how good of a device it is.
whoever is in charge of mergers / acquisitions at tivo really, really, dropped the ball.
they should have been an acquisition target for every major cable company, AT&amp;T, and every major dish company.
it's essentially over for them.
every TV providing entity has their own DVR now, and they are closing the gap with tivo rapidly.
i've been thinking about moving to AT&amp;T U-verse to get out from under comcast's boot, and from what i've read their DVR is as good or better than tivo.i've had 3 tivo boxes since 2000. i feel an almost brotherly love for them as a company.
yes i know how stupid that sounds.
it makes me sick they couldn't figure out how to be successful.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839240</id>
	<title>patents are the nukes of the software industry</title>
	<author>Lord Ender</author>
	<datestamp>1263988380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When one big software company sues another, the only possible outcomes are that either they all back down or they end in Mutually Assured Destruction. Most of the companies have patent portfolios as a deterrent only. I don't know what TiVo thinks they can accomplish with their North Korea strategy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When one big software company sues another , the only possible outcomes are that either they all back down or they end in Mutually Assured Destruction .
Most of the companies have patent portfolios as a deterrent only .
I do n't know what TiVo thinks they can accomplish with their North Korea strategy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When one big software company sues another, the only possible outcomes are that either they all back down or they end in Mutually Assured Destruction.
Most of the companies have patent portfolios as a deterrent only.
I don't know what TiVo thinks they can accomplish with their North Korea strategy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839518</id>
	<title>Re:Tivo</title>
	<author>ArhcAngel</author>
	<datestamp>1263989520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's very interesting. When we got U-Verse (Nov 2008) I would have agreed with you. I decided to stick it out and within 3 months AT&amp;T rolled out an update that improved the situation quite a bit. In fact they have provided quite a few improvements over the last year and most of the issues I originally had are long gone. The only issue I haven't tested since the updates is HDMI connections causing the box to randomly reboot. Both my HD sets only do up to 1080i anyway so Component is fine with me. I never got a TIVO since you couldn't pay me to go back to Comcast and the hoops needed to get it working on other platforms put me off.</p><p>On the topic of the lawsuit...SSDL</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's very interesting .
When we got U-Verse ( Nov 2008 ) I would have agreed with you .
I decided to stick it out and within 3 months AT&amp;T rolled out an update that improved the situation quite a bit .
In fact they have provided quite a few improvements over the last year and most of the issues I originally had are long gone .
The only issue I have n't tested since the updates is HDMI connections causing the box to randomly reboot .
Both my HD sets only do up to 1080i anyway so Component is fine with me .
I never got a TIVO since you could n't pay me to go back to Comcast and the hoops needed to get it working on other platforms put me off.On the topic of the lawsuit...SSDL</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's very interesting.
When we got U-Verse (Nov 2008) I would have agreed with you.
I decided to stick it out and within 3 months AT&amp;T rolled out an update that improved the situation quite a bit.
In fact they have provided quite a few improvements over the last year and most of the issues I originally had are long gone.
The only issue I haven't tested since the updates is HDMI connections causing the box to randomly reboot.
Both my HD sets only do up to 1080i anyway so Component is fine with me.
I never got a TIVO since you couldn't pay me to go back to Comcast and the hoops needed to get it working on other platforms put me off.On the topic of the lawsuit...SSDL</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839100</id>
	<title>Yes!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263987660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You go girl!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You go girl !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You go girl!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841426</id>
	<title>Re:Suing TiVo for delivering content ?</title>
	<author>Neanderthal Gronk</author>
	<datestamp>1264001280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who use fire?  Gronk have patent on fire.  Patent small number, like number of toes on Gronk's foot.  Gronk sue all fire users!  Only Gronk make fire!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who use fire ?
Gronk have patent on fire .
Patent small number , like number of toes on Gronk 's foot .
Gronk sue all fire users !
Only Gronk make fire !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who use fire?
Gronk have patent on fire.
Patent small number, like number of toes on Gronk's foot.
Gronk sue all fire users!
Only Gronk make fire!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839158</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840938</id>
	<title>Re:Suing TiVo for delivering content ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263997140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Suing TiVo for delivering content ?</p><p>Next is Neanderthal suing them for using fire or a wheel ?</p></div><p>I took my Tivo apart once.  Let me assure you, there were no wheels in there, and very little fire.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Suing TiVo for delivering content ? Next is Neanderthal suing them for using fire or a wheel ? I took my Tivo apart once .
Let me assure you , there were no wheels in there , and very little fire .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Suing TiVo for delivering content ?Next is Neanderthal suing them for using fire or a wheel ?I took my Tivo apart once.
Let me assure you, there were no wheels in there, and very little fire.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839158</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839552</id>
	<title>Ill sue you all</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263989760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a patented the act of recognizing letters organized into words. I hereby order you all to cease and desist from any further reading without first obtaining a license. If you desire to read said license, that will require an additional license.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a patented the act of recognizing letters organized into words .
I hereby order you all to cease and desist from any further reading without first obtaining a license .
If you desire to read said license , that will require an additional license .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a patented the act of recognizing letters organized into words.
I hereby order you all to cease and desist from any further reading without first obtaining a license.
If you desire to read said license, that will require an additional license.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839620</id>
	<title>Re:Patent infringement is a nuclear weapon</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263990060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Room temperature?!  Everyone knows that patent infringement suits are a dish best served cold.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Room temperature ? !
Everyone knows that patent infringement suits are a dish best served cold .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Room temperature?!
Everyone knows that patent infringement suits are a dish best served cold.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839802</id>
	<title>Re:Hoist on their own petard...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263990900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Tivo hardly invented the DVR concept. Its a natural extension of the ideas expressed by a VCR. The DVR was obvious to anyone with half a brain once we started getting enough processing power to deal with digital video effciently.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Tivo hardly invented the DVR concept .
Its a natural extension of the ideas expressed by a VCR .
The DVR was obvious to anyone with half a brain once we started getting enough processing power to deal with digital video effciently .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tivo hardly invented the DVR concept.
Its a natural extension of the ideas expressed by a VCR.
The DVR was obvious to anyone with half a brain once we started getting enough processing power to deal with digital video effciently.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839538</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841514</id>
	<title>Re:TiVo's suit against AT&amp;T</title>
	<author>Dun Malg</author>
	<datestamp>1264002180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>the "time-warping" feature of DVRs? The "pause live tv" feature? How exactly is this novel and unique once you get the video into the computer that runs the DVR?</p></div><p>They didn't patent the features, they patented a particular <b>method</b>  of implementing those features. If you'd actually read the patent, you'd see that the method is pretty freakin' complicated and definitely non-obvious.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the " time-warping " feature of DVRs ?
The " pause live tv " feature ?
How exactly is this novel and unique once you get the video into the computer that runs the DVR ? They did n't patent the features , they patented a particular method of implementing those features .
If you 'd actually read the patent , you 'd see that the method is pretty freakin ' complicated and definitely non-obvious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the "time-warping" feature of DVRs?
The "pause live tv" feature?
How exactly is this novel and unique once you get the video into the computer that runs the DVR?They didn't patent the features, they patented a particular method  of implementing those features.
If you'd actually read the patent, you'd see that the method is pretty freakin' complicated and definitely non-obvious.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839066</id>
	<title>Sure have been a lot of patent suits lately</title>
	<author>Senes</author>
	<datestamp>1263987480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You launch yours, I'll launch mine, and the usual trolls will launch their own just because they can. With any luck, they'll cause enough chaos to bring the issue to light and bring us closer to IP reform.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You launch yours , I 'll launch mine , and the usual trolls will launch their own just because they can .
With any luck , they 'll cause enough chaos to bring the issue to light and bring us closer to IP reform .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You launch yours, I'll launch mine, and the usual trolls will launch their own just because they can.
With any luck, they'll cause enough chaos to bring the issue to light and bring us closer to IP reform.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839610</id>
	<title>Re:Patent infringement is a nuclear weapon</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263990000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Humans are so damn smart it is scary.</p></div><p>If humans were so smart, you wouldn't have to explain the golden rule to them.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Humans are so damn smart it is scary.If humans were so smart , you would n't have to explain the golden rule to them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Humans are so damn smart it is scary.If humans were so smart, you wouldn't have to explain the golden rule to them.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840304</id>
	<title>Re:Hoist on their own petard...</title>
	<author>Planesdragon</author>
	<datestamp>1263993240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The same nonsense that allowed Tivo to run amok</p> </div><p>Yeah.  I mean, everyone and their brother was making PVR's before TiVo, and it's not like this invaded every single cable company in America or anything, or did anything at all to change how we watch TV as a nation...</p><p>Sorry, but TiVo's a great case of "well-earned Patent."  You've just got your panties in a knot over the GPL v3 issue.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The same nonsense that allowed Tivo to run amok Yeah .
I mean , everyone and their brother was making PVR 's before TiVo , and it 's not like this invaded every single cable company in America or anything , or did anything at all to change how we watch TV as a nation...Sorry , but TiVo 's a great case of " well-earned Patent .
" You 've just got your panties in a knot over the GPL v3 issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The same nonsense that allowed Tivo to run amok Yeah.
I mean, everyone and their brother was making PVR's before TiVo, and it's not like this invaded every single cable company in America or anything, or did anything at all to change how we watch TV as a nation...Sorry, but TiVo's a great case of "well-earned Patent.
"  You've just got your panties in a knot over the GPL v3 issue.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839672</id>
	<title>Re:Which is it?</title>
	<author>Runaway1956</author>
	<datestamp>1263990300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I like the MAD option.  Someone push the button.  I want to see the entire house of cards come tumbling down.  And, let's pray that when the patents house of cards falls, it somehow undermines the copyrights house of cards too!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like the MAD option .
Someone push the button .
I want to see the entire house of cards come tumbling down .
And , let 's pray that when the patents house of cards falls , it somehow undermines the copyrights house of cards too !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like the MAD option.
Someone push the button.
I want to see the entire house of cards come tumbling down.
And, let's pray that when the patents house of cards falls, it somehow undermines the copyrights house of cards too!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839122</id>
	<title>clusterfuck</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263987720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Corporate America is one big clusterfuck</htmltext>
<tokenext>Corporate America is one big clusterfuck</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Corporate America is one big clusterfuck</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839826</id>
	<title>Re:clusterfuck</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263991020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Here AC, fixed that for ya:<blockquote><div><p>America is one big clusterfuck</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here AC , fixed that for ya : America is one big clusterfuck</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here AC, fixed that for ya:America is one big clusterfuck
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839350</id>
	<title>Re:Which is it?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263988740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>MAD of AT&amp;T and Microsoft?? Bring it on!! That could be a good thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>MAD of AT&amp;T and Microsoft ? ?
Bring it on ! !
That could be a good thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MAD of AT&amp;T and Microsoft??
Bring it on!!
That could be a good thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30844874</id>
	<title>Re:Circular reasoning</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1264083660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They will all realise the futile position they each hold, stop lobbying to have patent laws further modified to make innovation impossible, and eventually we will have a patent system which acts as intended: To protect innovation from exploitation.<br> <br>Yeah, I can't stop laughing either...</htmltext>
<tokenext>They will all realise the futile position they each hold , stop lobbying to have patent laws further modified to make innovation impossible , and eventually we will have a patent system which acts as intended : To protect innovation from exploitation .
Yeah , I ca n't stop laughing either.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They will all realise the futile position they each hold, stop lobbying to have patent laws further modified to make innovation impossible, and eventually we will have a patent system which acts as intended: To protect innovation from exploitation.
Yeah, I can't stop laughing either...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30845150</id>
	<title>Obvious and done before</title>
	<author>Martin Spamer</author>
	<datestamp>1264085760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used to work for Kingston Interactive Television and we where one of the <a href="http://www.advanced-television.com/special\_report/xdsl/kingston.html" title="advanced-television.com">first in the world</a> [advanced-television.com] to deliver a working IPTV, EPG &amp; VOD system consumers as a commercial product. We did this in 1999, we won awards, including an <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/humber/bbci\_hull/project\_hull/index.shtml" title="bbc.co.uk">EMMA and BAFTA nomination</a> [bbc.co.uk]. Kingston had been researching streaming video over the local loop for at least 10 years prior to that, even testing a narrow-band television system.  It was xDSL that made it possible.  See <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQi\_vXAHuTk" title="youtube.com">KITV in action</a> [youtube.com] on YouTube.</p><p>I designed the VOD &amp; Content management system and we implemented our own solution because nobody offered what we needed as a software product.  Executives from every major Television Broadcast, IT and telecom corporation visited, including Microsoft, to see KITV.  It wasn't patented then because it was obvious, it wasn't novel enough then, it certainly isn't novel today.  It was a well established idea in the 1990's that was waiting for the networking &amp; server technology to match the requirements regarding latency, packet loss &amp; QOS.</p><p>I cannot put into words how galling it is to find somebody has patented something you've already done before and done better, both cases should fail because of prior art and have their patents struck out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to work for Kingston Interactive Television and we where one of the first in the world [ advanced-television.com ] to deliver a working IPTV , EPG &amp; VOD system consumers as a commercial product .
We did this in 1999 , we won awards , including an EMMA and BAFTA nomination [ bbc.co.uk ] .
Kingston had been researching streaming video over the local loop for at least 10 years prior to that , even testing a narrow-band television system .
It was xDSL that made it possible .
See KITV in action [ youtube.com ] on YouTube.I designed the VOD &amp; Content management system and we implemented our own solution because nobody offered what we needed as a software product .
Executives from every major Television Broadcast , IT and telecom corporation visited , including Microsoft , to see KITV .
It was n't patented then because it was obvious , it was n't novel enough then , it certainly is n't novel today .
It was a well established idea in the 1990 's that was waiting for the networking &amp; server technology to match the requirements regarding latency , packet loss &amp; QOS.I can not put into words how galling it is to find somebody has patented something you 've already done before and done better , both cases should fail because of prior art and have their patents struck out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to work for Kingston Interactive Television and we where one of the first in the world [advanced-television.com] to deliver a working IPTV, EPG &amp; VOD system consumers as a commercial product.
We did this in 1999, we won awards, including an EMMA and BAFTA nomination [bbc.co.uk].
Kingston had been researching streaming video over the local loop for at least 10 years prior to that, even testing a narrow-band television system.
It was xDSL that made it possible.
See KITV in action [youtube.com] on YouTube.I designed the VOD &amp; Content management system and we implemented our own solution because nobody offered what we needed as a software product.
Executives from every major Television Broadcast, IT and telecom corporation visited, including Microsoft, to see KITV.
It wasn't patented then because it was obvious, it wasn't novel enough then, it certainly isn't novel today.
It was a well established idea in the 1990's that was waiting for the networking &amp; server technology to match the requirements regarding latency, packet loss &amp; QOS.I cannot put into words how galling it is to find somebody has patented something you've already done before and done better, both cases should fail because of prior art and have their patents struck out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839540</id>
	<title>I wonder if there are any ms fanbois still left</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1263989700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>who will be able to come up and say microsoft is not in bed with corporations that are enemies of the new digital era, after this incident.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>who will be able to come up and say microsoft is not in bed with corporations that are enemies of the new digital era , after this incident .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>who will be able to come up and say microsoft is not in bed with corporations that are enemies of the new digital era, after this incident.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30847544</id>
	<title>Conspiracy theory</title>
	<author>Areyoukiddingme</author>
	<datestamp>1264096560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The U-Verse DVR did stupid, unexplainable shit often enough that I cancelled it after a little less than a year.</p></div></blockquote><p>Let's see.  Skip ahead 2 minutes.  That sounds like... skipping a commercial block.  Which TV companies say is a Bad Thing.  Sounds to me like you were being penalized for trying to skip commercials.&lt;/conspiracy&gt;
</p><p>
Just saying.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The U-Verse DVR did stupid , unexplainable shit often enough that I cancelled it after a little less than a year.Let 's see .
Skip ahead 2 minutes .
That sounds like... skipping a commercial block .
Which TV companies say is a Bad Thing .
Sounds to me like you were being penalized for trying to skip commercials .
Just saying .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The U-Verse DVR did stupid, unexplainable shit often enough that I cancelled it after a little less than a year.Let's see.
Skip ahead 2 minutes.
That sounds like... skipping a commercial block.
Which TV companies say is a Bad Thing.
Sounds to me like you were being penalized for trying to skip commercials.
Just saying.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840710</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841442</id>
	<title>Re:Circular reasoning</title>
	<author>Dun Malg</author>
	<datestamp>1264001400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, it means they cross license, and the only ones who lose are those third parties who wish to enter the same market and will now have to license <b>both</b> patents.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , it means they cross license , and the only ones who lose are those third parties who wish to enter the same market and will now have to license both patents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, it means they cross license, and the only ones who lose are those third parties who wish to enter the same market and will now have to license both patents.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839538</id>
	<title>Re:Hoist on their own petard...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263989640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Please tell me you are joking.  This isn't the case of some Patent Troll licensing an obvious technology then sitting on it til someone develops it.
Tivo is a company that built an incredible device that everyone wants to copy.  This is EXACTLY the kind of thing a patent is meant to protect.  AT&amp;T stole Tivo's idea and is now making a profit on selling it, acting as a direct competitor to Tivo using Tivo's own patented ideas.

If suing for patent infringement "should not be tolerated", what is Tivo's recourse?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Please tell me you are joking .
This is n't the case of some Patent Troll licensing an obvious technology then sitting on it til someone develops it .
Tivo is a company that built an incredible device that everyone wants to copy .
This is EXACTLY the kind of thing a patent is meant to protect .
AT&amp;T stole Tivo 's idea and is now making a profit on selling it , acting as a direct competitor to Tivo using Tivo 's own patented ideas .
If suing for patent infringement " should not be tolerated " , what is Tivo 's recourse ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please tell me you are joking.
This isn't the case of some Patent Troll licensing an obvious technology then sitting on it til someone develops it.
Tivo is a company that built an incredible device that everyone wants to copy.
This is EXACTLY the kind of thing a patent is meant to protect.
AT&amp;T stole Tivo's idea and is now making a profit on selling it, acting as a direct competitor to Tivo using Tivo's own patented ideas.
If suing for patent infringement "should not be tolerated", what is Tivo's recourse?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839258</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839122
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840710
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840382
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839546
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30845520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839688
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839538
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30846898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839240
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30844380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30842758
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840202
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30843428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841280
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839546
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840938
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839158
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30846976
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840710
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30844874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839546
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30847308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30842512
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841174
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30846186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839620
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840338
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30847544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840710
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839802
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839538
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840304
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839158
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30844500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_20_228235_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841014
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839538
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_20_228235.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30842512
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30847308
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_20_228235.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839540
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_20_228235.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840710
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841310
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30847544
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30846976
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_20_228235.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839546
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840382
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841514
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841280
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_20_228235.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839066
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_20_228235.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839122
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839826
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_20_228235.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839424
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_20_228235.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839196
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839518
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839548
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841836
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840810
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_20_228235.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839044
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_20_228235.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839104
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839610
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840338
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30844380
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30843428
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30844500
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840390
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30845520
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839620
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30846186
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_20_228235.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839216
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841174
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841442
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30844874
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_20_228235.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839512
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_20_228235.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839114
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839350
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839446
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839672
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_20_228235.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840938
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841426
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_20_228235.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841682
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_20_228235.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839258
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839538
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841014
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839802
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839688
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840202
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30842758
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30840304
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30841482
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_20_228235.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839240
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30846898
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_20_228235.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839018
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_20_228235.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_20_228235.30839460
</commentlist>
</conversation>
