<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_22_143251</id>
	<title>Microsoft Dodges Class Action In WGA Lawsuit</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1264171440000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"A lawsuit that <a href="//yro.slashdot.org/story/09/09/07/1955217/Lawsuit-Claims-WGA-is-Spyware">accused Microsoft of misleading consumers</a> to download and install an update for Windows Genuine Advantage under the guise that it was critical security update <a href="http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/01/microsoft-dodges-wga-class-action-lawsuit.ars">will go forward, but not as a class action</a>. A federal judge has refused to certify the lawsuit as a class action, which would have meant that anyone who owned a Windows XP PC in mid-2006 could join the case without having to hire an attorney. As Windows XP was easily the most popular operating system at the time, the ruling means Redmond has managed to avoid hundreds of millions in potential damages."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " A lawsuit that accused Microsoft of misleading consumers to download and install an update for Windows Genuine Advantage under the guise that it was critical security update will go forward , but not as a class action .
A federal judge has refused to certify the lawsuit as a class action , which would have meant that anyone who owned a Windows XP PC in mid-2006 could join the case without having to hire an attorney .
As Windows XP was easily the most popular operating system at the time , the ruling means Redmond has managed to avoid hundreds of millions in potential damages .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "A lawsuit that accused Microsoft of misleading consumers to download and install an update for Windows Genuine Advantage under the guise that it was critical security update will go forward, but not as a class action.
A federal judge has refused to certify the lawsuit as a class action, which would have meant that anyone who owned a Windows XP PC in mid-2006 could join the case without having to hire an attorney.
As Windows XP was easily the most popular operating system at the time, the ruling means Redmond has managed to avoid hundreds of millions in potential damages.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861696</id>
	<title>Re:WGA was the final straw for me</title>
	<author>jim\_v2000</author>
	<datestamp>1264187160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt;I have to say that WGA was really the final straw for me with Microsoft.
<br> <br>
What did it do to you that was so terrible?</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; I have to say that WGA was really the final straw for me with Microsoft .
What did it do to you that was so terrible ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;I have to say that WGA was really the final straw for me with Microsoft.
What did it do to you that was so terrible?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860102</id>
	<title>Re:Thats fine by me...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264179180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who is "Noone" and why are they bound by this outcome?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who is " Noone " and why are they bound by this outcome ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who is "Noone" and why are they bound by this outcome?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859686</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862618</id>
	<title>Once more around the track my friend</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264192920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Copyright infringement is not stealing</i> </p><p>The geek trots out this argument at every opportunity.</p><p>The problem is that copyright infringement was denounced as piracy and theft while the Black Flag still flew over the Carribean.</p><p>The geek lost the battle over words 250 years ago.</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Copyright infringement is not stealing The geek trots out this argument at every opportunity.The problem is that copyright infringement was denounced as piracy and theft while the Black Flag still flew over the Carribean.The geek lost the battle over words 250 years ago .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Copyright infringement is not stealing The geek trots out this argument at every opportunity.The problem is that copyright infringement was denounced as piracy and theft while the Black Flag still flew over the Carribean.The geek lost the battle over words 250 years ago.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862294</id>
	<title>Re:What's the issue?</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1264191120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>How many of the people that were to join the class action suit would have had legitimate copies of XP flagged as illegitimate? I know very few people that had this happen.</i></p><p>My girlfriend had this happen to her.  Installed her retail copy of XP on a new computer, it would not activate.  She called Microsoft and after getting bounced around for almost an hour, she was told that there's nothing they can do.  She used Ubuntu for quite a while, until she decided that she couldn't live without Freehand MX, so we pirated XP.</p><p>People like to cast piracy as theft.  Microsoft didn't lose anything when we pirated Windows.  My GF lost ~$150 because of WGA.  That is theft.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How many of the people that were to join the class action suit would have had legitimate copies of XP flagged as illegitimate ?
I know very few people that had this happen.My girlfriend had this happen to her .
Installed her retail copy of XP on a new computer , it would not activate .
She called Microsoft and after getting bounced around for almost an hour , she was told that there 's nothing they can do .
She used Ubuntu for quite a while , until she decided that she could n't live without Freehand MX , so we pirated XP.People like to cast piracy as theft .
Microsoft did n't lose anything when we pirated Windows .
My GF lost ~ $ 150 because of WGA .
That is theft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many of the people that were to join the class action suit would have had legitimate copies of XP flagged as illegitimate?
I know very few people that had this happen.My girlfriend had this happen to her.
Installed her retail copy of XP on a new computer, it would not activate.
She called Microsoft and after getting bounced around for almost an hour, she was told that there's nothing they can do.
She used Ubuntu for quite a while, until she decided that she couldn't live without Freehand MX, so we pirated XP.People like to cast piracy as theft.
Microsoft didn't lose anything when we pirated Windows.
My GF lost ~$150 because of WGA.
That is theft.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861010</id>
	<title>Re:What's the issue?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264183560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"And to jab the Apply fanboys - Apple releases OS updates YEARLY for $130. MS fanboys have had the pleasure of paying $200 retail (or $140 OEM w/ a mouse or stick of ram, or anything else cheap), for 5 years"</p><p>I'm still running OS X 10.2, 10.3, and 10.4 systems, just as I'm still running some Windows 2000 and XP machines.  Just because a new OS update is sold doesn't mean you have to buy it.</p><p>"So, back to reality, if you stole Windows, expect the genuine advantage to show up. And I love it, you know why? Because I'm a legitimate sysadmin, and when I load on Windows XP, Server, or even Linux (Redhat, or another one with support) I purchase the program, and make sure my clients are fully licenced."</p><p>I also make sure my machines are fully licensed.  That's why I complain bitterly about a program continuously running in the background that <i>does no good for me at all</i>, and which can occasionally incorrectly claim my system is illegitimate.  WGA is one of the first things I disable after installing my legitimate copies of Windows.  It is one of several ways that you can optimize Windows performance and reliability.  That Microsoft chose to foist it on unsuspecting users as a "critical security update", when it was nothing of the sort, is unethical.</p><p>"Back in reality", what will you tell your clients when <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/25/microsofts-wga-servers-down-everyones-a-pirate-today/" title="engadget.com" rel="nofollow">this happens again</a> [engadget.com]?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" And to jab the Apply fanboys - Apple releases OS updates YEARLY for $ 130 .
MS fanboys have had the pleasure of paying $ 200 retail ( or $ 140 OEM w/ a mouse or stick of ram , or anything else cheap ) , for 5 years " I 'm still running OS X 10.2 , 10.3 , and 10.4 systems , just as I 'm still running some Windows 2000 and XP machines .
Just because a new OS update is sold does n't mean you have to buy it .
" So , back to reality , if you stole Windows , expect the genuine advantage to show up .
And I love it , you know why ?
Because I 'm a legitimate sysadmin , and when I load on Windows XP , Server , or even Linux ( Redhat , or another one with support ) I purchase the program , and make sure my clients are fully licenced .
" I also make sure my machines are fully licensed .
That 's why I complain bitterly about a program continuously running in the background that does no good for me at all , and which can occasionally incorrectly claim my system is illegitimate .
WGA is one of the first things I disable after installing my legitimate copies of Windows .
It is one of several ways that you can optimize Windows performance and reliability .
That Microsoft chose to foist it on unsuspecting users as a " critical security update " , when it was nothing of the sort , is unethical .
" Back in reality " , what will you tell your clients when this happens again [ engadget.com ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"And to jab the Apply fanboys - Apple releases OS updates YEARLY for $130.
MS fanboys have had the pleasure of paying $200 retail (or $140 OEM w/ a mouse or stick of ram, or anything else cheap), for 5 years"I'm still running OS X 10.2, 10.3, and 10.4 systems, just as I'm still running some Windows 2000 and XP machines.
Just because a new OS update is sold doesn't mean you have to buy it.
"So, back to reality, if you stole Windows, expect the genuine advantage to show up.
And I love it, you know why?
Because I'm a legitimate sysadmin, and when I load on Windows XP, Server, or even Linux (Redhat, or another one with support) I purchase the program, and make sure my clients are fully licenced.
"I also make sure my machines are fully licensed.
That's why I complain bitterly about a program continuously running in the background that does no good for me at all, and which can occasionally incorrectly claim my system is illegitimate.
WGA is one of the first things I disable after installing my legitimate copies of Windows.
It is one of several ways that you can optimize Windows performance and reliability.
That Microsoft chose to foist it on unsuspecting users as a "critical security update", when it was nothing of the sort, is unethical.
"Back in reality", what will you tell your clients when this happens again [engadget.com]?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859344</id>
	<title>Hundreds of millions</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264175520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...the ruling means Redmond has managed to avoid hundreds of millions in potential damages</p></div><p>All of which would have gone to the lawyers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...the ruling means Redmond has managed to avoid hundreds of millions in potential damagesAll of which would have gone to the lawyers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...the ruling means Redmond has managed to avoid hundreds of millions in potential damagesAll of which would have gone to the lawyers.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30903154</id>
	<title>Re:WGA was the final straw for me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264516440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mac Mini is a ghetto computer. For an Apple fan boy you sure are a cheapass.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mac Mini is a ghetto computer .
For an Apple fan boy you sure are a cheapass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mac Mini is a ghetto computer.
For an Apple fan boy you sure are a cheapass.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860030</id>
	<title>Re:What's the issue?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264178880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How many of the people that were to join the class action suit would have had legitimate copies of XP flagged as illegitimate? I know very few people that had this happen. A few corporations had their volume keys flagged as such, but if the admin was doing things properly, they would have denied the update through group policy (or some other patch management).</p></div><p>Somewhat OT, but every time my Win7 computer wakes up from suspend, it tells me that it may be pirated (it's not) and blocks me from t downloading any optional updates. Mine was a simple upgrade from Win Vista (which came with the laptop) to Win 7 (upgrade disk provided by the manufacturer), and yet I'm still told that it's not legit.  I have no trouble believing that legit XP installs have their fair share of this with WGA.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How many of the people that were to join the class action suit would have had legitimate copies of XP flagged as illegitimate ?
I know very few people that had this happen .
A few corporations had their volume keys flagged as such , but if the admin was doing things properly , they would have denied the update through group policy ( or some other patch management ) .Somewhat OT , but every time my Win7 computer wakes up from suspend , it tells me that it may be pirated ( it 's not ) and blocks me from t downloading any optional updates .
Mine was a simple upgrade from Win Vista ( which came with the laptop ) to Win 7 ( upgrade disk provided by the manufacturer ) , and yet I 'm still told that it 's not legit .
I have no trouble believing that legit XP installs have their fair share of this with WGA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many of the people that were to join the class action suit would have had legitimate copies of XP flagged as illegitimate?
I know very few people that had this happen.
A few corporations had their volume keys flagged as such, but if the admin was doing things properly, they would have denied the update through group policy (or some other patch management).Somewhat OT, but every time my Win7 computer wakes up from suspend, it tells me that it may be pirated (it's not) and blocks me from t downloading any optional updates.
Mine was a simple upgrade from Win Vista (which came with the laptop) to Win 7 (upgrade disk provided by the manufacturer), and yet I'm still told that it's not legit.
I have no trouble believing that legit XP installs have their fair share of this with WGA.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860120</id>
	<title>Re:TWAT</title>
	<author>Spazztastic</author>
	<datestamp>1264179240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>WGA renamed for Vista and 7 as "The Windows Activation Technologies (TWAT)"</p><p>Your Honor, I rest my case.</p></div><p>I made a guild in World of Warcraft called T W A T, The War Against Terrorism. Anybody who objected to the name was called a terrorist, including the GM who contacted me about it. It didn't end very well...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>WGA renamed for Vista and 7 as " The Windows Activation Technologies ( TWAT ) " Your Honor , I rest my case.I made a guild in World of Warcraft called T W A T , The War Against Terrorism .
Anybody who objected to the name was called a terrorist , including the GM who contacted me about it .
It did n't end very well.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WGA renamed for Vista and 7 as "The Windows Activation Technologies (TWAT)"Your Honor, I rest my case.I made a guild in World of Warcraft called T W A T, The War Against Terrorism.
Anybody who objected to the name was called a terrorist, including the GM who contacted me about it.
It didn't end very well...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859624</id>
	<title>Re:Hundreds of millions</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264176900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>All of which would have gone to the lawyers.</p></div><p>Do you sue for the purpose of getting rich, or to make the world a better place? What's important here is that Microsoft should have been the one paying the lawyers. (For all I know, the lawyers probably get paid anyway by tax dollars through some legal loophole, and the judge gets a cut too.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>All of which would have gone to the lawyers.Do you sue for the purpose of getting rich , or to make the world a better place ?
What 's important here is that Microsoft should have been the one paying the lawyers .
( For all I know , the lawyers probably get paid anyway by tax dollars through some legal loophole , and the judge gets a cut too .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All of which would have gone to the lawyers.Do you sue for the purpose of getting rich, or to make the world a better place?
What's important here is that Microsoft should have been the one paying the lawyers.
(For all I know, the lawyers probably get paid anyway by tax dollars through some legal loophole, and the judge gets a cut too.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860214</id>
	<title>Re:What's the issue?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264179720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Rape isn't murder, it's rape. Copyright infringement is not stealing; it's copyright infringement.</p><p>If you download a copy of XP, that infringes Microsoft's copyright. Microsoft has not been deprived of property any more than the rape victim has been deprived of life.</p><p>If you walk out of Best Buy with a copy of XP without paying, you have indeed stolen it, and Best Buy is out the cost of the software they bought from Microsoft.</p><p>Come on, guys, this is a technical forum. Lets be a little more precice, can we?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Rape is n't murder , it 's rape .
Copyright infringement is not stealing ; it 's copyright infringement.If you download a copy of XP , that infringes Microsoft 's copyright .
Microsoft has not been deprived of property any more than the rape victim has been deprived of life.If you walk out of Best Buy with a copy of XP without paying , you have indeed stolen it , and Best Buy is out the cost of the software they bought from Microsoft.Come on , guys , this is a technical forum .
Lets be a little more precice , can we ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rape isn't murder, it's rape.
Copyright infringement is not stealing; it's copyright infringement.If you download a copy of XP, that infringes Microsoft's copyright.
Microsoft has not been deprived of property any more than the rape victim has been deprived of life.If you walk out of Best Buy with a copy of XP without paying, you have indeed stolen it, and Best Buy is out the cost of the software they bought from Microsoft.Come on, guys, this is a technical forum.
Lets be a little more precice, can we?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30863422</id>
	<title>Now you understand</title>
	<author>BCW2</author>
	<datestamp>1264154460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The advantages of donating to both sides in every election are obvious now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The advantages of donating to both sides in every election are obvious now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The advantages of donating to both sides in every election are obvious now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859300</id>
	<title>Thats fine by me...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264175220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I never planned on using the corporate justice system anyway.</p><p>I used the consumer justice system... I pirated some of their software and then switched to Linux.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I never planned on using the corporate justice system anyway.I used the consumer justice system... I pirated some of their software and then switched to Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I never planned on using the corporate justice system anyway.I used the consumer justice system... I pirated some of their software and then switched to Linux.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862406</id>
	<title>Named Litigant comments</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264191660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As one of the named litigants in this case, it was never about the money, it was more about setting the precident that software companies do not have a right to steal processor cycles from users..  Doesnt matter how many or how few, Microsoft co-opted hundreds of thousands of us to run checks for them to track down illegal software without our consent..</p><p>Now obviously, I have legal copies of XP and I dont like what Microsoft was doing, so one way to change their attitude was to sue.  It could never have been about the money, because awards were capped by the EULA to $5, so even the people representing the class wouldn't have made a red cent (The lawyer would have.. but to be fair I put in maybe 100 hours, he put in 1000s and got nothing for it)</p><p>As one of the class reps, do please know that I would never have allowed the "voucher" crap that we all see.. I would have protested strongly.. I'd have much rather see the total award given to the EFF where it could do some good preventing these actions in the future.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As one of the named litigants in this case , it was never about the money , it was more about setting the precident that software companies do not have a right to steal processor cycles from users.. Doesnt matter how many or how few , Microsoft co-opted hundreds of thousands of us to run checks for them to track down illegal software without our consent..Now obviously , I have legal copies of XP and I dont like what Microsoft was doing , so one way to change their attitude was to sue .
It could never have been about the money , because awards were capped by the EULA to $ 5 , so even the people representing the class would n't have made a red cent ( The lawyer would have.. but to be fair I put in maybe 100 hours , he put in 1000s and got nothing for it ) As one of the class reps , do please know that I would never have allowed the " voucher " crap that we all see.. I would have protested strongly.. I 'd have much rather see the total award given to the EFF where it could do some good preventing these actions in the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As one of the named litigants in this case, it was never about the money, it was more about setting the precident that software companies do not have a right to steal processor cycles from users..  Doesnt matter how many or how few, Microsoft co-opted hundreds of thousands of us to run checks for them to track down illegal software without our consent..Now obviously, I have legal copies of XP and I dont like what Microsoft was doing, so one way to change their attitude was to sue.
It could never have been about the money, because awards were capped by the EULA to $5, so even the people representing the class wouldn't have made a red cent (The lawyer would have.. but to be fair I put in maybe 100 hours, he put in 1000s and got nothing for it)As one of the class reps, do please know that I would never have allowed the "voucher" crap that we all see.. I would have protested strongly.. I'd have much rather see the total award given to the EFF where it could do some good preventing these actions in the future.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30865436</id>
	<title>This means that M$ could have millions of suits.</title>
	<author>mrmeval</author>
	<datestamp>1264166280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A class action is a way of protection a company by consolidating a lot of damaged parties. Seek out some law students who are friendly and can show what you need to file to start up a lawsuit for yourself. Do this 1 million times.</p><p>Palin?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A class action is a way of protection a company by consolidating a lot of damaged parties .
Seek out some law students who are friendly and can show what you need to file to start up a lawsuit for yourself .
Do this 1 million times.Palin ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A class action is a way of protection a company by consolidating a lot of damaged parties.
Seek out some law students who are friendly and can show what you need to file to start up a lawsuit for yourself.
Do this 1 million times.Palin?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860008</id>
	<title>Re:What's the issue?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264178820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>if you stole Windows, expect the genuine advantage to show up.</i></p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; I "stole" windows, and it never shows up. Then again, I have auto updates disabled.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Oh, and I do have legitimate copies of Microsoft software lying around, since MS DOS 2.odd. However Microsoft feels it can enforce a "per CPU" license agreement on individual users. I disagree. I also disagree to be bound by their agreement by opening the package. So there. Up to them to enforce it. Good luck with that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if you stole Windows , expect the genuine advantage to show up .
      I " stole " windows , and it never shows up .
Then again , I have auto updates disabled .
      Oh , and I do have legitimate copies of Microsoft software lying around , since MS DOS 2.odd .
However Microsoft feels it can enforce a " per CPU " license agreement on individual users .
I disagree .
I also disagree to be bound by their agreement by opening the package .
So there .
Up to them to enforce it .
Good luck with that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if you stole Windows, expect the genuine advantage to show up.
      I "stole" windows, and it never shows up.
Then again, I have auto updates disabled.
      Oh, and I do have legitimate copies of Microsoft software lying around, since MS DOS 2.odd.
However Microsoft feels it can enforce a "per CPU" license agreement on individual users.
I disagree.
I also disagree to be bound by their agreement by opening the package.
So there.
Up to them to enforce it.
Good luck with that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488</id>
	<title>What's the issue?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264176240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How many of the people that were to join the class action suit would have had legitimate copies of XP flagged as illegitimate? I know very few people that had this happen. A few corporations had their volume keys flagged as such, but if the admin was doing things properly, they would have denied the update through group policy (or some other patch management).</p><p>For all the individual users - I remember coming across a few who decided to let their beliefs be known at a few functions I attended. They were up in arms over this, how it removed their background, and had a nuisance box pop up on the system tray. I asked if they bought the copy - they said no. So, WTF is the problem? You steal something, then get upset, when you get caught? Be happy, nothing really happens when you get caught. MS is basically saying "we know you pirated this, but no worries, just buy a copy now, we won't tell, we won't take you to court, we won't send Jimmy to break your legs."</p><p>Now, we can all be pro-linux, pro-mac, pro-whatever, but the bottom line is, Windows costs money, and like any other company, MS has to make money to continue making Windows, etc. Now, they may be charging TOO MUCH, but this is a case for a monopoly. Just because all the oil makers are in cahoots, doesn't mean we can steal gas because we feel because it is a monopoly their prices are too high. And to jab the Apply fanboys - Apple releases OS updates YEARLY for $130. MS fanboys have had the pleasure of paying $200 retail (or $140 OEM w/ a mouse or stick of ram, or anything else cheap), for 5 years. I bet if MS released OS updates every year for $130, everyone would be up in arms, but when Apple adds a program like Notepad to it's OS, they repackage it, and call it something cute. I'm waiting for Apple Liger (it comes with a new theme!!!!!!!!!).</p><p>So, back to reality, if you stole Windows, expect the genuine advantage to show up. And I love it, you know why? Because I'm a legitimate sysadmin, and when I load on Windows XP, Server, or even Linux (Redhat, or another one with support) I purchase the program, and make sure my clients are fully licenced. I have to compete with people who steal software and sell computers with pirated versions. The client usually does not know the difference, until the genuine advantage shows up - and I love this, because it weeds out the PC makers that are cutting corners and pocketing the extra money. The client gets pissed, then the PC maker ends up getting in trouble.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How many of the people that were to join the class action suit would have had legitimate copies of XP flagged as illegitimate ?
I know very few people that had this happen .
A few corporations had their volume keys flagged as such , but if the admin was doing things properly , they would have denied the update through group policy ( or some other patch management ) .For all the individual users - I remember coming across a few who decided to let their beliefs be known at a few functions I attended .
They were up in arms over this , how it removed their background , and had a nuisance box pop up on the system tray .
I asked if they bought the copy - they said no .
So , WTF is the problem ?
You steal something , then get upset , when you get caught ?
Be happy , nothing really happens when you get caught .
MS is basically saying " we know you pirated this , but no worries , just buy a copy now , we wo n't tell , we wo n't take you to court , we wo n't send Jimmy to break your legs .
" Now , we can all be pro-linux , pro-mac , pro-whatever , but the bottom line is , Windows costs money , and like any other company , MS has to make money to continue making Windows , etc .
Now , they may be charging TOO MUCH , but this is a case for a monopoly .
Just because all the oil makers are in cahoots , does n't mean we can steal gas because we feel because it is a monopoly their prices are too high .
And to jab the Apply fanboys - Apple releases OS updates YEARLY for $ 130 .
MS fanboys have had the pleasure of paying $ 200 retail ( or $ 140 OEM w/ a mouse or stick of ram , or anything else cheap ) , for 5 years .
I bet if MS released OS updates every year for $ 130 , everyone would be up in arms , but when Apple adds a program like Notepad to it 's OS , they repackage it , and call it something cute .
I 'm waiting for Apple Liger ( it comes with a new theme ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
) .So , back to reality , if you stole Windows , expect the genuine advantage to show up .
And I love it , you know why ?
Because I 'm a legitimate sysadmin , and when I load on Windows XP , Server , or even Linux ( Redhat , or another one with support ) I purchase the program , and make sure my clients are fully licenced .
I have to compete with people who steal software and sell computers with pirated versions .
The client usually does not know the difference , until the genuine advantage shows up - and I love this , because it weeds out the PC makers that are cutting corners and pocketing the extra money .
The client gets pissed , then the PC maker ends up getting in trouble .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many of the people that were to join the class action suit would have had legitimate copies of XP flagged as illegitimate?
I know very few people that had this happen.
A few corporations had their volume keys flagged as such, but if the admin was doing things properly, they would have denied the update through group policy (or some other patch management).For all the individual users - I remember coming across a few who decided to let their beliefs be known at a few functions I attended.
They were up in arms over this, how it removed their background, and had a nuisance box pop up on the system tray.
I asked if they bought the copy - they said no.
So, WTF is the problem?
You steal something, then get upset, when you get caught?
Be happy, nothing really happens when you get caught.
MS is basically saying "we know you pirated this, but no worries, just buy a copy now, we won't tell, we won't take you to court, we won't send Jimmy to break your legs.
"Now, we can all be pro-linux, pro-mac, pro-whatever, but the bottom line is, Windows costs money, and like any other company, MS has to make money to continue making Windows, etc.
Now, they may be charging TOO MUCH, but this is a case for a monopoly.
Just because all the oil makers are in cahoots, doesn't mean we can steal gas because we feel because it is a monopoly their prices are too high.
And to jab the Apply fanboys - Apple releases OS updates YEARLY for $130.
MS fanboys have had the pleasure of paying $200 retail (or $140 OEM w/ a mouse or stick of ram, or anything else cheap), for 5 years.
I bet if MS released OS updates every year for $130, everyone would be up in arms, but when Apple adds a program like Notepad to it's OS, they repackage it, and call it something cute.
I'm waiting for Apple Liger (it comes with a new theme!!!!!!!!!
).So, back to reality, if you stole Windows, expect the genuine advantage to show up.
And I love it, you know why?
Because I'm a legitimate sysadmin, and when I load on Windows XP, Server, or even Linux (Redhat, or another one with support) I purchase the program, and make sure my clients are fully licenced.
I have to compete with people who steal software and sell computers with pirated versions.
The client usually does not know the difference, until the genuine advantage shows up - and I love this, because it weeds out the PC makers that are cutting corners and pocketing the extra money.
The client gets pissed, then the PC maker ends up getting in trouble.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861332</id>
	<title>Re:WGA was the final straw for me</title>
	<author>natehoy</author>
	<datestamp>1264185120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WGA was the beginning of the end with my relationship with Microsoft, and I've been using it pretty much exclusively since DOS 3.0.</p><p>After the dust settled, I started looking into cross platform software that could do what I wanted to in Windows, with a goal of eventually replacing everything with an open source alternative.  It really opened my eyes about open source software and what it can (and cannot) do.</p><p>I can now say that, as of two weeks ago, my household became Redmond-free.  All three computers in the household are now running Linux Mint, and loving it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WGA was the beginning of the end with my relationship with Microsoft , and I 've been using it pretty much exclusively since DOS 3.0.After the dust settled , I started looking into cross platform software that could do what I wanted to in Windows , with a goal of eventually replacing everything with an open source alternative .
It really opened my eyes about open source software and what it can ( and can not ) do.I can now say that , as of two weeks ago , my household became Redmond-free .
All three computers in the household are now running Linux Mint , and loving it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WGA was the beginning of the end with my relationship with Microsoft, and I've been using it pretty much exclusively since DOS 3.0.After the dust settled, I started looking into cross platform software that could do what I wanted to in Windows, with a goal of eventually replacing everything with an open source alternative.
It really opened my eyes about open source software and what it can (and cannot) do.I can now say that, as of two weeks ago, my household became Redmond-free.
All three computers in the household are now running Linux Mint, and loving it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859772</id>
	<title>In other news</title>
	<author>DarkofPeace</author>
	<datestamp>1264177620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://politics.slashdot.org/story/10/01/21/2014204/Supreme-Court-Rolls-Back-Corporate-Campaign-Spending-Limits" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://politics.slashdot.org/story/10/01/21/2014204/Supreme-Court-Rolls-Back-Corporate-Campaign-Spending-Limits</a> [slashdot.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //politics.slashdot.org/story/10/01/21/2014204/Supreme-Court-Rolls-Back-Corporate-Campaign-Spending-Limits [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://politics.slashdot.org/story/10/01/21/2014204/Supreme-Court-Rolls-Back-Corporate-Campaign-Spending-Limits [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30865560</id>
	<title>Re:</title>
	<author>clint999</author>
	<datestamp>1264167000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>I never planned on using the corporate justice system anyway.I used the consumer justice system... I pirated some of their software and then switched to Linux.</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>I never planned on using the corporate justice system anyway.I used the consumer justice system... I pirated some of their software and then switched to Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I never planned on using the corporate justice system anyway.I used the consumer justice system... I pirated some of their software and then switched to Linux.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862400</id>
	<title>Re:Thats fine by me...</title>
	<author>weicco</author>
	<datestamp>1264191660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used the same system. I made some changes to Linux, distributed it without giving out the source code and then switched to Windows. That doesn't so good anymore, doesn't it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used the same system .
I made some changes to Linux , distributed it without giving out the source code and then switched to Windows .
That does n't so good anymore , does n't it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used the same system.
I made some changes to Linux, distributed it without giving out the source code and then switched to Windows.
That doesn't so good anymore, doesn't it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30865062</id>
	<title>Re:What's the issue?</title>
	<author>Duncan J Murray</author>
	<datestamp>1264163820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Disagree.  I had a perfectly valid version of Windows XP.  Fed up with the increasingly slow boot-up times, I was irked that microsoft wanted me to install WGA - even explicitly stating that it ran every time on start up.  No thanks - I didn't want it, and it wasn't a critical update.</p><p>I'm glad in retrospect that I didn't just moan about it.  March last year, I switched to Ubuntu after my last time clicking no to WGA, and it's a breath of fresh air just how much Ubuntu respects my choices.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Disagree .
I had a perfectly valid version of Windows XP .
Fed up with the increasingly slow boot-up times , I was irked that microsoft wanted me to install WGA - even explicitly stating that it ran every time on start up .
No thanks - I did n't want it , and it was n't a critical update.I 'm glad in retrospect that I did n't just moan about it .
March last year , I switched to Ubuntu after my last time clicking no to WGA , and it 's a breath of fresh air just how much Ubuntu respects my choices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Disagree.
I had a perfectly valid version of Windows XP.
Fed up with the increasingly slow boot-up times, I was irked that microsoft wanted me to install WGA - even explicitly stating that it ran every time on start up.
No thanks - I didn't want it, and it wasn't a critical update.I'm glad in retrospect that I didn't just moan about it.
March last year, I switched to Ubuntu after my last time clicking no to WGA, and it's a breath of fresh air just how much Ubuntu respects my choices.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30870252</id>
	<title>Re:Once more around the track my friend</title>
	<author>b4dc0d3r</author>
	<datestamp>1264268100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hereby denounce you as a troll, snake oil salesman, practicing thespian, and a grossly inappropriate sense of grandeur.  That makes it true then, eh?</p><p>Look, if you want to travel back in time we can have a conversation using the terms as they used to be used.  These days there is a different name for different types of unauthorized acquisition.  The reason it's important is because in many countries the punishment is quite different.</p><p>If you were on trial for manslaughter, having accidentally run over a person who jumped into your auto's path, your lawyer would object every time someone said murder.  So the judge says "overruled, either way the defendant killed someone, and admitted to that much in the police report, and that's why we're here".</p><p>Go ahead, point out how this situation is different from the copyright/theft argument.  While you're doing so, make sure you read your post and my reply again.</p><p>The geek is trying to be precise here, and the law clearly defines a difference between the two.  Now, given how many times this has been talked about, please tell me honestly, did I just get bite a troll?  You other posts suggest you tend to be serious... in fact your other replies tend to take fine distinctions very seriously.  But someone will read your post here and think, mighty fine point, I'll use that one someday.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hereby denounce you as a troll , snake oil salesman , practicing thespian , and a grossly inappropriate sense of grandeur .
That makes it true then , eh ? Look , if you want to travel back in time we can have a conversation using the terms as they used to be used .
These days there is a different name for different types of unauthorized acquisition .
The reason it 's important is because in many countries the punishment is quite different.If you were on trial for manslaughter , having accidentally run over a person who jumped into your auto 's path , your lawyer would object every time someone said murder .
So the judge says " overruled , either way the defendant killed someone , and admitted to that much in the police report , and that 's why we 're here " .Go ahead , point out how this situation is different from the copyright/theft argument .
While you 're doing so , make sure you read your post and my reply again.The geek is trying to be precise here , and the law clearly defines a difference between the two .
Now , given how many times this has been talked about , please tell me honestly , did I just get bite a troll ?
You other posts suggest you tend to be serious... in fact your other replies tend to take fine distinctions very seriously .
But someone will read your post here and think , mighty fine point , I 'll use that one someday .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hereby denounce you as a troll, snake oil salesman, practicing thespian, and a grossly inappropriate sense of grandeur.
That makes it true then, eh?Look, if you want to travel back in time we can have a conversation using the terms as they used to be used.
These days there is a different name for different types of unauthorized acquisition.
The reason it's important is because in many countries the punishment is quite different.If you were on trial for manslaughter, having accidentally run over a person who jumped into your auto's path, your lawyer would object every time someone said murder.
So the judge says "overruled, either way the defendant killed someone, and admitted to that much in the police report, and that's why we're here".Go ahead, point out how this situation is different from the copyright/theft argument.
While you're doing so, make sure you read your post and my reply again.The geek is trying to be precise here, and the law clearly defines a difference between the two.
Now, given how many times this has been talked about, please tell me honestly, did I just get bite a troll?
You other posts suggest you tend to be serious... in fact your other replies tend to take fine distinctions very seriously.
But someone will read your post here and think, mighty fine point, I'll use that one someday.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862618</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30863104</id>
	<title>Re:What's the issue?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264152780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Rape isn't murder, it's rape.</p></div><p>While I agree with your point, I personally equate rape with murder, and I think the penalty should be the same.  I've known several women who have been raped, and their lives are in shambles because of it.  Women very rarely fully recover from it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Rape is n't murder , it 's rape.While I agree with your point , I personally equate rape with murder , and I think the penalty should be the same .
I 've known several women who have been raped , and their lives are in shambles because of it .
Women very rarely fully recover from it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rape isn't murder, it's rape.While I agree with your point, I personally equate rape with murder, and I think the penalty should be the same.
I've known several women who have been raped, and their lives are in shambles because of it.
Women very rarely fully recover from it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862404</id>
	<title>Re:What's the issue?</title>
	<author>kackle</author>
	<datestamp>1264191660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Copyright infringement is not stealing; it's copyright infringement.</p></div><p>Copyright infringement is theft of permission.  It takes away the copyright holder's ability to control any copying.  So yes, it is stealing; not of the "product" per se, but of the holder's right of control.  That cat doesn't go back in the bag.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Lets be a little more precice, can we?</p></div><p>How embarrassing for you.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Copyright infringement is not stealing ; it 's copyright infringement.Copyright infringement is theft of permission .
It takes away the copyright holder 's ability to control any copying .
So yes , it is stealing ; not of the " product " per se , but of the holder 's right of control .
That cat does n't go back in the bag.Lets be a little more precice , can we ? How embarrassing for you .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Copyright infringement is not stealing; it's copyright infringement.Copyright infringement is theft of permission.
It takes away the copyright holder's ability to control any copying.
So yes, it is stealing; not of the "product" per se, but of the holder's right of control.
That cat doesn't go back in the bag.Lets be a little more precice, can we?How embarrassing for you.
;)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861642</id>
	<title>What is the WGA?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264186800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The World Canadian Bureau?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The World Canadian Bureau ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The World Canadian Bureau?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859686</id>
	<title>Re:Thats fine by me...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264177140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It also means that noone else is bound by the outcome, and is free to sue individually.

If Microsoft loses the individual suit, you could potentially see 10,000,000 more individual suits using this case as a precedent for an easy win.  That would cost MS significantly more money.

Lack of class certification COULD be a disaster for Microsoft<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... especially if they lose and the award is substantial.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It also means that noone else is bound by the outcome , and is free to sue individually .
If Microsoft loses the individual suit , you could potentially see 10,000,000 more individual suits using this case as a precedent for an easy win .
That would cost MS significantly more money .
Lack of class certification COULD be a disaster for Microsoft ... especially if they lose and the award is substantial .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It also means that noone else is bound by the outcome, and is free to sue individually.
If Microsoft loses the individual suit, you could potentially see 10,000,000 more individual suits using this case as a precedent for an easy win.
That would cost MS significantly more money.
Lack of class certification COULD be a disaster for Microsoft ... especially if they lose and the award is substantial.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860208</id>
	<title>Re:What's the issue?</title>
	<author>EXrider</author>
	<datestamp>1264179720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>And to jab the Apply fanboys - Apple releases OS updates YEARLY for $130.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Wrong, Apple stopped doing yearly OS updates once their OS finally reached general usability, which was version 10.3 (back in '03).  Anyways, they've been supporting their most recent OS releases for at least 4 years, you don't <b>have</b> to upgrade Mac OS soon as it comes out, just like you don't <b>have</b> to upgrade Windows as soon as a new release comes out.</p><blockquote><div><p>I bet if MS released OS updates every year for $130, everyone would be up in arms, but when Apple adds a program like Notepad to it's OS, they repackage it, and call it something cute. I'm waiting for Apple Liger (it comes with a new theme!!!!!!!!!).</p></div></blockquote><p>
If you were an admin that had actually supported some Macs, you'd realize that there are always un-advertised features in those OS releases that actually make your job as an admin easier.  Additionally, based on that comment, I can tell you've never actually used Mac OS X for any length of time.  By the way, 10.6 is offered as an upgrade for merely $30 and it doesn't come with any new eye candy, just underlying OS refinements that make Active Directory and Exchange integration work better, and memory and disk footprints smaller.</p><blockquote><div><p>Because I'm a legitimate sysadmin, and when I load on Windows XP, Server, or even Linux (Redhat, or another one with support) I purchase the program, and make sure my clients are fully licenced.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Well then, you've had the fortune to only deal with companies that pony up the cash for volume licenses then.  When you work for a company that only buys OEM licenses, WGA makes things that <b>you</b> take for granted as an admin, hell.  Disaster recovery, Terminal Services, system images and virtualization all become a pain in the ass or even impossible to practically implement thanks to WGA.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And to jab the Apply fanboys - Apple releases OS updates YEARLY for $ 130 .
Wrong , Apple stopped doing yearly OS updates once their OS finally reached general usability , which was version 10.3 ( back in '03 ) .
Anyways , they 've been supporting their most recent OS releases for at least 4 years , you do n't have to upgrade Mac OS soon as it comes out , just like you do n't have to upgrade Windows as soon as a new release comes out.I bet if MS released OS updates every year for $ 130 , everyone would be up in arms , but when Apple adds a program like Notepad to it 's OS , they repackage it , and call it something cute .
I 'm waiting for Apple Liger ( it comes with a new theme ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ) .
If you were an admin that had actually supported some Macs , you 'd realize that there are always un-advertised features in those OS releases that actually make your job as an admin easier .
Additionally , based on that comment , I can tell you 've never actually used Mac OS X for any length of time .
By the way , 10.6 is offered as an upgrade for merely $ 30 and it does n't come with any new eye candy , just underlying OS refinements that make Active Directory and Exchange integration work better , and memory and disk footprints smaller.Because I 'm a legitimate sysadmin , and when I load on Windows XP , Server , or even Linux ( Redhat , or another one with support ) I purchase the program , and make sure my clients are fully licenced .
Well then , you 've had the fortune to only deal with companies that pony up the cash for volume licenses then .
When you work for a company that only buys OEM licenses , WGA makes things that you take for granted as an admin , hell .
Disaster recovery , Terminal Services , system images and virtualization all become a pain in the ass or even impossible to practically implement thanks to WGA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And to jab the Apply fanboys - Apple releases OS updates YEARLY for $130.
Wrong, Apple stopped doing yearly OS updates once their OS finally reached general usability, which was version 10.3 (back in '03).
Anyways, they've been supporting their most recent OS releases for at least 4 years, you don't have to upgrade Mac OS soon as it comes out, just like you don't have to upgrade Windows as soon as a new release comes out.I bet if MS released OS updates every year for $130, everyone would be up in arms, but when Apple adds a program like Notepad to it's OS, they repackage it, and call it something cute.
I'm waiting for Apple Liger (it comes with a new theme!!!!!!!!!).
If you were an admin that had actually supported some Macs, you'd realize that there are always un-advertised features in those OS releases that actually make your job as an admin easier.
Additionally, based on that comment, I can tell you've never actually used Mac OS X for any length of time.
By the way, 10.6 is offered as an upgrade for merely $30 and it doesn't come with any new eye candy, just underlying OS refinements that make Active Directory and Exchange integration work better, and memory and disk footprints smaller.Because I'm a legitimate sysadmin, and when I load on Windows XP, Server, or even Linux (Redhat, or another one with support) I purchase the program, and make sure my clients are fully licenced.
Well then, you've had the fortune to only deal with companies that pony up the cash for volume licenses then.
When you work for a company that only buys OEM licenses, WGA makes things that you take for granted as an admin, hell.
Disaster recovery, Terminal Services, system images and virtualization all become a pain in the ass or even impossible to practically implement thanks to WGA.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859518</id>
	<title>TWAT</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264176360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>WGA renamed for Vista and 7 as "The Windows Activation Technologies (TWAT)"

Your Honor, I rest my case.</htmltext>
<tokenext>WGA renamed for Vista and 7 as " The Windows Activation Technologies ( TWAT ) " Your Honor , I rest my case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WGA renamed for Vista and 7 as "The Windows Activation Technologies (TWAT)"

Your Honor, I rest my case.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860556</id>
	<title>Re:Hundreds of millions</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264181280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Do you sue for the purpose of getting rich, or to make the world a better place? </p></div><p>If you are a nigger you sue to "Get yours from the man!".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you sue for the purpose of getting rich , or to make the world a better place ?
If you are a nigger you sue to " Get yours from the man !
" .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you sue for the purpose of getting rich, or to make the world a better place?
If you are a nigger you sue to "Get yours from the man!
".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859624</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30863564</id>
	<title>Re:TWAT</title>
	<author>fm6</author>
	<datestamp>1264155300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In my junior high, the guys who had Dominic Patrone's physed class (colorful fellow, only teacher from that period whose name I remember) for home room voted to name the intramural football team "Mr. Patrone's Supporters". Patrone himself was delighted. The principal was not amused.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In my junior high , the guys who had Dominic Patrone 's physed class ( colorful fellow , only teacher from that period whose name I remember ) for home room voted to name the intramural football team " Mr. Patrone 's Supporters " .
Patrone himself was delighted .
The principal was not amused .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my junior high, the guys who had Dominic Patrone's physed class (colorful fellow, only teacher from that period whose name I remember) for home room voted to name the intramural football team "Mr. Patrone's Supporters".
Patrone himself was delighted.
The principal was not amused.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862856</id>
	<title>Re:What's the issue?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264150980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps, but Apple's operating system actually works right.  Microsoft uses its marketing budget power to brainwash everyone into thinking that Windows is the only thing out there.</p><p>By the way,  I'm also a legitimate network admin, and we've dumped Windows and Server 2003/2008 for Leopard Server and MacOSX.  Now, I spend my time moving us <strong>forward</strong> instead of fixing all of the crap that Windows throws in your face every time you log in.  I don't need to kludge anything with OSX.</p><p>Oh, and by the way, you only buy updates for major upgrades to the operating system, not every single update (like 10.4 to 10.5).  And Snow Leopard was only $25.</p><p>And before you accuse Apple of selling bells and whistles, take a look at Microsoft on that one first.  What real functionality did they add to XP that made it different from 2000?  Nothing.  They didn't add the firewall until SP2.  What, Windows Movie Maker?  Please.</p><p>By the way, on the subject of activation, I can remember a number of times that I have swapped out a network card or replaced a video card or something, and had to reactivate Windows -- and the "automatic" one didn't work!  The last time that happened, it was with a Dell server that had completely wiped (it developed a bad memory controller).  Now, I had installed this copy of Server 2003 on this computer before, and it had never had to activate.  But when I took that server and transferred it to a VM (not reinstalled, just transferred to a VM), it not only wanted to activate, but I had to call Microsoft to activate it!  Then, when I called, it took two hours of talking to some "Engrish" speaking guy before they finally decided I wasn't a pirate and gave me the activation code.</p><p>Now, how hard would it have been to get that working if it had been a pirated copy?  Cakewalk.  It's been shown that WGA is trivial to defeat.  Which one was it harder for, the legit customer or the pirate?  Who was penalized?  Hint: He wouldn't say "Yarr".</p><p>I call it WGD:  Windows Genuine Disadvantage Lubricated Tool.  Oh, wait, they didn't say it was the CUSTOMER that gets the advantage...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps , but Apple 's operating system actually works right .
Microsoft uses its marketing budget power to brainwash everyone into thinking that Windows is the only thing out there.By the way , I 'm also a legitimate network admin , and we 've dumped Windows and Server 2003/2008 for Leopard Server and MacOSX .
Now , I spend my time moving us forward instead of fixing all of the crap that Windows throws in your face every time you log in .
I do n't need to kludge anything with OSX.Oh , and by the way , you only buy updates for major upgrades to the operating system , not every single update ( like 10.4 to 10.5 ) .
And Snow Leopard was only $ 25.And before you accuse Apple of selling bells and whistles , take a look at Microsoft on that one first .
What real functionality did they add to XP that made it different from 2000 ?
Nothing. They did n't add the firewall until SP2 .
What , Windows Movie Maker ?
Please.By the way , on the subject of activation , I can remember a number of times that I have swapped out a network card or replaced a video card or something , and had to reactivate Windows -- and the " automatic " one did n't work !
The last time that happened , it was with a Dell server that had completely wiped ( it developed a bad memory controller ) .
Now , I had installed this copy of Server 2003 on this computer before , and it had never had to activate .
But when I took that server and transferred it to a VM ( not reinstalled , just transferred to a VM ) , it not only wanted to activate , but I had to call Microsoft to activate it !
Then , when I called , it took two hours of talking to some " Engrish " speaking guy before they finally decided I was n't a pirate and gave me the activation code.Now , how hard would it have been to get that working if it had been a pirated copy ?
Cakewalk. It 's been shown that WGA is trivial to defeat .
Which one was it harder for , the legit customer or the pirate ?
Who was penalized ?
Hint : He would n't say " Yarr " .I call it WGD : Windows Genuine Disadvantage Lubricated Tool .
Oh , wait , they did n't say it was the CUSTOMER that gets the advantage.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps, but Apple's operating system actually works right.
Microsoft uses its marketing budget power to brainwash everyone into thinking that Windows is the only thing out there.By the way,  I'm also a legitimate network admin, and we've dumped Windows and Server 2003/2008 for Leopard Server and MacOSX.
Now, I spend my time moving us forward instead of fixing all of the crap that Windows throws in your face every time you log in.
I don't need to kludge anything with OSX.Oh, and by the way, you only buy updates for major upgrades to the operating system, not every single update (like 10.4 to 10.5).
And Snow Leopard was only $25.And before you accuse Apple of selling bells and whistles, take a look at Microsoft on that one first.
What real functionality did they add to XP that made it different from 2000?
Nothing.  They didn't add the firewall until SP2.
What, Windows Movie Maker?
Please.By the way, on the subject of activation, I can remember a number of times that I have swapped out a network card or replaced a video card or something, and had to reactivate Windows -- and the "automatic" one didn't work!
The last time that happened, it was with a Dell server that had completely wiped (it developed a bad memory controller).
Now, I had installed this copy of Server 2003 on this computer before, and it had never had to activate.
But when I took that server and transferred it to a VM (not reinstalled, just transferred to a VM), it not only wanted to activate, but I had to call Microsoft to activate it!
Then, when I called, it took two hours of talking to some "Engrish" speaking guy before they finally decided I wasn't a pirate and gave me the activation code.Now, how hard would it have been to get that working if it had been a pirated copy?
Cakewalk.  It's been shown that WGA is trivial to defeat.
Which one was it harder for, the legit customer or the pirate?
Who was penalized?
Hint: He wouldn't say "Yarr".I call it WGD:  Windows Genuine Disadvantage Lubricated Tool.
Oh, wait, they didn't say it was the CUSTOMER that gets the advantage...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859826</id>
	<title>Denial of class != ruling on merits</title>
	<author>xymog</author>
	<datestamp>1264177920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem with the case is that plaintiff's' attorneys have failed to meet the legal requirements to certify the lawsuit as a class action. The initial pleading has been repeatedly amended to add and drop plaintiffs, while at the same time it is not able to advance coherent legal arguments backed by evidence. Courts will not certify a lawsuit as a class action based on wishful thinking. The courts require prima facie evidence that the issue is widespread, that many people are harmed, and that judicial economy will be best served by having a single lawsuit.

This isn't a "win" for Microsoft or a "loss" for the common man; plaintiffs' attorneys haven't done their homework and met the burden of proof for certifying the class.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with the case is that plaintiff 's ' attorneys have failed to meet the legal requirements to certify the lawsuit as a class action .
The initial pleading has been repeatedly amended to add and drop plaintiffs , while at the same time it is not able to advance coherent legal arguments backed by evidence .
Courts will not certify a lawsuit as a class action based on wishful thinking .
The courts require prima facie evidence that the issue is widespread , that many people are harmed , and that judicial economy will be best served by having a single lawsuit .
This is n't a " win " for Microsoft or a " loss " for the common man ; plaintiffs ' attorneys have n't done their homework and met the burden of proof for certifying the class .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with the case is that plaintiff's' attorneys have failed to meet the legal requirements to certify the lawsuit as a class action.
The initial pleading has been repeatedly amended to add and drop plaintiffs, while at the same time it is not able to advance coherent legal arguments backed by evidence.
Courts will not certify a lawsuit as a class action based on wishful thinking.
The courts require prima facie evidence that the issue is widespread, that many people are harmed, and that judicial economy will be best served by having a single lawsuit.
This isn't a "win" for Microsoft or a "loss" for the common man; plaintiffs' attorneys haven't done their homework and met the burden of proof for certifying the class.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859922</id>
	<title>Re:What's the issue?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264178280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft's right to only support their legitimately-purchased products does not entitle them to mislead their (legitimate) customers.  MS's war on those who stole windows is fine with me, if they just avoid collateral damage.</p><p>I realize that this particular lie didn't cause all that much damage.  Maybe a few thousand people had to put in a few more hours to make sure the 'critical' patch didn't break their company's setup.  It's a matter of principle, however - if we allow Microsoft to get away with this, what's to keep them from doing more damage with other lies in the name of fighting piracy?</p><p>I'm not defending those who stole Windows - honestly, I'd rather they just switch to a legal free-as-in-beer (and preferably free-as-in-speech) OS.  I'm defending the legitimate customers that Microsoft chose to deliberately lie too, both past and future.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft 's right to only support their legitimately-purchased products does not entitle them to mislead their ( legitimate ) customers .
MS 's war on those who stole windows is fine with me , if they just avoid collateral damage.I realize that this particular lie did n't cause all that much damage .
Maybe a few thousand people had to put in a few more hours to make sure the 'critical ' patch did n't break their company 's setup .
It 's a matter of principle , however - if we allow Microsoft to get away with this , what 's to keep them from doing more damage with other lies in the name of fighting piracy ? I 'm not defending those who stole Windows - honestly , I 'd rather they just switch to a legal free-as-in-beer ( and preferably free-as-in-speech ) OS .
I 'm defending the legitimate customers that Microsoft chose to deliberately lie too , both past and future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft's right to only support their legitimately-purchased products does not entitle them to mislead their (legitimate) customers.
MS's war on those who stole windows is fine with me, if they just avoid collateral damage.I realize that this particular lie didn't cause all that much damage.
Maybe a few thousand people had to put in a few more hours to make sure the 'critical' patch didn't break their company's setup.
It's a matter of principle, however - if we allow Microsoft to get away with this, what's to keep them from doing more damage with other lies in the name of fighting piracy?I'm not defending those who stole Windows - honestly, I'd rather they just switch to a legal free-as-in-beer (and preferably free-as-in-speech) OS.
I'm defending the legitimate customers that Microsoft chose to deliberately lie too, both past and future.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860014</id>
	<title>Re:What's the issue?</title>
	<author>infinitelink</author>
	<datestamp>1264178820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your comment is a perfect example of being off-topic; as such, it functions as a diversion from the real matter at hand--the illegal installation of malware onto many computers, breaching privacy laws, and worse, under guise as an update, rather than something new altogether; this ain't no Mac vs. Lin vs. Win issue, and your mind's immediate jump to such things as those, and "piracy", is a perfect example of how unfortunately stupid people are these days--too quick to speak; I want to be fair, however, I'm an idiot too: I do it too much too, but I'm trying not to; I say this in friendly encouragement--shut-up more often.

Speaking of speaking out of ignorance: WGA installs on all computers running Windows, "pirated" (ahem, stolen, not pirated--there is a legal difference) or legit, and it does indeed flag legit installs, even proper installs, for whatever reasons unknown: too often; I've heard reports that it sometimes flags machines even after having "validating" them already once before. The thing is, Microsoft has no legal rights to validate any computer, period: even if someone has breached copyright by installing an illegit duplicate: there are no legal means for them to create effective enforcement mechanisms outside of going through court: seriously. SERIOUSLY. Just because software is dynamic instead of static, does not mean those who make it may begin to become their own legal enforcers, judges, etc.. This is a serious trespass on authority, just as are so many other things (use licenses overriding secured rights, etc.) these days: so much arrogance--even more when the Microsofty types decide they'll pay what it takes to have laws written for them, pragmatic rather than concerned with just government.

I can't say it's just Microsoft, though. It's like the lawyers pissed about the "residual overhang of physicality", who want laws to ensure they and clients can continue extracting protection money for "IP" without continuing to make real product: those laws are set-up to be just, not subjugate justice to profit; it's like the lower courts' and patent offices ignoring the Supreme Court's caution that the case reviewed regarding a patent which included a piece of software in a physical transformation does not mean software is patentable: all this patent litigation over software is illegitimate, unauthorized, i.e. illegal, but the unauthorized "authorities" have been using power they are not given for enforcement nonetheless; it's like the congress, president, executive staff, political parties (both major ones), etc., making laws federally they are not authorized even to debate in session--which some of the more open scumbags (who were actually open about being scumbags) have dared repeatedly say in session in congress, and to the public: and here we get to the point where a bunch of jerk offs who want this or that with society, this way vs. their way vs. his way, cry "but but but" without any real deference or regard for "rule of law", which has been of late bandied about too often by those who so often trample it.

Sheesh.
e whole case is rather about</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your comment is a perfect example of being off-topic ; as such , it functions as a diversion from the real matter at hand--the illegal installation of malware onto many computers , breaching privacy laws , and worse , under guise as an update , rather than something new altogether ; this ai n't no Mac vs. Lin vs. Win issue , and your mind 's immediate jump to such things as those , and " piracy " , is a perfect example of how unfortunately stupid people are these days--too quick to speak ; I want to be fair , however , I 'm an idiot too : I do it too much too , but I 'm trying not to ; I say this in friendly encouragement--shut-up more often .
Speaking of speaking out of ignorance : WGA installs on all computers running Windows , " pirated " ( ahem , stolen , not pirated--there is a legal difference ) or legit , and it does indeed flag legit installs , even proper installs , for whatever reasons unknown : too often ; I 've heard reports that it sometimes flags machines even after having " validating " them already once before .
The thing is , Microsoft has no legal rights to validate any computer , period : even if someone has breached copyright by installing an illegit duplicate : there are no legal means for them to create effective enforcement mechanisms outside of going through court : seriously .
SERIOUSLY. Just because software is dynamic instead of static , does not mean those who make it may begin to become their own legal enforcers , judges , etc.. This is a serious trespass on authority , just as are so many other things ( use licenses overriding secured rights , etc .
) these days : so much arrogance--even more when the Microsofty types decide they 'll pay what it takes to have laws written for them , pragmatic rather than concerned with just government .
I ca n't say it 's just Microsoft , though .
It 's like the lawyers pissed about the " residual overhang of physicality " , who want laws to ensure they and clients can continue extracting protection money for " IP " without continuing to make real product : those laws are set-up to be just , not subjugate justice to profit ; it 's like the lower courts ' and patent offices ignoring the Supreme Court 's caution that the case reviewed regarding a patent which included a piece of software in a physical transformation does not mean software is patentable : all this patent litigation over software is illegitimate , unauthorized , i.e .
illegal , but the unauthorized " authorities " have been using power they are not given for enforcement nonetheless ; it 's like the congress , president , executive staff , political parties ( both major ones ) , etc. , making laws federally they are not authorized even to debate in session--which some of the more open scumbags ( who were actually open about being scumbags ) have dared repeatedly say in session in congress , and to the public : and here we get to the point where a bunch of jerk offs who want this or that with society , this way vs. their way vs. his way , cry " but but but " without any real deference or regard for " rule of law " , which has been of late bandied about too often by those who so often trample it .
Sheesh . e whole case is rather about</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your comment is a perfect example of being off-topic; as such, it functions as a diversion from the real matter at hand--the illegal installation of malware onto many computers, breaching privacy laws, and worse, under guise as an update, rather than something new altogether; this ain't no Mac vs. Lin vs. Win issue, and your mind's immediate jump to such things as those, and "piracy", is a perfect example of how unfortunately stupid people are these days--too quick to speak; I want to be fair, however, I'm an idiot too: I do it too much too, but I'm trying not to; I say this in friendly encouragement--shut-up more often.
Speaking of speaking out of ignorance: WGA installs on all computers running Windows, "pirated" (ahem, stolen, not pirated--there is a legal difference) or legit, and it does indeed flag legit installs, even proper installs, for whatever reasons unknown: too often; I've heard reports that it sometimes flags machines even after having "validating" them already once before.
The thing is, Microsoft has no legal rights to validate any computer, period: even if someone has breached copyright by installing an illegit duplicate: there are no legal means for them to create effective enforcement mechanisms outside of going through court: seriously.
SERIOUSLY. Just because software is dynamic instead of static, does not mean those who make it may begin to become their own legal enforcers, judges, etc.. This is a serious trespass on authority, just as are so many other things (use licenses overriding secured rights, etc.
) these days: so much arrogance--even more when the Microsofty types decide they'll pay what it takes to have laws written for them, pragmatic rather than concerned with just government.
I can't say it's just Microsoft, though.
It's like the lawyers pissed about the "residual overhang of physicality", who want laws to ensure they and clients can continue extracting protection money for "IP" without continuing to make real product: those laws are set-up to be just, not subjugate justice to profit; it's like the lower courts' and patent offices ignoring the Supreme Court's caution that the case reviewed regarding a patent which included a piece of software in a physical transformation does not mean software is patentable: all this patent litigation over software is illegitimate, unauthorized, i.e.
illegal, but the unauthorized "authorities" have been using power they are not given for enforcement nonetheless; it's like the congress, president, executive staff, political parties (both major ones), etc., making laws federally they are not authorized even to debate in session--which some of the more open scumbags (who were actually open about being scumbags) have dared repeatedly say in session in congress, and to the public: and here we get to the point where a bunch of jerk offs who want this or that with society, this way vs. their way vs. his way, cry "but but but" without any real deference or regard for "rule of law", which has been of late bandied about too often by those who so often trample it.
Sheesh.
e whole case is rather about</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860112</id>
	<title>Halfway install</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264179240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have an older computer that while in a hurry allowed the WGA to start to install. I wanted to cancel that installation but now was unable. Every time I boot it asked to continue with the install and I cancel out of it. Does anyone know if I will have the option to de-install that feature once it is installed? Or a way to remove the partial installation?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have an older computer that while in a hurry allowed the WGA to start to install .
I wanted to cancel that installation but now was unable .
Every time I boot it asked to continue with the install and I cancel out of it .
Does anyone know if I will have the option to de-install that feature once it is installed ?
Or a way to remove the partial installation ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have an older computer that while in a hurry allowed the WGA to start to install.
I wanted to cancel that installation but now was unable.
Every time I boot it asked to continue with the install and I cancel out of it.
Does anyone know if I will have the option to de-install that feature once it is installed?
Or a way to remove the partial installation?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861884</id>
	<title>Re:What's the issue?</title>
	<author>Zero\_\_Kelvin</author>
	<datestamp>1264188720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"Somewhat OT, but every time my Win7 computer wakes up from suspend, it tells me that it may be pirated<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..."</p></div></blockquote><p>That is strange. When I bought my computer I left Vista on it and set up Dual Boot Linux/Vista just in case I needed a good laugh.  The last time I tried to boot Vista, as far as I could tell, it never woke up.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Somewhat OT , but every time my Win7 computer wakes up from suspend , it tells me that it may be pirated ... " That is strange .
When I bought my computer I left Vista on it and set up Dual Boot Linux/Vista just in case I needed a good laugh .
The last time I tried to boot Vista , as far as I could tell , it never woke up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Somewhat OT, but every time my Win7 computer wakes up from suspend, it tells me that it may be pirated ..."That is strange.
When I bought my computer I left Vista on it and set up Dual Boot Linux/Vista just in case I needed a good laugh.
The last time I tried to boot Vista, as far as I could tell, it never woke up.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860030</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860160</id>
	<title>Not $130</title>
	<author>btaylor</author>
	<datestamp>1264179480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apple doesn't necessarily release its updates for $130 a pop.  <a href="http://store.apple.com/us/product/MAC\_OS\_X\_SNGL" title="apple.com" rel="nofollow">Snow Leopard</a> [apple.com] was released as a $29 upgrade.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple does n't necessarily release its updates for $ 130 a pop .
Snow Leopard [ apple.com ] was released as a $ 29 upgrade .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple doesn't necessarily release its updates for $130 a pop.
Snow Leopard [apple.com] was released as a $29 upgrade.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862144</id>
	<title>Too bad</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1264190160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You won't be getting those discount coupons for MS products after all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You wo n't be getting those discount coupons for MS products after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You won't be getting those discount coupons for MS products after all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860836</id>
	<title>Re:Hundreds of millions</title>
	<author>natehoy</author>
	<datestamp>1264182780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Law firms initiate class action suits, by and large, to make money.  Some of them also happen to contribute to the public good by punishing companies for bad behavior, but the core reason most class action suits go forward is because large law firms have found the formula (forgive the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>./ meme):</p><p>1.  Find an injustice or perceived injustice with enough victims to qualify as a "class".<br>2.  Get a judge to certify it as a class action.<br>3.  Win a judgment (or better yet convince the defendant company to settle)<br>4.  Profit (usually about 1/4 to 1/3 of the total settlement)!</p><p>Basically, class action law firms are mostly comprised of ambulance chasers who decided the exhaust fumes were getting to them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Law firms initiate class action suits , by and large , to make money .
Some of them also happen to contribute to the public good by punishing companies for bad behavior , but the core reason most class action suits go forward is because large law firms have found the formula ( forgive the ./ meme ) : 1 .
Find an injustice or perceived injustice with enough victims to qualify as a " class " .2 .
Get a judge to certify it as a class action.3 .
Win a judgment ( or better yet convince the defendant company to settle ) 4 .
Profit ( usually about 1/4 to 1/3 of the total settlement ) ! Basically , class action law firms are mostly comprised of ambulance chasers who decided the exhaust fumes were getting to them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Law firms initiate class action suits, by and large, to make money.
Some of them also happen to contribute to the public good by punishing companies for bad behavior, but the core reason most class action suits go forward is because large law firms have found the formula (forgive the ./ meme):1.
Find an injustice or perceived injustice with enough victims to qualify as a "class".2.
Get a judge to certify it as a class action.3.
Win a judgment (or better yet convince the defendant company to settle)4.
Profit (usually about 1/4 to 1/3 of the total settlement)!Basically, class action law firms are mostly comprised of ambulance chasers who decided the exhaust fumes were getting to them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859624</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859680</id>
	<title>Re:Thats fine by me...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264177140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Linux is my operating system.<br>Windows under virtualization is just an emulator. And I'm not paying $100+, or in fact anything at all for an emulator.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Linux is my operating system.Windows under virtualization is just an emulator .
And I 'm not paying $ 100 + , or in fact anything at all for an emulator .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Linux is my operating system.Windows under virtualization is just an emulator.
And I'm not paying $100+, or in fact anything at all for an emulator.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861810</id>
	<title>Re:What's the issue?</title>
	<author>cdrguru</author>
	<datestamp>1264188120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Just because all the oil makers are in cahoots, doesn't mean we can steal gas because we feel because it is a monopoly their prices are too high.</p></div><p>Huh?  You mean <i>you</i> haven't been stealing gas in protest?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I have to compete with people who steal software and sell computers with pirated versions.</p></div><p>Yup.  And the goal of piracy is to (a) obviously to get free stuff, but (b) destroying revenue from digital goods is even more important.  The idea that popular idea (piracy) can bring large corporations to their knees is extremely attractive.  So attractive, in fact, that there is almost no chance of any anti-piracy anything ever winning out.</p><p>So sure, there are some selfish pirates out there that are just in it to get free stuff.  But don't ignore the fact that these people are also contributing to the freedom of digital goods worldwide.  Sounds like a good idea when you put it in those terms.  Unless of course you own or work for a company that actually gets money from (gasp!) the sale of software.  In that case, your days are probably numbered because unless software is nailed down tight, it will absolutely be stolen and redistributed all over the planet.  And any attempt to nail it down will be fought.</p><p>Anyone that is hoping to actually make a living selling creative works (software, music, books, anything) is unaware of the pirate movement and the effect it is having on greedy bastards trying to make money off intangible objects.</p><p>By the way, I am one of those greedy bastards.  Just like Microsoft.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just because all the oil makers are in cahoots , does n't mean we can steal gas because we feel because it is a monopoly their prices are too high.Huh ?
You mean you have n't been stealing gas in protest ? I have to compete with people who steal software and sell computers with pirated versions.Yup .
And the goal of piracy is to ( a ) obviously to get free stuff , but ( b ) destroying revenue from digital goods is even more important .
The idea that popular idea ( piracy ) can bring large corporations to their knees is extremely attractive .
So attractive , in fact , that there is almost no chance of any anti-piracy anything ever winning out.So sure , there are some selfish pirates out there that are just in it to get free stuff .
But do n't ignore the fact that these people are also contributing to the freedom of digital goods worldwide .
Sounds like a good idea when you put it in those terms .
Unless of course you own or work for a company that actually gets money from ( gasp !
) the sale of software .
In that case , your days are probably numbered because unless software is nailed down tight , it will absolutely be stolen and redistributed all over the planet .
And any attempt to nail it down will be fought.Anyone that is hoping to actually make a living selling creative works ( software , music , books , anything ) is unaware of the pirate movement and the effect it is having on greedy bastards trying to make money off intangible objects.By the way , I am one of those greedy bastards .
Just like Microsoft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just because all the oil makers are in cahoots, doesn't mean we can steal gas because we feel because it is a monopoly their prices are too high.Huh?
You mean you haven't been stealing gas in protest?I have to compete with people who steal software and sell computers with pirated versions.Yup.
And the goal of piracy is to (a) obviously to get free stuff, but (b) destroying revenue from digital goods is even more important.
The idea that popular idea (piracy) can bring large corporations to their knees is extremely attractive.
So attractive, in fact, that there is almost no chance of any anti-piracy anything ever winning out.So sure, there are some selfish pirates out there that are just in it to get free stuff.
But don't ignore the fact that these people are also contributing to the freedom of digital goods worldwide.
Sounds like a good idea when you put it in those terms.
Unless of course you own or work for a company that actually gets money from (gasp!
) the sale of software.
In that case, your days are probably numbered because unless software is nailed down tight, it will absolutely be stolen and redistributed all over the planet.
And any attempt to nail it down will be fought.Anyone that is hoping to actually make a living selling creative works (software, music, books, anything) is unaware of the pirate movement and the effect it is having on greedy bastards trying to make money off intangible objects.By the way, I am one of those greedy bastards.
Just like Microsoft.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860970</id>
	<title>Oblig userfriendly cartoon</title>
	<author>catman</author>
	<datestamp>1264183380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20070313" title="userfriendly.org">http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20070313</a> [userfriendly.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/ ? id = 20070313 [ userfriendly.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20070313 [userfriendly.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860260</id>
	<title>Re:Hundreds of millions</title>
	<author>Funderburk</author>
	<datestamp>1264179900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>All of which would have gone to the lawyers.</p></div><p>Not all of it.

Those involved would have received a shiny new coupon for $20 off MS Office<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Or a copy of Vista if they wanted to say "F#\%&amp; You!"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>All of which would have gone to the lawyers.Not all of it .
Those involved would have received a shiny new coupon for $ 20 off MS Office ... Or a copy of Vista if they wanted to say " F # \ % &amp; You !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All of which would have gone to the lawyers.Not all of it.
Those involved would have received a shiny new coupon for $20 off MS Office ... Or a copy of Vista if they wanted to say "F#\%&amp; You!
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860080</id>
	<title>Re:If you can dodge a class action lawsuit...</title>
	<author>PhxBlue</author>
	<datestamp>1264179120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you can dodge a class action lawsuit, you can dodge a ball.</p></div><p>But can you dodge a chair?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you can dodge a class action lawsuit , you can dodge a ball.But can you dodge a chair ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you can dodge a class action lawsuit, you can dodge a ball.But can you dodge a chair?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860058</id>
	<title>Re:Thats fine by me...</title>
	<author>robinstar1574</author>
	<datestamp>1264179000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can you send me a copy?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can you send me a copy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can you send me a copy?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860300</id>
	<title>WGA was the final straw for me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264180140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have to say that WGA was really the final straw for me with Microsoft. I, being a paying customer, felt from day 1 of WGA that it was an absolute kick in the teeth from Microsoft. It is what turned me from a Microsoft fan over to using my Mac Mini. It was a sad thing for me but I'm much happier now and will never come back. Thanks for turning me away Microsoft!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to say that WGA was really the final straw for me with Microsoft .
I , being a paying customer , felt from day 1 of WGA that it was an absolute kick in the teeth from Microsoft .
It is what turned me from a Microsoft fan over to using my Mac Mini .
It was a sad thing for me but I 'm much happier now and will never come back .
Thanks for turning me away Microsoft !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to say that WGA was really the final straw for me with Microsoft.
I, being a paying customer, felt from day 1 of WGA that it was an absolute kick in the teeth from Microsoft.
It is what turned me from a Microsoft fan over to using my Mac Mini.
It was a sad thing for me but I'm much happier now and will never come back.
Thanks for turning me away Microsoft!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859514</id>
	<title>Frivolous lawsuit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264176360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Managed to "dodge"?    This is the classic definition of a frivolous lawsuit.  this is not a compliance lawsuit.   There is no injuctive relief.    This is a perceived slight by litigous individuals.  Why didn't the entire case get thrown out altogether?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Managed to " dodge " ?
This is the classic definition of a frivolous lawsuit .
this is not a compliance lawsuit .
There is no injuctive relief .
This is a perceived slight by litigous individuals .
Why did n't the entire case get thrown out altogether ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Managed to "dodge"?
This is the classic definition of a frivolous lawsuit.
this is not a compliance lawsuit.
There is no injuctive relief.
This is a perceived slight by litigous individuals.
Why didn't the entire case get thrown out altogether?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860362</id>
	<title>This may have worked out in MS's favor.</title>
	<author>kellyb9</author>
	<datestamp>1264180500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Whoever refuses to join the class action lawsuit has illegal copies on Windows!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Whoever refuses to join the class action lawsuit has illegal copies on Windows !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whoever refuses to join the class action lawsuit has illegal copies on Windows!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859758</id>
	<title>Re:If you can dodge a class action lawsuit...</title>
	<author>Arancaytar</author>
	<datestamp>1264177560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, Bill. I'm trying to tell you that when you're ready, you won't have to dodge lawsuits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , Bill .
I 'm trying to tell you that when you 're ready , you wo n't have to dodge lawsuits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, Bill.
I'm trying to tell you that when you're ready, you won't have to dodge lawsuits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862488</id>
	<title>Re:What's the issue?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264192200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a moral issue with being treated like I broke the law every time I buy something. I paid my money, yet I am harassed? Pirates enjoy a far better experience for far less cost. This is true for *ALL* DRM. DRM is bad, unethical, immoral. Why is it legal to try to trick me into installing it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a moral issue with being treated like I broke the law every time I buy something .
I paid my money , yet I am harassed ?
Pirates enjoy a far better experience for far less cost .
This is true for * ALL * DRM .
DRM is bad , unethical , immoral .
Why is it legal to try to trick me into installing it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a moral issue with being treated like I broke the law every time I buy something.
I paid my money, yet I am harassed?
Pirates enjoy a far better experience for far less cost.
This is true for *ALL* DRM.
DRM is bad, unethical, immoral.
Why is it legal to try to trick me into installing it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859386</id>
	<title>If you can dodge a class action lawsuit...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264175760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you can dodge a class action lawsuit, you can dodge a ball.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you can dodge a class action lawsuit , you can dodge a ball .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you can dodge a class action lawsuit, you can dodge a ball.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862198</id>
	<title>Re:Thats fine by me...</title>
	<author>Undead Waffle</author>
	<datestamp>1264190460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or they can settle on this small case and make the problem go away without setting a precedent.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or they can settle on this small case and make the problem go away without setting a precedent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or they can settle on this small case and make the problem go away without setting a precedent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859686</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861420</id>
	<title>Re:What's the issue?</title>
	<author>Virmal</author>
	<datestamp>1264185600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't you love it when a sysadmin posts on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. as "Anonymous Coward" ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't you love it when a sysadmin posts on / .
as " Anonymous Coward " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't you love it when a sysadmin posts on /.
as "Anonymous Coward" ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860834</id>
	<title>Re:Hundreds of millions</title>
	<author>nomadic</author>
	<datestamp>1264182780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>All of which would have gone to the lawyers.
</i>
<br>
<br>
Modded insightful?  It's completely and utterly false, though.  Ahh, slashdot.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All of which would have gone to the lawyers .
Modded insightful ?
It 's completely and utterly false , though .
Ahh , slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All of which would have gone to the lawyers.
Modded insightful?
It's completely and utterly false, though.
Ahh, slashdot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861908</id>
	<title>Re:What's the issue?</title>
	<author>Zero\_\_Kelvin</author>
	<datestamp>1264188900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"If you download a copy of XP, that infringes Microsoft's copyright. Microsoft has not been deprived of property any more than the rape victim has been deprived of life.</p></div></blockquote><p>Sometimes the rape victim is so traumatized they kill themselves.  You'd be surprised how many Windows users the world has lost that way.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" If you download a copy of XP , that infringes Microsoft 's copyright .
Microsoft has not been deprived of property any more than the rape victim has been deprived of life.Sometimes the rape victim is so traumatized they kill themselves .
You 'd be surprised how many Windows users the world has lost that way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"If you download a copy of XP, that infringes Microsoft's copyright.
Microsoft has not been deprived of property any more than the rape victim has been deprived of life.Sometimes the rape victim is so traumatized they kill themselves.
You'd be surprised how many Windows users the world has lost that way.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30868578</id>
	<title>I Have This Pattern</title>
	<author>Errol backfiring</author>
	<datestamp>1264249800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Same here. I vowed never to install XP because of Windows Genuine Annoyance, and moved from 98SE to Xubuntu. Never regretted it even one day.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Same here .
I vowed never to install XP because of Windows Genuine Annoyance , and moved from 98SE to Xubuntu .
Never regretted it even one day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same here.
I vowed never to install XP because of Windows Genuine Annoyance, and moved from 98SE to Xubuntu.
Never regretted it even one day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862968</id>
	<title>Re:What's the issue?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264151820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Come on, guys, this is a technical forum. Lets be a little more precice, can we?</i></p><p>Perhaps you should start by being <b>precise</b>; it's "<b>let's</b>."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Come on , guys , this is a technical forum .
Lets be a little more precice , can we ? Perhaps you should start by being precise ; it 's " let 's .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Come on, guys, this is a technical forum.
Lets be a little more precice, can we?Perhaps you should start by being precise; it's "let's.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862220</id>
	<title>Re:WGA was the final straw for me</title>
	<author>Seth Kriticos</author>
	<datestamp>1264190700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Something like that for me too. I was dual booting Windows/Linux since around 97, but never got around to completely switch. Then came Windows XP, I read the license and swore never to use that on my home machine. I still stayed with Windows 2000 up until around 3 years ago, but then ditched the products of that whole company. Definitely an improvement. I have to thank for the final blow to switch me. Never been happier.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Something like that for me too .
I was dual booting Windows/Linux since around 97 , but never got around to completely switch .
Then came Windows XP , I read the license and swore never to use that on my home machine .
I still stayed with Windows 2000 up until around 3 years ago , but then ditched the products of that whole company .
Definitely an improvement .
I have to thank for the final blow to switch me .
Never been happier .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Something like that for me too.
I was dual booting Windows/Linux since around 97, but never got around to completely switch.
Then came Windows XP, I read the license and swore never to use that on my home machine.
I still stayed with Windows 2000 up until around 3 years ago, but then ditched the products of that whole company.
Definitely an improvement.
I have to thank for the final blow to switch me.
Never been happier.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862880</id>
	<title>Re:Thats fine by me...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264151160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And we, as well as Microsoft, know full well that not a single other lawsuit will ever take place... because it takes time, resources, and effort that nobody will expend.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And we , as well as Microsoft , know full well that not a single other lawsuit will ever take place... because it takes time , resources , and effort that nobody will expend .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And we, as well as Microsoft, know full well that not a single other lawsuit will ever take place... because it takes time, resources, and effort that nobody will expend.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859686</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859346</id>
	<title>good</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264175520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They don't deserve being sued for this anyway. WGA enables other updates to be installed, it pretty much is a security update.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They do n't deserve being sued for this anyway .
WGA enables other updates to be installed , it pretty much is a security update .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They don't deserve being sued for this anyway.
WGA enables other updates to be installed, it pretty much is a security update.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859776</id>
	<title>Re:Hundreds of millions</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1264177680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wouldn't care who it went to so long as it caused them to rethink their way of doing business.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't care who it went to so long as it caused them to rethink their way of doing business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't care who it went to so long as it caused them to rethink their way of doing business.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861380</id>
	<title>Re:Hundreds of millions</title>
	<author>GasparGMSwordsman</author>
	<datestamp>1264185360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...the ruling means Redmond has managed to avoid hundreds of millions in potential damages</p></div><p>All of which would have gone to the lawyers.</p></div><p>And this matters why?</p><p>The point of this kind of lawsuit is not to make money, it is to punish a perpetrator for wrong doing.  So if Microsoft looses 2 Billion US, why should I care where it goes.  The point is that Microsoft had to pay money for its actions and is hopefully less likely to repeat that action.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...the ruling means Redmond has managed to avoid hundreds of millions in potential damagesAll of which would have gone to the lawyers.And this matters why ? The point of this kind of lawsuit is not to make money , it is to punish a perpetrator for wrong doing .
So if Microsoft looses 2 Billion US , why should I care where it goes .
The point is that Microsoft had to pay money for its actions and is hopefully less likely to repeat that action .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...the ruling means Redmond has managed to avoid hundreds of millions in potential damagesAll of which would have gone to the lawyers.And this matters why?The point of this kind of lawsuit is not to make money, it is to punish a perpetrator for wrong doing.
So if Microsoft looses 2 Billion US, why should I care where it goes.
The point is that Microsoft had to pay money for its actions and is hopefully less likely to repeat that action.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859752</id>
	<title>Re:If you can dodge a class action lawsuit...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264177500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What the fuck is that supposed to mean?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What the fuck is that supposed to mean ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the fuck is that supposed to mean?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860908</id>
	<title>Re:Hundreds of millions</title>
	<author>Mr\_Silver</author>
	<datestamp>1264183080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>All of which would have gone to the lawyers.</p></div></blockquote><p>Maybe so and yes it sucks. However I'd rather it went to lawyers than stay in the hands of Microsoft and validate their opinion that they did nothing wrong.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>All of which would have gone to the lawyers.Maybe so and yes it sucks .
However I 'd rather it went to lawyers than stay in the hands of Microsoft and validate their opinion that they did nothing wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All of which would have gone to the lawyers.Maybe so and yes it sucks.
However I'd rather it went to lawyers than stay in the hands of Microsoft and validate their opinion that they did nothing wrong.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861910</id>
	<title>REMOVE THE ASSININE WGA AND FIX XP  !</title>
	<author>myspace-cn</author>
	<datestamp>1264188900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jesus Tits just fix XP . Sell licenses to who ever needs them for "pre IE8 applications" and keep it alive for IE7<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/6 or give us a tool to remove without de-stabilizing our systems.  For example pro audio people with working hardware which is train wrecked by Win 7.</p><p>We all already know we have to keep our win systems behind a hardware firewall now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jesus Tits just fix XP .
Sell licenses to who ever needs them for " pre IE8 applications " and keep it alive for IE7 /6 or give us a tool to remove without de-stabilizing our systems .
For example pro audio people with working hardware which is train wrecked by Win 7.We all already know we have to keep our win systems behind a hardware firewall now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jesus Tits just fix XP .
Sell licenses to who ever needs them for "pre IE8 applications" and keep it alive for IE7 /6 or give us a tool to remove without de-stabilizing our systems.
For example pro audio people with working hardware which is train wrecked by Win 7.We all already know we have to keep our win systems behind a hardware firewall now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860102
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859686
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860834
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30868578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860908
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30863104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860058
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30903154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859686
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861420
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859686
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860014
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862856
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861908
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860008
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859386
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859752
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859386
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30863564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30865062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859758
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859386
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860030
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861696
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_143251_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30870252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862618
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_143251.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859488
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861420
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30865062
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860030
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861884
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860208
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861010
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860214
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862404
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862618
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30870252
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862968
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861908
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30863104
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861810
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862488
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860008
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862294
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862856
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860160
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860014
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859922
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_143251.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860080
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859758
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859752
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_143251.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859344
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859776
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860908
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861380
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860834
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860260
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859624
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860836
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860556
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_143251.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859346
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_143251.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859826
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_143251.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860300
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862220
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861332
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30903154
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30868578
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30861696
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_143251.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859300
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859680
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860058
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859686
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862880
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860102
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862198
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30862400
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_143251.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860970
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_143251.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860112
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_143251.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30859518
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30860120
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_143251.30863564
</commentlist>
</conversation>
