<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_09_2242230</id>
	<title>Submit Your Comments About ACTA</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1265715600000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:alexNO@SPAMschoenfeldt.com" rel="nofollow">alex\_guy\_CA</a> Notes that the US Trade Representative &mdash; who has been negotiating the secret Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement without input from the American people or Congress &mdash; is <a href="http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/2891">seeking public submissions on how to conduct US foreign copyright policy</a>. This means that Americans can file comments with the USTR asking for ACTA to be made public. Public Knowledge explains the process: <i>"Under the <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#documentDetail?R=0900006480a7dc9b">Special 301 process</a> the USTR seeks input from US copyright, trademark, and patent owners about whether policies and practices in foreign countries deny them adequate IP protection. The process has generally been used by IP holders to complain not only about lax enforcement in other countries, but also about limitations and exceptions in their laws that are beneficial to libraries, to education, to innovation, and to the public interest generally. The ability to comment in the Special 301 process is not limited to IP owners only. Any member of the public is free to file comments. If you believe in the importance of balanced copyright policies, file comments with the USTR and make your voice heard. Comments can be filed electronically via <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/">http://www.regulations.gov/</a> docket number USTR-2010-0003. You have to include the term '2010 Special 301 Review' in the 'Type Comment and Upload File' field. ... Deadline for filing is February 16 by 5 pm."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>alex \ _guy \ _CA Notes that the US Trade Representative    who has been negotiating the secret Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement without input from the American people or Congress    is seeking public submissions on how to conduct US foreign copyright policy .
This means that Americans can file comments with the USTR asking for ACTA to be made public .
Public Knowledge explains the process : " Under the Special 301 process the USTR seeks input from US copyright , trademark , and patent owners about whether policies and practices in foreign countries deny them adequate IP protection .
The process has generally been used by IP holders to complain not only about lax enforcement in other countries , but also about limitations and exceptions in their laws that are beneficial to libraries , to education , to innovation , and to the public interest generally .
The ability to comment in the Special 301 process is not limited to IP owners only .
Any member of the public is free to file comments .
If you believe in the importance of balanced copyright policies , file comments with the USTR and make your voice heard .
Comments can be filed electronically via http : //www.regulations.gov/ docket number USTR-2010-0003 .
You have to include the term '2010 Special 301 Review ' in the 'Type Comment and Upload File ' field .
... Deadline for filing is February 16 by 5 pm .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>alex\_guy\_CA Notes that the US Trade Representative — who has been negotiating the secret Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement without input from the American people or Congress — is seeking public submissions on how to conduct US foreign copyright policy.
This means that Americans can file comments with the USTR asking for ACTA to be made public.
Public Knowledge explains the process: "Under the Special 301 process the USTR seeks input from US copyright, trademark, and patent owners about whether policies and practices in foreign countries deny them adequate IP protection.
The process has generally been used by IP holders to complain not only about lax enforcement in other countries, but also about limitations and exceptions in their laws that are beneficial to libraries, to education, to innovation, and to the public interest generally.
The ability to comment in the Special 301 process is not limited to IP owners only.
Any member of the public is free to file comments.
If you believe in the importance of balanced copyright policies, file comments with the USTR and make your voice heard.
Comments can be filed electronically via http://www.regulations.gov/ docket number USTR-2010-0003.
You have to include the term '2010 Special 301 Review' in the 'Type Comment and Upload File' field.
... Deadline for filing is February 16 by 5 pm.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080286</id>
	<title>Where can I read the leaked copy?</title>
	<author>H4x0r Jim Duggan</author>
	<datestamp>1265721060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; A leaked copy was posted on wikileaks, but they took everything offline due to their financial problems.  Does anyone have a copy of the leaked document?  Please post it here, or add it to this public wiki:</p><ul><li> <a href="http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting\_Trade\_Agreement" title="swpat.org">http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting\_Trade\_Agreement</a> [swpat.org] </li></ul><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; The URLs for the relevant wikileaks docs were:</p><ul><li>http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Classified\_US\%2C\_Japan\_and\_EU\_ACTA\_trade\_agreement\_drafts\%2C\_2009 - where you'd find scans of the document</li><li>http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Talk:Classified\_US\%2C\_Japan\_and\_EU\_ACTA\_trade\_agreement\_drafts\%2C\_2009 - where people had started to type it up</li></ul><p>I haven't found it in archive.org or Google cache.  Help sought, thanks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>    A leaked copy was posted on wikileaks , but they took everything offline due to their financial problems .
Does anyone have a copy of the leaked document ?
Please post it here , or add it to this public wiki : http : //en.swpat.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting \ _Trade \ _Agreement [ swpat.org ]     The URLs for the relevant wikileaks docs were : http : //wikileaks.org/wiki/Classified \ _US \ % 2C \ _Japan \ _and \ _EU \ _ACTA \ _trade \ _agreement \ _drafts \ % 2C \ _2009 - where you 'd find scans of the documenthttp : //wikileaks.org/wiki/Talk : Classified \ _US \ % 2C \ _Japan \ _and \ _EU \ _ACTA \ _trade \ _agreement \ _drafts \ % 2C \ _2009 - where people had started to type it upI have n't found it in archive.org or Google cache .
Help sought , thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
    A leaked copy was posted on wikileaks, but they took everything offline due to their financial problems.
Does anyone have a copy of the leaked document?
Please post it here, or add it to this public wiki: http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting\_Trade\_Agreement [swpat.org] 
    The URLs for the relevant wikileaks docs were:http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Classified\_US\%2C\_Japan\_and\_EU\_ACTA\_trade\_agreement\_drafts\%2C\_2009 - where you'd find scans of the documenthttp://wikileaks.org/wiki/Talk:Classified\_US\%2C\_Japan\_and\_EU\_ACTA\_trade\_agreement\_drafts\%2C\_2009 - where people had started to type it upI haven't found it in archive.org or Google cache.
Help sought, thanks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080554</id>
	<title>Is there a point?</title>
	<author>DoofusOfDeath</author>
	<datestamp>1265722860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't mean this at all in a snarky way, but...</p><p>Does anyone have a sense of whether or not us submitting comments would actually change the outcome?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't mean this at all in a snarky way , but...Does anyone have a sense of whether or not us submitting comments would actually change the outcome ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't mean this at all in a snarky way, but...Does anyone have a sense of whether or not us submitting comments would actually change the outcome?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31081354</id>
	<title>please comment!</title>
	<author>ffflala</author>
	<datestamp>1265728860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sure a lot of people will cynically disregard the opportunity to comment as pointless; ignore this urge! While this comment period touches a fairly narrow area, if you care about this issue PLEASE COMMENT. Bring yourself up to speed on the proposed regulation (summary: <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#documentDetail?R=0900006480a7dc9b" title="regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#documentDetail?R=0900006480a7dc9b</a> [regulations.gov]), and make your comment as efficient, relevant, and precise as possible.</p><p>Commenting on regs is NOT like writing your congressperson! Public comments to proposed regs are reviewed, and are considered; these public comment periods are not just for show. Industries with vested interests in an agency's regulations are aware of this, and are certain to have their say in the matter. Have yours!</p><p>There's more context in the linked summary, but here's basically what they're asking for input on:</p><p><div class="quote"><p> USTR requests that interested persons identify those countries that deny adequate and effective protection for intellectual property rights or deny fair and equitable market access to U.S. persons who rely on intellectual property protection. USTR requests that, where relevant, submissions mention particular regions, provinces, states, or other subdivisions of a country in which an act, policy, or practice is believed to warrant special attention. Submissions may report positive or negative developments with respect to these sub-national entities.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure a lot of people will cynically disregard the opportunity to comment as pointless ; ignore this urge !
While this comment period touches a fairly narrow area , if you care about this issue PLEASE COMMENT .
Bring yourself up to speed on the proposed regulation ( summary : http : //www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html # documentDetail ? R = 0900006480a7dc9b [ regulations.gov ] ) , and make your comment as efficient , relevant , and precise as possible.Commenting on regs is NOT like writing your congressperson !
Public comments to proposed regs are reviewed , and are considered ; these public comment periods are not just for show .
Industries with vested interests in an agency 's regulations are aware of this , and are certain to have their say in the matter .
Have yours ! There 's more context in the linked summary , but here 's basically what they 're asking for input on : USTR requests that interested persons identify those countries that deny adequate and effective protection for intellectual property rights or deny fair and equitable market access to U.S. persons who rely on intellectual property protection .
USTR requests that , where relevant , submissions mention particular regions , provinces , states , or other subdivisions of a country in which an act , policy , or practice is believed to warrant special attention .
Submissions may report positive or negative developments with respect to these sub-national entities .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure a lot of people will cynically disregard the opportunity to comment as pointless; ignore this urge!
While this comment period touches a fairly narrow area, if you care about this issue PLEASE COMMENT.
Bring yourself up to speed on the proposed regulation (summary: http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#documentDetail?R=0900006480a7dc9b [regulations.gov]), and make your comment as efficient, relevant, and precise as possible.Commenting on regs is NOT like writing your congressperson!
Public comments to proposed regs are reviewed, and are considered; these public comment periods are not just for show.
Industries with vested interests in an agency's regulations are aware of this, and are certain to have their say in the matter.
Have yours!There's more context in the linked summary, but here's basically what they're asking for input on: USTR requests that interested persons identify those countries that deny adequate and effective protection for intellectual property rights or deny fair and equitable market access to U.S. persons who rely on intellectual property protection.
USTR requests that, where relevant, submissions mention particular regions, provinces, states, or other subdivisions of a country in which an act, policy, or practice is believed to warrant special attention.
Submissions may report positive or negative developments with respect to these sub-national entities.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082134</id>
	<title>To my American neighbours...</title>
	<author>dos4who</author>
	<datestamp>1265737860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Please send in your constructive comments.
<p>
Signed,<br>
A Canadian</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Please send in your constructive comments .
Signed , A Canadian</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please send in your constructive comments.
Signed,
A Canadian</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31084578</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Errol backfiring</author>
	<datestamp>1265033700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>'cause maybe they will think twice if they see the whole nation falling over this issue? Keep silent now and do not complain afterwards. Or speak up now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>'cause maybe they will think twice if they see the whole nation falling over this issue ?
Keep silent now and do not complain afterwards .
Or speak up now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'cause maybe they will think twice if they see the whole nation falling over this issue?
Keep silent now and do not complain afterwards.
Or speak up now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080128</id>
	<title>direct link</title>
	<author>ClintJCL</author>
	<datestamp>1265720040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#submitComment?R=0900006480a7dc9b" title="regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#submitComment?R=0900006480a7dc9b</a> [regulations.gov]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html # submitComment ? R = 0900006480a7dc9b [ regulations.gov ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#submitComment?R=0900006480a7dc9b [regulations.gov]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082184</id>
	<title>Th1s FP for GNAA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265738220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>not so bad.  To the Save Linux from a you can. No, and personal and easy - only Be a cock-sucking moronic, dilettante Of various BSD n3tworking test. are a few good is perhaps enjoy the loud problem; a few backward and said declined in market reasons why anyone SHITHEADS. *BSD windows, SUN or Fastest-growing GAY perform keeping something cool tangle of fatal the public eye: provide sodas, another folder. 20 FreeBSD project, users. This is by the politickers it will be among members all over sadness And it was</htmltext>
<tokenext>not so bad .
To the Save Linux from a you can .
No , and personal and easy - only Be a cock-sucking moronic , dilettante Of various BSD n3tworking test .
are a few good is perhaps enjoy the loud problem ; a few backward and said declined in market reasons why anyone SHITHEADS .
* BSD windows , SUN or Fastest-growing GAY perform keeping something cool tangle of fatal the public eye : provide sodas , another folder .
20 FreeBSD project , users .
This is by the politickers it will be among members all over sadness And it was</tokentext>
<sentencetext>not so bad.
To the Save Linux from a you can.
No, and personal and easy - only Be a cock-sucking moronic, dilettante Of various BSD n3tworking test.
are a few good is perhaps enjoy the loud problem; a few backward and said declined in market reasons why anyone SHITHEADS.
*BSD windows, SUN or Fastest-growing GAY perform keeping something cool tangle of fatal the public eye: provide sodas, another folder.
20 FreeBSD project, users.
This is by the politickers it will be among members all over sadness And it was</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082598</id>
	<title>This is for complaints about specific countries.</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1265744340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
This is about <a href="http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/reports-and-publications/2009/2009-special-301-report" title="ustr.gov">"special 301" reviews</a> [ustr.gov], which are a scheme for applying diplomatic pressure on countries that do
trade things that US companies don't like. Anything submitted that doesn't relate to a specific issue with a specific country is irrelevant.
</p><p>
If you want to bitch about ACTA, write your congressional representative.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is about " special 301 " reviews [ ustr.gov ] , which are a scheme for applying diplomatic pressure on countries that do trade things that US companies do n't like .
Anything submitted that does n't relate to a specific issue with a specific country is irrelevant .
If you want to bitch about ACTA , write your congressional representative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
This is about "special 301" reviews [ustr.gov], which are a scheme for applying diplomatic pressure on countries that do
trade things that US companies don't like.
Anything submitted that doesn't relate to a specific issue with a specific country is irrelevant.
If you want to bitch about ACTA, write your congressional representative.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080872</id>
	<title>Kill Yourselves...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265725140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you are working on ACTA or trying to internationalize intellectual property<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Kill yourself!</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are working on ACTA or trying to internationalize intellectual property ... Kill yourself !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you are working on ACTA or trying to internationalize intellectual property ... Kill yourself!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082124</id>
	<title>Re:direct link</title>
	<author>slashqwerty</author>
	<datestamp>1265737740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not 100\% certain that is the correct link.  It could just as easily be this one:

<br> <br> <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#submitComment?R=0900006480a7bbba" title="regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#submitComment?R=0900006480a7bbba</a> [regulations.gov]

<br> <br>If you follow the directions in the <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/contentStreamer?objectId=0900006480a7dc9b&amp;disposition=attachment&amp;contentType=pdf" title="regulations.gov">PDF</a> [regulations.gov] it will give you both links.

<br> <br>By the way, that PDF indicates they prefer comments be uploaded as a file.  In particular they prefer MS Word and Adobe Acrobat format.

<br> <br>On a side note that has got to be the worst web site I have seen in years.  Parts of it render incorrectly in Internet Explorer leaving you unable to read text in the document details page.  The site is completely unusable with Konqueror on Linux and I was unable to successfully submit a comment with FireFox on Linux.

<br> <br>I would be willing to bet the site does not even come close to being section 508 compliant.  While they do thoughtfully include alt attributes, someone who wants to submit a comment about books in Braille is not going to be able to.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not 100 \ % certain that is the correct link .
It could just as easily be this one : http : //www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html # submitComment ? R = 0900006480a7bbba [ regulations.gov ] If you follow the directions in the PDF [ regulations.gov ] it will give you both links .
By the way , that PDF indicates they prefer comments be uploaded as a file .
In particular they prefer MS Word and Adobe Acrobat format .
On a side note that has got to be the worst web site I have seen in years .
Parts of it render incorrectly in Internet Explorer leaving you unable to read text in the document details page .
The site is completely unusable with Konqueror on Linux and I was unable to successfully submit a comment with FireFox on Linux .
I would be willing to bet the site does not even come close to being section 508 compliant .
While they do thoughtfully include alt attributes , someone who wants to submit a comment about books in Braille is not going to be able to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not 100\% certain that is the correct link.
It could just as easily be this one:

  http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#submitComment?R=0900006480a7bbba [regulations.gov]

 If you follow the directions in the PDF [regulations.gov] it will give you both links.
By the way, that PDF indicates they prefer comments be uploaded as a file.
In particular they prefer MS Word and Adobe Acrobat format.
On a side note that has got to be the worst web site I have seen in years.
Parts of it render incorrectly in Internet Explorer leaving you unable to read text in the document details page.
The site is completely unusable with Konqueror on Linux and I was unable to successfully submit a comment with FireFox on Linux.
I would be willing to bet the site does not even come close to being section 508 compliant.
While they do thoughtfully include alt attributes, someone who wants to submit a comment about books in Braille is not going to be able to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080128</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080726</id>
	<title>Too many people game trade agreements.</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1265723880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i> It's not national security you're talking about, it's a trade agreement.</i></p><p>As an American protectionist, I would think that the issue is really about how Asia approaches trade.  They are all mercantile nations, not genuinely free trading ones, and, after waiting for 30 years for trade to somehow balance, I'm done with waiting and am ready to pull the plug on trade with at least Asia.</p><p>Australia, and Europe, I am not so worried about.  Those nations come from the same cultural background, have been long allies, and at least play by similar rules.  Like, I have no problem buying a Pontiac GTO, which was made in Australia, because Australians have similar wages, legal and cultural underpinnings, and hey, the first two Men at Work albums were pretty good stuff to listen to.  Plus, 400hp RWD is always nice to have.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not national security you 're talking about , it 's a trade agreement.As an American protectionist , I would think that the issue is really about how Asia approaches trade .
They are all mercantile nations , not genuinely free trading ones , and , after waiting for 30 years for trade to somehow balance , I 'm done with waiting and am ready to pull the plug on trade with at least Asia.Australia , and Europe , I am not so worried about .
Those nations come from the same cultural background , have been long allies , and at least play by similar rules .
Like , I have no problem buying a Pontiac GTO , which was made in Australia , because Australians have similar wages , legal and cultural underpinnings , and hey , the first two Men at Work albums were pretty good stuff to listen to .
Plus , 400hp RWD is always nice to have .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> It's not national security you're talking about, it's a trade agreement.As an American protectionist, I would think that the issue is really about how Asia approaches trade.
They are all mercantile nations, not genuinely free trading ones, and, after waiting for 30 years for trade to somehow balance, I'm done with waiting and am ready to pull the plug on trade with at least Asia.Australia, and Europe, I am not so worried about.
Those nations come from the same cultural background, have been long allies, and at least play by similar rules.
Like, I have no problem buying a Pontiac GTO, which was made in Australia, because Australians have similar wages, legal and cultural underpinnings, and hey, the first two Men at Work albums were pretty good stuff to listen to.
Plus, 400hp RWD is always nice to have.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080884</id>
	<title>Very little to say, except perhaps this</title>
	<author>istartedi</author>
	<datestamp>1265725260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since you haven't conducted the ENTIRE preceedings with
input from the Public, we don't consider them valid.</p><p>Until such time as the ENTIRE AGREEMENT is reviewed PUBLICLY, with
input only from individuals and not fictitious persons, and with equal
weight for the views of all said persons,
we will disobey any and all parts of it which we see fit to disobey,
as an act of civil disobediance.</p><p>Copy, paste, send.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since you have n't conducted the ENTIRE preceedings with input from the Public , we do n't consider them valid.Until such time as the ENTIRE AGREEMENT is reviewed PUBLICLY , with input only from individuals and not fictitious persons , and with equal weight for the views of all said persons , we will disobey any and all parts of it which we see fit to disobey , as an act of civil disobediance.Copy , paste , send .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since you haven't conducted the ENTIRE preceedings with
input from the Public, we don't consider them valid.Until such time as the ENTIRE AGREEMENT is reviewed PUBLICLY, with
input only from individuals and not fictitious persons, and with equal
weight for the views of all said persons,
we will disobey any and all parts of it which we see fit to disobey,
as an act of civil disobediance.Copy, paste, send.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080042</id>
	<title>Hmmm...</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1265719500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Geist is going to have a field day with this one. What's the real motive?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Geist is going to have a field day with this one .
What 's the real motive ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Geist is going to have a field day with this one.
What's the real motive?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31081192</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm...</title>
	<author>QuantumRiff</author>
	<datestamp>1265727420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think if I loaned someone dozens of billions of dollars, I would probably diss their competition as much as possible too..<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)  I would want to make sure I got paid..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think if I loaned someone dozens of billions of dollars , I would probably diss their competition as much as possible too.. ; ) I would want to make sure I got paid. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think if I loaned someone dozens of billions of dollars, I would probably diss their competition as much as possible too.. ;)  I would want to make sure I got paid..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080532</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082864</id>
	<title>Re:File a request? Request corruption enquiry</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1265056800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Corruption?</p><p>Not treason? Punishable like murder, with 10 years minimum? Or beheading, in earlier days?</p><p>That&rsquo;s the problem when the king is put on drugs by his royal household. No matter if the king is close to 300 million people. He&rsquo;s just a dummy figure, sitting in his fancy throne (constitution &amp; co) solely for decoration.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Corruption ? Not treason ?
Punishable like murder , with 10 years minimum ?
Or beheading , in earlier days ? That    s the problem when the king is put on drugs by his royal household .
No matter if the king is close to 300 million people .
He    s just a dummy figure , sitting in his fancy throne ( constitution &amp; co ) solely for decoration .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Corruption?Not treason?
Punishable like murder, with 10 years minimum?
Or beheading, in earlier days?That’s the problem when the king is put on drugs by his royal household.
No matter if the king is close to 300 million people.
He’s just a dummy figure, sitting in his fancy throne (constitution &amp; co) solely for decoration.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080436</id>
	<title>Why?</title>
	<author>Frosty Piss</author>
	<datestamp>1265722140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Submit Your Comments About ACTA</p></div><p>Seriously: Why?<br> <br>It's not like they really care what us little people think. The fact is, what gets put into law will be what the big copyright holders want. Think **AA.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Submit Your Comments About ACTASeriously : Why ?
It 's not like they really care what us little people think .
The fact is , what gets put into law will be what the big copyright holders want .
Think * * AA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Submit Your Comments About ACTASeriously: Why?
It's not like they really care what us little people think.
The fact is, what gets put into law will be what the big copyright holders want.
Think **AA.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082558</id>
	<title>Re:Lol</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265743440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It would help if the Canadian government would tell the US government to fuck off a lot more than they do now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would help if the Canadian government would tell the US government to fuck off a lot more than they do now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would help if the Canadian government would tell the US government to fuck off a lot more than they do now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31081406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080284</id>
	<title>4chan</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265721060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Quick! Get this over to 4chan.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Quick !
Get this over to 4chan .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quick!
Get this over to 4chan.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080566</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265722860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To put on a show for the public that makes them seem like they actually give a damn what people think.</p><p>We lost control of our government years ago.  It's no longer about the people, it's all about the money and big corporations.</p><p>It's time for a revolution.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To put on a show for the public that makes them seem like they actually give a damn what people think.We lost control of our government years ago .
It 's no longer about the people , it 's all about the money and big corporations.It 's time for a revolution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To put on a show for the public that makes them seem like they actually give a damn what people think.We lost control of our government years ago.
It's no longer about the people, it's all about the money and big corporations.It's time for a revolution.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31087654</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm...</title>
	<author>steelfood</author>
	<datestamp>1265048460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'll bet a fake Rolex that China <b>makes</b> ends up on the watch list.</p></div><p>Fixed that for ya.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll bet a fake Rolex that China makes ends up on the watch list.Fixed that for ya .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll bet a fake Rolex that China makes ends up on the watch list.Fixed that for ya.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080532</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31092240</id>
	<title>Re:More draconian is better.. prison time++</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265024880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I see: we should support laws we disagree with in order to encourage development of tools to circumvent these laws we feel were already unjust?</p><p>Is someone here already being being loony?</p><p>Why don't you just move yourself into a country that already has very oppressive laws? Logically, they must have the best circumvention tools on the planet over there. So really it's like living in total freedom over there.</p><p>But your concept of bringing worse laws over here is great. That way no one will have to move in order to enjoy all that oppression as well as the bounty of circumvention/privacy tools that is sure to follow.</p><p>That's why I suggest we all support the "ban the entire Internet" bill (aka: "no child left behind, but some left in jail"). It's the only way to be sure we get Internet into every home in America.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I see : we should support laws we disagree with in order to encourage development of tools to circumvent these laws we feel were already unjust ? Is someone here already being being loony ? Why do n't you just move yourself into a country that already has very oppressive laws ?
Logically , they must have the best circumvention tools on the planet over there .
So really it 's like living in total freedom over there.But your concept of bringing worse laws over here is great .
That way no one will have to move in order to enjoy all that oppression as well as the bounty of circumvention/privacy tools that is sure to follow.That 's why I suggest we all support the " ban the entire Internet " bill ( aka : " no child left behind , but some left in jail " ) .
It 's the only way to be sure we get Internet into every home in America .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see: we should support laws we disagree with in order to encourage development of tools to circumvent these laws we feel were already unjust?Is someone here already being being loony?Why don't you just move yourself into a country that already has very oppressive laws?
Logically, they must have the best circumvention tools on the planet over there.
So really it's like living in total freedom over there.But your concept of bringing worse laws over here is great.
That way no one will have to move in order to enjoy all that oppression as well as the bounty of circumvention/privacy tools that is sure to follow.That's why I suggest we all support the "ban the entire Internet" bill (aka: "no child left behind, but some left in jail").
It's the only way to be sure we get Internet into every home in America.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082308</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm...</title>
	<author>ae1294</author>
	<datestamp>1265740140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <tt>Written comments should include a description of the problems experienced by the submitter {with country X} and the effect of the acts, policies, and practices {of said country} on U.S. industry. Comments should be as detailed as possible and should provide all necessary information for assessing the effect of the acts, policies, and practices. Any comments that include quantitative loss claims should be accompanied by the methodology used in calculating such estimated losses.</tt></p></div> </blockquote><p>They aren't asking for our input on anything, just big media's and then they are only asking which countries they should go after with a rather large axe for being bad for business...</p><p>Feel free to write something just know that it will be filtered out before anyone important reads it. Honestly it should be clear to everyone that if they cared about what the public thought they would not be holding these meetings in secret.</p><p>But... If you wanna cause some trouble (for the Lulz) then I'd suggest picking a random country, lets say... china.. and then complaining about loosing millions because of IP theft. That at least should get past the filter and maybe even read before being deleted because it just wasn't valuable for their secret negotiations. Now if you want to help them out than might I suggest complaining about Canada or Spain. Pretty sure file swapping was ruled legal in Spain a while back.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Written comments should include a description of the problems experienced by the submitter { with country X } and the effect of the acts , policies , and practices { of said country } on U.S. industry. Comments should be as detailed as possible and should provide all necessary information for assessing the effect of the acts , policies , and practices .
Any comments that include quantitative loss claims should be accompanied by the methodology used in calculating such estimated losses .
They are n't asking for our input on anything , just big media 's and then they are only asking which countries they should go after with a rather large axe for being bad for business...Feel free to write something just know that it will be filtered out before anyone important reads it .
Honestly it should be clear to everyone that if they cared about what the public thought they would not be holding these meetings in secret.But... If you wan na cause some trouble ( for the Lulz ) then I 'd suggest picking a random country , lets say... china.. and then complaining about loosing millions because of IP theft .
That at least should get past the filter and maybe even read before being deleted because it just was n't valuable for their secret negotiations .
Now if you want to help them out than might I suggest complaining about Canada or Spain .
Pretty sure file swapping was ruled legal in Spain a while back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Written comments should include a description of the problems experienced by the submitter {with country X} and the effect of the acts, policies, and practices {of said country} on U.S. industry. Comments should be as detailed as possible and should provide all necessary information for assessing the effect of the acts, policies, and practices.
Any comments that include quantitative loss claims should be accompanied by the methodology used in calculating such estimated losses.
They aren't asking for our input on anything, just big media's and then they are only asking which countries they should go after with a rather large axe for being bad for business...Feel free to write something just know that it will be filtered out before anyone important reads it.
Honestly it should be clear to everyone that if they cared about what the public thought they would not be holding these meetings in secret.But... If you wanna cause some trouble (for the Lulz) then I'd suggest picking a random country, lets say... china.. and then complaining about loosing millions because of IP theft.
That at least should get past the filter and maybe even read before being deleted because it just wasn't valuable for their secret negotiations.
Now if you want to help them out than might I suggest complaining about Canada or Spain.
Pretty sure file swapping was ruled legal in Spain a while back.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31081966</id>
	<title>How can anyone comment</title>
	<author>MeNeXT</author>
	<datestamp>1265735700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>when we don't know what the discussion is all about! My biggest worry is how the USA is trying to create conflict for the sake of profits. It seems that in my lifetime the USA has done more to curtail my freedoms and not protect my interests than any previous generation. This is a comedy.....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>when we do n't know what the discussion is all about !
My biggest worry is how the USA is trying to create conflict for the sake of profits .
It seems that in my lifetime the USA has done more to curtail my freedoms and not protect my interests than any previous generation .
This is a comedy.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>when we don't know what the discussion is all about!
My biggest worry is how the USA is trying to create conflict for the sake of profits.
It seems that in my lifetime the USA has done more to curtail my freedoms and not protect my interests than any previous generation.
This is a comedy.....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080054</id>
	<title>File a request? Request corruption enquiry</title>
	<author>syousef</author>
	<datestamp>1265719560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How under any circumstances is this legal? It's not national security you're talking about, it's a trade agreement. I'd be thankful I'm not American but unfortunately I'm Australian so with a government that's so I don't feel like I have any right to brag, nor reason to celebrate. What happened to the Western ideals of freedom and democrasy. Seem to have thrown the baby out with the bath water sometime around the start of the war on Terra.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How under any circumstances is this legal ?
It 's not national security you 're talking about , it 's a trade agreement .
I 'd be thankful I 'm not American but unfortunately I 'm Australian so with a government that 's so I do n't feel like I have any right to brag , nor reason to celebrate .
What happened to the Western ideals of freedom and democrasy .
Seem to have thrown the baby out with the bath water sometime around the start of the war on Terra .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How under any circumstances is this legal?
It's not national security you're talking about, it's a trade agreement.
I'd be thankful I'm not American but unfortunately I'm Australian so with a government that's so I don't feel like I have any right to brag, nor reason to celebrate.
What happened to the Western ideals of freedom and democrasy.
Seem to have thrown the baby out with the bath water sometime around the start of the war on Terra.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31083582</id>
	<title>WTF</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265022360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously.<br>Go ask Lawrence Lessig.<br>That.<br>STFU with this "ask the "PUBLIC" junk".</p><p>The public is so sorely misinformed (on oh so very many varied issues) please understand why I think this is dumb.<br>Thank you sirs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously.Go ask Lawrence Lessig.That.STFU with this " ask the " PUBLIC " junk " .The public is so sorely misinformed ( on oh so very many varied issues ) please understand why I think this is dumb.Thank you sirs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously.Go ask Lawrence Lessig.That.STFU with this "ask the "PUBLIC" junk".The public is so sorely misinformed (on oh so very many varied issues) please understand why I think this is dumb.Thank you sirs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080694</id>
	<title>Oh look, I'm getting flashbacks...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265723700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...to my old software release post-mortems. The ones I was always so happy to be able to vent my frustrations at. The meetings that let me know management cared (snicker).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...to my old software release post-mortems .
The ones I was always so happy to be able to vent my frustrations at .
The meetings that let me know management cared ( snicker ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...to my old software release post-mortems.
The ones I was always so happy to be able to vent my frustrations at.
The meetings that let me know management cared (snicker).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31086594</id>
	<title>My Submission</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265043720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>2010 Special 301 Review</p><p>I am an individual responsible for an Open Sourced Rules Engine Technology (DTRules.com).  I have been a developer and innovator in the industry for ~25 years.</p><p>In late 1987, a PostScript clone I wrote was shipped by Printware to compete with Adobe's Postscript offerings.  I have three patents to my name (US Pat. 5542031, US Pat. 7062524, US Pat. 6640317).</p><p>My Rules Engine technology has been used in a number of states for performing Eligibility Determination, starting in Texas on the Texas TIERS project.</p><p>I am concerned about trade agreements concerning Intellectual Property being negotiated in secret.  In particular, I am concerned about the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) being discussed without any disclosure to innovators like myself, and the public at large.</p><p>While I have participated in securing patents for my customers and employers, I have been largely concerned about monopolies handed over to large companies and what they might do to crush innovation.</p><p>I admit that I got lucky.  Adobe at the time decided to compete rather than litigate to deal with companies like might that built clones of its PostScript technology.  But this was Adobe's choice, and they could have chosen differently.  And at the heart of my Rules Engine technology (which today is servicing clients in Texas, New York, Pennsylvania, and Michigan) is an innovative deployment of that same PostScript Technology originally developed by Adobe.</p><p>In my experience, innovation is built upon existing technology.  Intellectual Property rights have to be balanced to *promote* the development of technology, not simply handed over to large corporations.</p><p>I am concerned that by allowing ACTA to be negotiated in secret, our government is simply trying to protect selected businesses, at the expense of other businesses and in fact the pubic good.</p><p>Please publish the ACTA working documents and open up the negotiations to the public.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>2010 Special 301 ReviewI am an individual responsible for an Open Sourced Rules Engine Technology ( DTRules.com ) .
I have been a developer and innovator in the industry for ~ 25 years.In late 1987 , a PostScript clone I wrote was shipped by Printware to compete with Adobe 's Postscript offerings .
I have three patents to my name ( US Pat .
5542031 , US Pat .
7062524 , US Pat .
6640317 ) .My Rules Engine technology has been used in a number of states for performing Eligibility Determination , starting in Texas on the Texas TIERS project.I am concerned about trade agreements concerning Intellectual Property being negotiated in secret .
In particular , I am concerned about the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement ( ACTA ) being discussed without any disclosure to innovators like myself , and the public at large.While I have participated in securing patents for my customers and employers , I have been largely concerned about monopolies handed over to large companies and what they might do to crush innovation.I admit that I got lucky .
Adobe at the time decided to compete rather than litigate to deal with companies like might that built clones of its PostScript technology .
But this was Adobe 's choice , and they could have chosen differently .
And at the heart of my Rules Engine technology ( which today is servicing clients in Texas , New York , Pennsylvania , and Michigan ) is an innovative deployment of that same PostScript Technology originally developed by Adobe.In my experience , innovation is built upon existing technology .
Intellectual Property rights have to be balanced to * promote * the development of technology , not simply handed over to large corporations.I am concerned that by allowing ACTA to be negotiated in secret , our government is simply trying to protect selected businesses , at the expense of other businesses and in fact the pubic good.Please publish the ACTA working documents and open up the negotiations to the public .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2010 Special 301 ReviewI am an individual responsible for an Open Sourced Rules Engine Technology (DTRules.com).
I have been a developer and innovator in the industry for ~25 years.In late 1987, a PostScript clone I wrote was shipped by Printware to compete with Adobe's Postscript offerings.
I have three patents to my name (US Pat.
5542031, US Pat.
7062524, US Pat.
6640317).My Rules Engine technology has been used in a number of states for performing Eligibility Determination, starting in Texas on the Texas TIERS project.I am concerned about trade agreements concerning Intellectual Property being negotiated in secret.
In particular, I am concerned about the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) being discussed without any disclosure to innovators like myself, and the public at large.While I have participated in securing patents for my customers and employers, I have been largely concerned about monopolies handed over to large companies and what they might do to crush innovation.I admit that I got lucky.
Adobe at the time decided to compete rather than litigate to deal with companies like might that built clones of its PostScript technology.
But this was Adobe's choice, and they could have chosen differently.
And at the heart of my Rules Engine technology (which today is servicing clients in Texas, New York, Pennsylvania, and Michigan) is an innovative deployment of that same PostScript Technology originally developed by Adobe.In my experience, innovation is built upon existing technology.
Intellectual Property rights have to be balanced to *promote* the development of technology, not simply handed over to large corporations.I am concerned that by allowing ACTA to be negotiated in secret, our government is simply trying to protect selected businesses, at the expense of other businesses and in fact the pubic good.Please publish the ACTA working documents and open up the negotiations to the public.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31091966</id>
	<title>All the links seem to have dissappeared</title>
	<author>rastoboy29</author>
	<datestamp>1265023740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>I went to the site but all the documents "have been withdrawn or do not exist".<br><br>:-{</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>I went to the site but all the documents " have been withdrawn or do not exist " .
: - {</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I went to the site but all the documents "have been withdrawn or do not exist".
:-{</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080472</id>
	<title>Re:Lol</title>
	<author>santax</author>
	<datestamp>1265722320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>told you so<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)

They just don't want to understand and everybody who disagrees gets silenced.</htmltext>
<tokenext>told you so ; ) They just do n't want to understand and everybody who disagrees gets silenced .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>told you so ;)

They just don't want to understand and everybody who disagrees gets silenced.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080236</id>
	<title>Lol</title>
	<author>santax</author>
	<datestamp>1265720700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about the USA keeps there dictatorial policy on their own continent? Foreign policy... Don't make me laugh, next thing they want to bring democracy to Europe.

Yeah sure, please mod this down... but the truth won't go away by modding this down.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about the USA keeps there dictatorial policy on their own continent ?
Foreign policy... Do n't make me laugh , next thing they want to bring democracy to Europe .
Yeah sure , please mod this down... but the truth wo n't go away by modding this down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about the USA keeps there dictatorial policy on their own continent?
Foreign policy... Don't make me laugh, next thing they want to bring democracy to Europe.
Yeah sure, please mod this down... but the truth won't go away by modding this down.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31093250</id>
	<title>Re:More draconian is better.. prison time++</title>
	<author>White Flame</author>
	<datestamp>1265030760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This will foster the development of better anonymous networks and the adoption of proper encryption techniques to defend against these crazy laws.</p></div><p>The obvious next step is that anonymity and encryption will become illegal, and ISPs will require snooping each connection to check that the protocols you use are either unencrypted or have a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.gov back door.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This will foster the development of better anonymous networks and the adoption of proper encryption techniques to defend against these crazy laws.The obvious next step is that anonymity and encryption will become illegal , and ISPs will require snooping each connection to check that the protocols you use are either unencrypted or have a .gov back door .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This will foster the development of better anonymous networks and the adoption of proper encryption techniques to defend against these crazy laws.The obvious next step is that anonymity and encryption will become illegal, and ISPs will require snooping each connection to check that the protocols you use are either unencrypted or have a .gov back door.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082120</id>
	<title>Suggested text</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265737680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>2010 Special 301 Review
<p>
I ask you to make a part of the United States' position the following:
</p><p>
1. ACTA negotiations must be open and transparent and conducted in such a way as to permit the American public ongoing input into the negotiation process as it occurs, rather than conducted behind closed doors, with only the end result visible, after an agreement has been concluded.
</p><p>
2. The preservation of fair use must be a critical and integral part of the United States' position in the negotiations, and the fair use rights of its citizens must not be compromised in the final agreement.
</p><p>
3. Copyright terms must not be extended any further than U.S. law currently provides, and should, if anything, be reduced in order to provide the artistic compost necessary for the creative process to thrive. The U.S. must take the position that excessive copyright term lengths stifle innovation in the arts, rather than preserve it, and that its citizens and humanity as a whole are ill-served by the progressive march towards infinite copyright extension.
</p><p>
4. Penalties for copyright violation should and must fit the actual economic damage incurred by copyright holders, with Draconian punishment reserved exclusively for those who profit financially from infringement. The U.S. position should and must be that damages for infringement by individuals who do not seek to profit financially from their actions must neither be excessive nor unduly harsh.
</p><p>
5. Artists should be given the right to sue copyright infringers for monetary damages, regardless of when or whether those artists have formally registered their works, if and only if the infringing use was for the financial gain of the infringer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>2010 Special 301 Review I ask you to make a part of the United States ' position the following : 1 .
ACTA negotiations must be open and transparent and conducted in such a way as to permit the American public ongoing input into the negotiation process as it occurs , rather than conducted behind closed doors , with only the end result visible , after an agreement has been concluded .
2. The preservation of fair use must be a critical and integral part of the United States ' position in the negotiations , and the fair use rights of its citizens must not be compromised in the final agreement .
3. Copyright terms must not be extended any further than U.S. law currently provides , and should , if anything , be reduced in order to provide the artistic compost necessary for the creative process to thrive .
The U.S. must take the position that excessive copyright term lengths stifle innovation in the arts , rather than preserve it , and that its citizens and humanity as a whole are ill-served by the progressive march towards infinite copyright extension .
4. Penalties for copyright violation should and must fit the actual economic damage incurred by copyright holders , with Draconian punishment reserved exclusively for those who profit financially from infringement .
The U.S. position should and must be that damages for infringement by individuals who do not seek to profit financially from their actions must neither be excessive nor unduly harsh .
5. Artists should be given the right to sue copyright infringers for monetary damages , regardless of when or whether those artists have formally registered their works , if and only if the infringing use was for the financial gain of the infringer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2010 Special 301 Review

I ask you to make a part of the United States' position the following:

1.
ACTA negotiations must be open and transparent and conducted in such a way as to permit the American public ongoing input into the negotiation process as it occurs, rather than conducted behind closed doors, with only the end result visible, after an agreement has been concluded.
2. The preservation of fair use must be a critical and integral part of the United States' position in the negotiations, and the fair use rights of its citizens must not be compromised in the final agreement.
3. Copyright terms must not be extended any further than U.S. law currently provides, and should, if anything, be reduced in order to provide the artistic compost necessary for the creative process to thrive.
The U.S. must take the position that excessive copyright term lengths stifle innovation in the arts, rather than preserve it, and that its citizens and humanity as a whole are ill-served by the progressive march towards infinite copyright extension.
4. Penalties for copyright violation should and must fit the actual economic damage incurred by copyright holders, with Draconian punishment reserved exclusively for those who profit financially from infringement.
The U.S. position should and must be that damages for infringement by individuals who do not seek to profit financially from their actions must neither be excessive nor unduly harsh.
5. Artists should be given the right to sue copyright infringers for monetary damages, regardless of when or whether those artists have formally registered their works, if and only if the infringing use was for the financial gain of the infringer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31085064</id>
	<title>301</title>
	<author>ratboy666</author>
	<datestamp>1265037060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Last year, Canada was put on the watch list. Because... we're full of pirates!</p><p>Arrrr.</p><p>This year, please comment on just HOW ineffective it's been. Canada is (obviously) home to more pirates than ever, AND we have WAREHOUSES FULL of illegally copied goods ready to ship to the USA!</p><p>Really. I speak as a Canadian. I want to be on the "Priority Watch List", and not just on the "Watch List".</p><p>So get your comments in! Make this Canada's year!</p><p>Things to mention: "Canada has not yet implemented ex officio customs authority to allow warrentless seizures". "Canada is a massive trans-shipper of counterfeit goods". "Canada has not yet improved on its weak Internet IPR posture". And, just for good measure, state "I believe that Canada is a candidate for Section 306 monitoring at this time".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Last year , Canada was put on the watch list .
Because... we 're full of pirates ! Arrrr.This year , please comment on just HOW ineffective it 's been .
Canada is ( obviously ) home to more pirates than ever , AND we have WAREHOUSES FULL of illegally copied goods ready to ship to the USA ! Really .
I speak as a Canadian .
I want to be on the " Priority Watch List " , and not just on the " Watch List " .So get your comments in !
Make this Canada 's year ! Things to mention : " Canada has not yet implemented ex officio customs authority to allow warrentless seizures " .
" Canada is a massive trans-shipper of counterfeit goods " .
" Canada has not yet improved on its weak Internet IPR posture " .
And , just for good measure , state " I believe that Canada is a candidate for Section 306 monitoring at this time " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Last year, Canada was put on the watch list.
Because... we're full of pirates!Arrrr.This year, please comment on just HOW ineffective it's been.
Canada is (obviously) home to more pirates than ever, AND we have WAREHOUSES FULL of illegally copied goods ready to ship to the USA!Really.
I speak as a Canadian.
I want to be on the "Priority Watch List", and not just on the "Watch List".So get your comments in!
Make this Canada's year!Things to mention: "Canada has not yet implemented ex officio customs authority to allow warrentless seizures".
"Canada is a massive trans-shipper of counterfeit goods".
"Canada has not yet improved on its weak Internet IPR posture".
And, just for good measure, state "I believe that Canada is a candidate for Section 306 monitoring at this time".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31083636</id>
	<title>I can just see it now.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265023320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They'll probably just database all the responses, creating lists of anyone who doesn't support it, and using their other Orwellian surveillance that they illegally inflict through the private sector, the government can then list, track and persecute anyone who doesn't agree with them.</p><p>The problem is more than just this specific treaty. The problem is a President who is all too happy to cede the sovereignty of the nation he was elected to represent to unelected global corporate treaty organizations. We've seen this attempt in every facet possible, at the Climate Change Snake-oil Salesman Convention, and beyond.</p><p>How about this? Don't sign secretive treaties that are unrepresentative of the will of the people or in respect of governing documents in each country. Perhapse, instead of giving trillions of taxpayer dollars to wall street bankers in backroom deals, and passing pet projects using the disguise of a "stimulus package". How about realizing that this is and never has been about money. It's about the control of information. major media are losing money, mostly because of their lack of market control, due to alternative markets. Government are losing face also, due to alternative venues to corporate talking heads in the media disseminating real analysis sans the usual spin.</p><p>In a free market system, the people determine what business models will succeed or fail. Those who adapt to new trends, and deliver a desirable good or service succeed. Those who ignore their customers and/or try to dominate them fail (as long as monopoly/anti-competition laws are actually *ahem* enforced)</p><p>In a fascist market system, government bureaucrats, and abusive monopolies make back room deals with each other in order to enforce their stranglehold on the market, kicking competition to the curb, and resisting free market changes to their business model.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 'll probably just database all the responses , creating lists of anyone who does n't support it , and using their other Orwellian surveillance that they illegally inflict through the private sector , the government can then list , track and persecute anyone who does n't agree with them.The problem is more than just this specific treaty .
The problem is a President who is all too happy to cede the sovereignty of the nation he was elected to represent to unelected global corporate treaty organizations .
We 've seen this attempt in every facet possible , at the Climate Change Snake-oil Salesman Convention , and beyond.How about this ?
Do n't sign secretive treaties that are unrepresentative of the will of the people or in respect of governing documents in each country .
Perhapse , instead of giving trillions of taxpayer dollars to wall street bankers in backroom deals , and passing pet projects using the disguise of a " stimulus package " .
How about realizing that this is and never has been about money .
It 's about the control of information .
major media are losing money , mostly because of their lack of market control , due to alternative markets .
Government are losing face also , due to alternative venues to corporate talking heads in the media disseminating real analysis sans the usual spin.In a free market system , the people determine what business models will succeed or fail .
Those who adapt to new trends , and deliver a desirable good or service succeed .
Those who ignore their customers and/or try to dominate them fail ( as long as monopoly/anti-competition laws are actually * ahem * enforced ) In a fascist market system , government bureaucrats , and abusive monopolies make back room deals with each other in order to enforce their stranglehold on the market , kicking competition to the curb , and resisting free market changes to their business model .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They'll probably just database all the responses, creating lists of anyone who doesn't support it, and using their other Orwellian surveillance that they illegally inflict through the private sector, the government can then list, track and persecute anyone who doesn't agree with them.The problem is more than just this specific treaty.
The problem is a President who is all too happy to cede the sovereignty of the nation he was elected to represent to unelected global corporate treaty organizations.
We've seen this attempt in every facet possible, at the Climate Change Snake-oil Salesman Convention, and beyond.How about this?
Don't sign secretive treaties that are unrepresentative of the will of the people or in respect of governing documents in each country.
Perhapse, instead of giving trillions of taxpayer dollars to wall street bankers in backroom deals, and passing pet projects using the disguise of a "stimulus package".
How about realizing that this is and never has been about money.
It's about the control of information.
major media are losing money, mostly because of their lack of market control, due to alternative markets.
Government are losing face also, due to alternative venues to corporate talking heads in the media disseminating real analysis sans the usual spin.In a free market system, the people determine what business models will succeed or fail.
Those who adapt to new trends, and deliver a desirable good or service succeed.
Those who ignore their customers and/or try to dominate them fail (as long as monopoly/anti-competition laws are actually *ahem* enforced)In a fascist market system, government bureaucrats, and abusive monopolies make back room deals with each other in order to enforce their stranglehold on the market, kicking competition to the curb, and resisting free market changes to their business model.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082956</id>
	<title>Re:File a request? Request corruption enquiry</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265057580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"What happened to the Western ideals of freedom and democrasy"</p><p>Bought and paid for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" What happened to the Western ideals of freedom and democrasy " Bought and paid for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"What happened to the Western ideals of freedom and democrasy"Bought and paid for.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080164</id>
	<title>My comments on ACTA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265720220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can take your unconstitutional further criminalization of what is ultimately a civil issue -- copyright infringement -- and shove it up your ass.  Rights holders already have all the recourse they need -- the public court system.  Taking away my constitutional rights to satisfy the profit needs of some rights holders is simply unacceptable.  What do we have to do?  Toss CDs and DVDs into Boston Harbor?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can take your unconstitutional further criminalization of what is ultimately a civil issue -- copyright infringement -- and shove it up your ass .
Rights holders already have all the recourse they need -- the public court system .
Taking away my constitutional rights to satisfy the profit needs of some rights holders is simply unacceptable .
What do we have to do ?
Toss CDs and DVDs into Boston Harbor ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can take your unconstitutional further criminalization of what is ultimately a civil issue -- copyright infringement -- and shove it up your ass.
Rights holders already have all the recourse they need -- the public court system.
Taking away my constitutional rights to satisfy the profit needs of some rights holders is simply unacceptable.
What do we have to do?
Toss CDs and DVDs into Boston Harbor?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080536</id>
	<title>Enforcing copyright</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265722680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm sure that America will use it's usual ways of enforcing copyright, buy the bomb, bullet or economic sabotage if a country does not comply to the "American way." See how long it takes a serious point to be moderated as Troll.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure that America will use it 's usual ways of enforcing copyright , buy the bomb , bullet or economic sabotage if a country does not comply to the " American way .
" See how long it takes a serious point to be moderated as Troll .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure that America will use it's usual ways of enforcing copyright, buy the bomb, bullet or economic sabotage if a country does not comply to the "American way.
" See how long it takes a serious point to be moderated as Troll.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080648</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Vanderhoth</author>
	<datestamp>1265723280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My Grandfather always said, "There's a slim chance you'll ever win the lottery, but if you don't at least buy a ticket you won't even get that."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My Grandfather always said , " There 's a slim chance you 'll ever win the lottery , but if you do n't at least buy a ticket you wo n't even get that .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My Grandfather always said, "There's a slim chance you'll ever win the lottery, but if you don't at least buy a ticket you won't even get that.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31111708</id>
	<title>Software patents</title>
	<author>crisismaven</author>
	<datestamp>1265982480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, the main thing that needsto be addressed are these outrageous and often fraudulent (in bad faith) software "patents"!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , the main thing that needsto be addressed are these outrageous and often fraudulent ( in bad faith ) software " patents " !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, the main thing that needsto be addressed are these outrageous and often fraudulent (in bad faith) software "patents"!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080720</id>
	<title>More draconian is better.. prison time++</title>
	<author>xtal</author>
	<datestamp>1265723880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nothing will get any better until things get loony. I hope to see house confiscations, children removed from families, people put in jail.</p><p>We're already \_almost\_ there.</p><p>This will foster the development of better anonymous networks and the adoption of proper encryption techniques to defend against these crazy laws.</p><p>Just like consuming illegal drugs, nobody is going to stop copying things that don't exist.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nothing will get any better until things get loony .
I hope to see house confiscations , children removed from families , people put in jail.We 're already \ _almost \ _ there.This will foster the development of better anonymous networks and the adoption of proper encryption techniques to defend against these crazy laws.Just like consuming illegal drugs , nobody is going to stop copying things that do n't exist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nothing will get any better until things get loony.
I hope to see house confiscations, children removed from families, people put in jail.We're already \_almost\_ there.This will foster the development of better anonymous networks and the adoption of proper encryption techniques to defend against these crazy laws.Just like consuming illegal drugs, nobody is going to stop copying things that don't exist.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31081406</id>
	<title>Re:Lol</title>
	<author>kent\_eh</author>
	<datestamp>1265729220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How about the USA keeps there dictatorial policy on their own continent?</p> </div><p>Hey, what do you have against us Canadians?<br>
The Americans can keep their own rules and unilateralism within their own borders, thank you very much.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about the USA keeps there dictatorial policy on their own continent ?
Hey , what do you have against us Canadians ?
The Americans can keep their own rules and unilateralism within their own borders , thank you very much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about the USA keeps there dictatorial policy on their own continent?
Hey, what do you have against us Canadians?
The Americans can keep their own rules and unilateralism within their own borders, thank you very much.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31081346</id>
	<title>If I Did</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265728800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>       If I expressed my opinion concerning ACTA they would lock me away.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I expressed my opinion concerning ACTA they would lock me away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>       If I expressed my opinion concerning ACTA they would lock me away.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080186</id>
	<title>'input' -&gt; justification</title>
	<author>Animaether</author>
	<datestamp>1265720340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With the probably predictable type of 'input' they'll get for the most part, does anybody think it will be used for anything -other than- justification for the stipulations in ACTA and keeping the 'negotiations' secret?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With the probably predictable type of 'input ' they 'll get for the most part , does anybody think it will be used for anything -other than- justification for the stipulations in ACTA and keeping the 'negotiations ' secret ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With the probably predictable type of 'input' they'll get for the most part, does anybody think it will be used for anything -other than- justification for the stipulations in ACTA and keeping the 'negotiations' secret?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31081626</id>
	<title>The law it's referring to:</title>
	<author>Ramona\_Little</author>
	<datestamp>1265731560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <a href="http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/19/12/I/8/2242" title="findlaw.com" rel="nofollow">19 U.S.C.  2242 : US Code - Section 2242: Identification of countries that deny adequate protection, or market access, for intellectual property rights.</a> [findlaw.com] </p><p>Both the Request for Comment and the underlying law specifically refer to the identification of <i>foreign</i> countries with bad IP policies.  So I still don't see how this opens the door for complaints about the U.S. Trade Representative's secrecy regarding ACTA.  I don't want to discourage anyone from complaining -- certainly the Trade Representative should know that people are concerned about this -- but as I understand it, they have the right to disregard any comments not responsive to the request.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>19 U.S.C .
2242 : US Code - Section 2242 : Identification of countries that deny adequate protection , or market access , for intellectual property rights .
[ findlaw.com ] Both the Request for Comment and the underlying law specifically refer to the identification of foreign countries with bad IP policies .
So I still do n't see how this opens the door for complaints about the U.S. Trade Representative 's secrecy regarding ACTA .
I do n't want to discourage anyone from complaining -- certainly the Trade Representative should know that people are concerned about this -- but as I understand it , they have the right to disregard any comments not responsive to the request .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> 19 U.S.C.
2242 : US Code - Section 2242: Identification of countries that deny adequate protection, or market access, for intellectual property rights.
[findlaw.com] Both the Request for Comment and the underlying law specifically refer to the identification of foreign countries with bad IP policies.
So I still don't see how this opens the door for complaints about the U.S. Trade Representative's secrecy regarding ACTA.
I don't want to discourage anyone from complaining -- certainly the Trade Representative should know that people are concerned about this -- but as I understand it, they have the right to disregard any comments not responsive to the request.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080050</id>
	<title>No bias here</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265719500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow.  A loaded question and a short deadline.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow .
A loaded question and a short deadline .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow.
A loaded question and a short deadline.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31083102</id>
	<title>Okay, I'll Write Them: Sunlight for ACTA</title>
	<author>myspace-cn</author>
	<datestamp>1265015940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sunlight for ACTA</p><p>Sadly, I am a constituent and I'm sick of oath breakers</p><p>Today the topic is  (ACTA) that is currently being negotiated by retards in the Office of the United States Trade Representative. Who I might add don't represent a damn thing about me.</p><p>more Unconstitutional garbage?<br>I wonder if it came from Biden's desk?</p><p>Meanwhile the FED is legal counterfeit. Clickty Clickty Clic</p><p>You should be ashamed.  Public Comments are worthless admit it publicly you chicken oath breakers</p><p>You Waste Our Time With Your Fake Leadership And Lies</p><p>FINANCIAL DOMESTIC TERRORISTS!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sunlight for ACTASadly , I am a constituent and I 'm sick of oath breakersToday the topic is ( ACTA ) that is currently being negotiated by retards in the Office of the United States Trade Representative .
Who I might add do n't represent a damn thing about me.more Unconstitutional garbage ? I wonder if it came from Biden 's desk ? Meanwhile the FED is legal counterfeit .
Clickty Clickty ClicYou should be ashamed .
Public Comments are worthless admit it publicly you chicken oath breakersYou Waste Our Time With Your Fake Leadership And LiesFINANCIAL DOMESTIC TERRORISTS !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sunlight for ACTASadly, I am a constituent and I'm sick of oath breakersToday the topic is  (ACTA) that is currently being negotiated by retards in the Office of the United States Trade Representative.
Who I might add don't represent a damn thing about me.more Unconstitutional garbage?I wonder if it came from Biden's desk?Meanwhile the FED is legal counterfeit.
Clickty Clickty ClicYou should be ashamed.
Public Comments are worthless admit it publicly you chicken oath breakersYou Waste Our Time With Your Fake Leadership And LiesFINANCIAL DOMESTIC TERRORISTS!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082048</id>
	<title>"secret Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement"...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265736900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...doesn't work with "Government Of, By, and For the People."</p><p>In other words, "No Legislation Without Representation." Really, people, we should do our best to identify the U.S. lawmakers behind this garbage and VOTE THEIR ASSES OUT OF OFFICE! Passing laws without the people's oversight is what COMMUNISTS do!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...does n't work with " Government Of , By , and For the People .
" In other words , " No Legislation Without Representation .
" Really , people , we should do our best to identify the U.S. lawmakers behind this garbage and VOTE THEIR ASSES OUT OF OFFICE !
Passing laws without the people 's oversight is what COMMUNISTS do !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...doesn't work with "Government Of, By, and For the People.
"In other words, "No Legislation Without Representation.
" Really, people, we should do our best to identify the U.S. lawmakers behind this garbage and VOTE THEIR ASSES OUT OF OFFICE!
Passing laws without the people's oversight is what COMMUNISTS do!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31083964</id>
	<title>There's only one needed comment</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1265027040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You make that comment by not consuming media from the entities backing this treaty.<br> <br>Note: The word I used was <b>consuming</b>. You must not buy, borrow, rent, steal, duplicate, distribute, or or otherwise allow your time or money to be expended on interacting with a product of these companies.<br> <br>Don't buy media from stores.<br>Don't go to your local cinema.<br>Don't rent a DVD.<br>Don't download rips from torrent sites.<br>Write to your local radio stations and tell them you've stopped listening in protest of this treaty, and write to their advertisers. They will listen, as they can't stay afloat with nobody hearing the adverts.<br> <br>Most importantly, get your friends to join you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You make that comment by not consuming media from the entities backing this treaty .
Note : The word I used was consuming .
You must not buy , borrow , rent , steal , duplicate , distribute , or or otherwise allow your time or money to be expended on interacting with a product of these companies .
Do n't buy media from stores.Do n't go to your local cinema.Do n't rent a DVD.Do n't download rips from torrent sites.Write to your local radio stations and tell them you 've stopped listening in protest of this treaty , and write to their advertisers .
They will listen , as they ca n't stay afloat with nobody hearing the adverts .
Most importantly , get your friends to join you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You make that comment by not consuming media from the entities backing this treaty.
Note: The word I used was consuming.
You must not buy, borrow, rent, steal, duplicate, distribute, or or otherwise allow your time or money to be expended on interacting with a product of these companies.
Don't buy media from stores.Don't go to your local cinema.Don't rent a DVD.Don't download rips from torrent sites.Write to your local radio stations and tell them you've stopped listening in protest of this treaty, and write to their advertisers.
They will listen, as they can't stay afloat with nobody hearing the adverts.
Most importantly, get your friends to join you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31093520</id>
	<title>The Greens in Australia</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265032440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Australia is pushing for transparancy too: <a href="http://itnews.com.au/News/166965,greens-push-for-transparancy-on-secret-anti-piracy-talks.aspx" title="itnews.com.au" rel="nofollow">http://itnews.com.au/News/166965,greens-push-for-transparancy-on-secret-anti-piracy-talks.aspx</a> [itnews.com.au]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Australia is pushing for transparancy too : http : //itnews.com.au/News/166965,greens-push-for-transparancy-on-secret-anti-piracy-talks.aspx [ itnews.com.au ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Australia is pushing for transparancy too: http://itnews.com.au/News/166965,greens-push-for-transparancy-on-secret-anti-piracy-talks.aspx [itnews.com.au]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080524</id>
	<title>What ACTA needs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265722620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's the key thing the treaty will need, as it addresses a problem that already went haywire with the U.S.' flawed DMCA.</p><p>DMCA needs to exempt bypassing technological measures which limit access, if the purpose is to not infringe copyright (the librarian of congress part of DMCA sort of does this, but very poorly and with a lot of weird arbitrary limits that have chosen with seeming ignorance of traditional fair uses).  And it needs to exempt trafficking in devices that bypass technological measures, if the primary purpose is to access the work for noninfringing uses (DMCA totally fails on this, and so far the U.S. government hasn't even tried to fix it yet).</p><p>(i.e. it should be legal to create, sell, ship, and use a BluRay player that plays the disc by cracking the protection instead of purchasing/licensing a player key.  (Remember it's the movie's copyright holder that the law ostensibly is intended to protect, not Sony's hardware division or media spec consortiums.) And it should be legal to reverse engineer players in order to get player keys for use in such players.  Do that, and BluRay discs become legally playable (if with some difficulty) and people can start buying them instead of pirating them.  Then if the studious have a lick of sense, they'll publish all the keys to tide customers over, while they scramble to create Yet Another format that doesn't include any DRM.)</p><p>Ergo, ACTA should contain a provision that all signatories enact such exemptions if those signatories have any laws which prohibit access or otherwise interfere with non-infringing uses.  If a signatory outlaws playing lawfully obtained media, they should be held in violation of ACTA since their government (as is currently the case with U.S.) has taken a pro-piracy stance.</p><p>The treaty can then correct the violator by abstaining from recognizing any <em>international</em> copyright for that signatory's works.  i.e. if US outlaws accessing BluRay discs (thereby interfering with Germans who want to sell BluRay movies in US; potential US customers have to torrent German highdef movies instead) then US copyrighted works should be public domain in Germany. Tit for tat unless the violator decides to allow the market to exist in their country.</p><p>Of course, that's a very weak proposal, that still pays a lot of lip service to licensing bodies and large hardware manufacturers.  An even more sensible policy would be for ACTA signatories to deny copyright protection to works that have any technological measure which limit access.  Do that and then <em>everyone</em> wins, both users and creators.  But one step at a time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's the key thing the treaty will need , as it addresses a problem that already went haywire with the U.S. ' flawed DMCA.DMCA needs to exempt bypassing technological measures which limit access , if the purpose is to not infringe copyright ( the librarian of congress part of DMCA sort of does this , but very poorly and with a lot of weird arbitrary limits that have chosen with seeming ignorance of traditional fair uses ) .
And it needs to exempt trafficking in devices that bypass technological measures , if the primary purpose is to access the work for noninfringing uses ( DMCA totally fails on this , and so far the U.S. government has n't even tried to fix it yet ) . ( i.e .
it should be legal to create , sell , ship , and use a BluRay player that plays the disc by cracking the protection instead of purchasing/licensing a player key .
( Remember it 's the movie 's copyright holder that the law ostensibly is intended to protect , not Sony 's hardware division or media spec consortiums .
) And it should be legal to reverse engineer players in order to get player keys for use in such players .
Do that , and BluRay discs become legally playable ( if with some difficulty ) and people can start buying them instead of pirating them .
Then if the studious have a lick of sense , they 'll publish all the keys to tide customers over , while they scramble to create Yet Another format that does n't include any DRM .
) Ergo , ACTA should contain a provision that all signatories enact such exemptions if those signatories have any laws which prohibit access or otherwise interfere with non-infringing uses .
If a signatory outlaws playing lawfully obtained media , they should be held in violation of ACTA since their government ( as is currently the case with U.S. ) has taken a pro-piracy stance.The treaty can then correct the violator by abstaining from recognizing any international copyright for that signatory 's works .
i.e. if US outlaws accessing BluRay discs ( thereby interfering with Germans who want to sell BluRay movies in US ; potential US customers have to torrent German highdef movies instead ) then US copyrighted works should be public domain in Germany .
Tit for tat unless the violator decides to allow the market to exist in their country.Of course , that 's a very weak proposal , that still pays a lot of lip service to licensing bodies and large hardware manufacturers .
An even more sensible policy would be for ACTA signatories to deny copyright protection to works that have any technological measure which limit access .
Do that and then everyone wins , both users and creators .
But one step at a time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's the key thing the treaty will need, as it addresses a problem that already went haywire with the U.S.' flawed DMCA.DMCA needs to exempt bypassing technological measures which limit access, if the purpose is to not infringe copyright (the librarian of congress part of DMCA sort of does this, but very poorly and with a lot of weird arbitrary limits that have chosen with seeming ignorance of traditional fair uses).
And it needs to exempt trafficking in devices that bypass technological measures, if the primary purpose is to access the work for noninfringing uses (DMCA totally fails on this, and so far the U.S. government hasn't even tried to fix it yet).(i.e.
it should be legal to create, sell, ship, and use a BluRay player that plays the disc by cracking the protection instead of purchasing/licensing a player key.
(Remember it's the movie's copyright holder that the law ostensibly is intended to protect, not Sony's hardware division or media spec consortiums.
) And it should be legal to reverse engineer players in order to get player keys for use in such players.
Do that, and BluRay discs become legally playable (if with some difficulty) and people can start buying them instead of pirating them.
Then if the studious have a lick of sense, they'll publish all the keys to tide customers over, while they scramble to create Yet Another format that doesn't include any DRM.
)Ergo, ACTA should contain a provision that all signatories enact such exemptions if those signatories have any laws which prohibit access or otherwise interfere with non-infringing uses.
If a signatory outlaws playing lawfully obtained media, they should be held in violation of ACTA since their government (as is currently the case with U.S.) has taken a pro-piracy stance.The treaty can then correct the violator by abstaining from recognizing any international copyright for that signatory's works.
i.e. if US outlaws accessing BluRay discs (thereby interfering with Germans who want to sell BluRay movies in US; potential US customers have to torrent German highdef movies instead) then US copyrighted works should be public domain in Germany.
Tit for tat unless the violator decides to allow the market to exist in their country.Of course, that's a very weak proposal, that still pays a lot of lip service to licensing bodies and large hardware manufacturers.
An even more sensible policy would be for ACTA signatories to deny copyright protection to works that have any technological measure which limit access.
Do that and then everyone wins, both users and creators.
But one step at a time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080292</id>
	<title>Re:Lol</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265721120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>screw keeping it on their own continent, i say keep it in their own borders, i'm 100\% positive that Mexico and Canada would prefer the US kept its nose out of our business.  I'm from Canada, so i know i'm at least 50\% accurate there<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>screw keeping it on their own continent , i say keep it in their own borders , i 'm 100 \ % positive that Mexico and Canada would prefer the US kept its nose out of our business .
I 'm from Canada , so i know i 'm at least 50 \ % accurate there : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>screw keeping it on their own continent, i say keep it in their own borders, i'm 100\% positive that Mexico and Canada would prefer the US kept its nose out of our business.
I'm from Canada, so i know i'm at least 50\% accurate there :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080706</id>
	<title>Not requesting public comment on ACTA per se</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265723760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Am I missing something?  I read the Federal Notice rather quickly, but I don't see anything about ACTA.  They're looking for comments specifically for "Identification of Countries Under Section 182 of the Trade Act of 1974."  Wouldn't they just disregard any comments that don't address what they've asked for?  (To "identify those countries that deny adequate and effective protection for intellectual property rights or deny fair and equitable market access to U.S. persons who rely on intellectual property protection.")

I suppose one could submit a comment saying that the parties negotiating ACTA are denying adequate and effective protection (etc.) under Section 182 of the Trade Act of 1974, but I don't know that this would have any effect on the ACTA negotiations.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Am I missing something ?
I read the Federal Notice rather quickly , but I do n't see anything about ACTA .
They 're looking for comments specifically for " Identification of Countries Under Section 182 of the Trade Act of 1974 .
" Would n't they just disregard any comments that do n't address what they 've asked for ?
( To " identify those countries that deny adequate and effective protection for intellectual property rights or deny fair and equitable market access to U.S. persons who rely on intellectual property protection .
" ) I suppose one could submit a comment saying that the parties negotiating ACTA are denying adequate and effective protection ( etc .
) under Section 182 of the Trade Act of 1974 , but I do n't know that this would have any effect on the ACTA negotiations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Am I missing something?
I read the Federal Notice rather quickly, but I don't see anything about ACTA.
They're looking for comments specifically for "Identification of Countries Under Section 182 of the Trade Act of 1974.
"  Wouldn't they just disregard any comments that don't address what they've asked for?
(To "identify those countries that deny adequate and effective protection for intellectual property rights or deny fair and equitable market access to U.S. persons who rely on intellectual property protection.
")

I suppose one could submit a comment saying that the parties negotiating ACTA are denying adequate and effective protection (etc.
) under Section 182 of the Trade Act of 1974, but I don't know that this would have any effect on the ACTA negotiations.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31081228</id>
	<title>Don't toss that CD...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265727720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For you will certainly be arrested for littering.  Watch it, man, the TASER is unholstered.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For you will certainly be arrested for littering .
Watch it , man , the TASER is unholstered .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For you will certainly be arrested for littering.
Watch it, man, the TASER is unholstered.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31085084</id>
	<title>Re:More draconian is better.. prison time++</title>
	<author>alexo</author>
	<datestamp>1265037180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Nothing will get any better until things get loony.</p></div></blockquote><p>If you ask the previous generation, they'll tell you that things are already loony, you are just desensitized (or indoctrinated). What you mean is "loonier", and that <i>will</i> happen, but then the general populace will grow to accept it as well.</p><p>Nothing will get any better.  Ever.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nothing will get any better until things get loony.If you ask the previous generation , they 'll tell you that things are already loony , you are just desensitized ( or indoctrinated ) .
What you mean is " loonier " , and that will happen , but then the general populace will grow to accept it as well.Nothing will get any better .
Ever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nothing will get any better until things get loony.If you ask the previous generation, they'll tell you that things are already loony, you are just desensitized (or indoctrinated).
What you mean is "loonier", and that will happen, but then the general populace will grow to accept it as well.Nothing will get any better.
Ever.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31081816</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265733540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"...but it seems that in the quest for jobs..."</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; This is the new propaganda catch-phrase, correct? It replaces "do it for the children". My guess is that the followup will be something like "maintain vigilance".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...but it seems that in the quest for jobs... "     This is the new propaganda catch-phrase , correct ?
It replaces " do it for the children " .
My guess is that the followup will be something like " maintain vigilance " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...but it seems that in the quest for jobs..."
    This is the new propaganda catch-phrase, correct?
It replaces "do it for the children".
My guess is that the followup will be something like "maintain vigilance".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080532</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080782</id>
	<title>Re:My comments on ACTA</title>
	<author>countertrolling</author>
	<datestamp>1265724300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Toss CDs and DVDs into Boston Harbor?</i></p><p>Ok to make a backup first?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Toss CDs and DVDs into Boston Harbor ? Ok to make a backup first ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Toss CDs and DVDs into Boston Harbor?Ok to make a backup first?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31081974</id>
	<title>Rational Discussion</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265735940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As much as I'd like to discuss this rationally, my ultimate message is best expressed by Dethklok</p><p>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c\_sioHsT7GQ at 1:24</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As much as I 'd like to discuss this rationally , my ultimate message is best expressed by Dethklokhttp : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = c \ _sioHsT7GQ at 1 : 24</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As much as I'd like to discuss this rationally, my ultimate message is best expressed by Dethklokhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c\_sioHsT7GQ at 1:24</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080766</id>
	<title>The point is moot</title>
	<author>plopez</author>
	<datestamp>1265724240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now that corporations can funnel as much unconstrained money as they want, look to them to dominate the debate on ACTS, DRM, copyrights, patents etc.</p><p>Turn off the lights, the party's over.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now that corporations can funnel as much unconstrained money as they want , look to them to dominate the debate on ACTS , DRM , copyrights , patents etc.Turn off the lights , the party 's over .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now that corporations can funnel as much unconstrained money as they want, look to them to dominate the debate on ACTS, DRM, copyrights, patents etc.Turn off the lights, the party's over.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080532</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm...</title>
	<author>gnieboer</author>
	<datestamp>1265722680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>IMHO (and near-total guess), I don't think this is an RIAA-type copyright nazi push.

It seems in the last 2 months or so that there's been a quiet directive from the current US administration to be more protectionist.  It's a stand the president can't make publicly because then everyone else will follow suit, but it seems that in the quest for jobs, they want to try to encourage domestic consumption.<br> <br>

I mean first off you've got the DOT secretary going nuts about <a href="http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2010/02/toyota-recall-23-update.html" title="cars.com">Toyota</a> [cars.com].  Deserved?  Maybe.  Did the Secretary help the situation by saying "don't drive your cars"?  Definitely not.
Then there's NSA's involvement with the China/Google issue.  More government involvement that seems out of place.
The "Buy American" clause, changes in tax breaks announced at the State of the Union address, blah blah blah.<br> <br>

So if that's the case, then I focused in on the part of the summary about "policies and practices in foreign countries".  Reading the actual docket, the request for info is strictly about what countries should be placed on a watch list, not what policies etc (searching iPods at the border) should be (or not be) in place.  It's JUST about what countries out there are making fake CDs and handbags etc. and need to be placed on the "watch list".<br> <br>

I'll bet a fake Rolex that China ends up on the watch list.</htmltext>
<tokenext>IMHO ( and near-total guess ) , I do n't think this is an RIAA-type copyright nazi push .
It seems in the last 2 months or so that there 's been a quiet directive from the current US administration to be more protectionist .
It 's a stand the president ca n't make publicly because then everyone else will follow suit , but it seems that in the quest for jobs , they want to try to encourage domestic consumption .
I mean first off you 've got the DOT secretary going nuts about Toyota [ cars.com ] .
Deserved ? Maybe .
Did the Secretary help the situation by saying " do n't drive your cars " ?
Definitely not .
Then there 's NSA 's involvement with the China/Google issue .
More government involvement that seems out of place .
The " Buy American " clause , changes in tax breaks announced at the State of the Union address , blah blah blah .
So if that 's the case , then I focused in on the part of the summary about " policies and practices in foreign countries " .
Reading the actual docket , the request for info is strictly about what countries should be placed on a watch list , not what policies etc ( searching iPods at the border ) should be ( or not be ) in place .
It 's JUST about what countries out there are making fake CDs and handbags etc .
and need to be placed on the " watch list " .
I 'll bet a fake Rolex that China ends up on the watch list .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IMHO (and near-total guess), I don't think this is an RIAA-type copyright nazi push.
It seems in the last 2 months or so that there's been a quiet directive from the current US administration to be more protectionist.
It's a stand the president can't make publicly because then everyone else will follow suit, but it seems that in the quest for jobs, they want to try to encourage domestic consumption.
I mean first off you've got the DOT secretary going nuts about Toyota [cars.com].
Deserved?  Maybe.
Did the Secretary help the situation by saying "don't drive your cars"?
Definitely not.
Then there's NSA's involvement with the China/Google issue.
More government involvement that seems out of place.
The "Buy American" clause, changes in tax breaks announced at the State of the Union address, blah blah blah.
So if that's the case, then I focused in on the part of the summary about "policies and practices in foreign countries".
Reading the actual docket, the request for info is strictly about what countries should be placed on a watch list, not what policies etc (searching iPods at the border) should be (or not be) in place.
It's JUST about what countries out there are making fake CDs and handbags etc.
and need to be placed on the "watch list".
I'll bet a fake Rolex that China ends up on the watch list.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082576</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm...</title>
	<author>siddesu</author>
	<datestamp>1265743920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>that is quite true, but in the case of toy yoda (and the other japanese cars) there is the additional motive of pressuring the new japanese government into political obedience - part of the platform they were elected included revision of certain aspects of US-Japan military "cooperation" etc. so, it is a bit more complicated than pure protectionist drive, but the protectionism is definitely there -- and was even before the elections.</htmltext>
<tokenext>that is quite true , but in the case of toy yoda ( and the other japanese cars ) there is the additional motive of pressuring the new japanese government into political obedience - part of the platform they were elected included revision of certain aspects of US-Japan military " cooperation " etc .
so , it is a bit more complicated than pure protectionist drive , but the protectionism is definitely there -- and was even before the elections .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that is quite true, but in the case of toy yoda (and the other japanese cars) there is the additional motive of pressuring the new japanese government into political obedience - part of the platform they were elected included revision of certain aspects of US-Japan military "cooperation" etc.
so, it is a bit more complicated than pure protectionist drive, but the protectionism is definitely there -- and was even before the elections.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080532</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31081078</id>
	<title>Re:My comments on ACTA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265726580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here was my exact comment about the proposed trade agreement:</p><p>2010 Special 301 Review</p><p>The handling of this negotiation has not been in the interests of the general public, nor has it been conducted in such a fashion as to provide sufficient public oversight.  Negotiations have been conducted in secret, without any kind of legislative or public oversight, and any concessions made under such conditions constitute a terrible breach of trust which is necessary for our type of government to function efficiently.</p><p>According to information that was made available on Wikileaks, the introduction of measures that would amount to "Guilty until proven innocent", such as "3 strikes" provisions, et al, have been a major staple of this trade agreement.  Due process laws exist to prevent circumstances of exactly this kind: Where a powerful organisation or group of organisations levels an accusation, and enacts a powerfully crippling punishment without first proving guilt before a jury of the defendent's peers.  As the propositions of the leaked draft currently stood as of the last update of that document on Wikileaks, these "Guilty until proven innocent" due process violations are a primary staple of this agreement.</p><p>Due to this fact, and the fact that the agreement in general has not been widely publicised, that this public review has been called for despite legitimate release of the document a priori, and the overall tone of secrecy involved in the deliberations of this trade agreement, it is my position as a citizen who's rights to public domain properties and rights to fair use through the codified fair use doctrine are in jeaparody, I strongly discourage, and DO NOT SUPPORT any ratification of this trade agreement until these issues have been totally eliminated, regardless of what my elected representatives claim on the matter.</p><p>I recommend a full disclosure of the ACTA document to the public so that a proper public review with up to date materials can be performed, and that the deadline of February 16 be postponed until then.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here was my exact comment about the proposed trade agreement : 2010 Special 301 ReviewThe handling of this negotiation has not been in the interests of the general public , nor has it been conducted in such a fashion as to provide sufficient public oversight .
Negotiations have been conducted in secret , without any kind of legislative or public oversight , and any concessions made under such conditions constitute a terrible breach of trust which is necessary for our type of government to function efficiently.According to information that was made available on Wikileaks , the introduction of measures that would amount to " Guilty until proven innocent " , such as " 3 strikes " provisions , et al , have been a major staple of this trade agreement .
Due process laws exist to prevent circumstances of exactly this kind : Where a powerful organisation or group of organisations levels an accusation , and enacts a powerfully crippling punishment without first proving guilt before a jury of the defendent 's peers .
As the propositions of the leaked draft currently stood as of the last update of that document on Wikileaks , these " Guilty until proven innocent " due process violations are a primary staple of this agreement.Due to this fact , and the fact that the agreement in general has not been widely publicised , that this public review has been called for despite legitimate release of the document a priori , and the overall tone of secrecy involved in the deliberations of this trade agreement , it is my position as a citizen who 's rights to public domain properties and rights to fair use through the codified fair use doctrine are in jeaparody , I strongly discourage , and DO NOT SUPPORT any ratification of this trade agreement until these issues have been totally eliminated , regardless of what my elected representatives claim on the matter.I recommend a full disclosure of the ACTA document to the public so that a proper public review with up to date materials can be performed , and that the deadline of February 16 be postponed until then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here was my exact comment about the proposed trade agreement:2010 Special 301 ReviewThe handling of this negotiation has not been in the interests of the general public, nor has it been conducted in such a fashion as to provide sufficient public oversight.
Negotiations have been conducted in secret, without any kind of legislative or public oversight, and any concessions made under such conditions constitute a terrible breach of trust which is necessary for our type of government to function efficiently.According to information that was made available on Wikileaks, the introduction of measures that would amount to "Guilty until proven innocent", such as "3 strikes" provisions, et al, have been a major staple of this trade agreement.
Due process laws exist to prevent circumstances of exactly this kind: Where a powerful organisation or group of organisations levels an accusation, and enacts a powerfully crippling punishment without first proving guilt before a jury of the defendent's peers.
As the propositions of the leaked draft currently stood as of the last update of that document on Wikileaks, these "Guilty until proven innocent" due process violations are a primary staple of this agreement.Due to this fact, and the fact that the agreement in general has not been widely publicised, that this public review has been called for despite legitimate release of the document a priori, and the overall tone of secrecy involved in the deliberations of this trade agreement, it is my position as a citizen who's rights to public domain properties and rights to fair use through the codified fair use doctrine are in jeaparody, I strongly discourage, and DO NOT SUPPORT any ratification of this trade agreement until these issues have been totally eliminated, regardless of what my elected representatives claim on the matter.I recommend a full disclosure of the ACTA document to the public so that a proper public review with up to date materials can be performed, and that the deadline of February 16 be postponed until then.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080164</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2242230_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080128
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2242230_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31081192
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080042
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2242230_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2242230_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31087654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080042
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2242230_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2242230_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080236
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2242230_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31081228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2242230_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31081406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080236
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2242230_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31093250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2242230_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2242230_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31084578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2242230_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080042
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2242230_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31092240
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2242230_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2242230_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31081078
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2242230_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31085084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2242230_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080042
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2242230_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2242230_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31081816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080042
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2242230_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2242230.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082134
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2242230.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080706
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2242230.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080286
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2242230.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080128
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082124
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2242230.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080872
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2242230.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080186
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2242230.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080648
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31084578
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080566
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2242230.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080236
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31081406
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082558
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080292
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080472
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2242230.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31081626
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2242230.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080042
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082308
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080532
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082576
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31081816
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31087654
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31081192
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2242230.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080164
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31081228
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31081078
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080782
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2242230.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082120
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2242230.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082184
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2242230.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080284
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2242230.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080884
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2242230.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080554
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2242230.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082048
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2242230.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080050
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2242230.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31083102
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2242230.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080054
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080726
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082864
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31082956
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2242230.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31080720
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31085084
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31093250
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2242230.31092240
</commentlist>
</conversation>
