<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_17_1521239</id>
	<title>ACTA Document Leaks With Details On Mexico Talks</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1266421800000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"A <a href="http://www.pcinpact.com/actu/news/55418-apport-acta-mexique-europe-commission.htm">brief
report</a>
from the European Commission authored by Pedro Velasco Martins (an EU
negotiator) on the most recent round of ACTA negotiations in
Guadalajara, Mexico has leaked, providing <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4795/125/">new
information on the
substance of the talks</a>, how countries are addressing the transparency
concerns, and plans for future negotiations. The document notes
that governments are planning a counter-offensive to rebut claims of
iPod-searching border guards and mandatory three-strikes policies."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " A brief report from the European Commission authored by Pedro Velasco Martins ( an EU negotiator ) on the most recent round of ACTA negotiations in Guadalajara , Mexico has leaked , providing new information on the substance of the talks , how countries are addressing the transparency concerns , and plans for future negotiations .
The document notes that governments are planning a counter-offensive to rebut claims of iPod-searching border guards and mandatory three-strikes policies .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "A brief
report
from the European Commission authored by Pedro Velasco Martins (an EU
negotiator) on the most recent round of ACTA negotiations in
Guadalajara, Mexico has leaked, providing new
information on the
substance of the talks, how countries are addressing the transparency
concerns, and plans for future negotiations.
The document notes
that governments are planning a counter-offensive to rebut claims of
iPod-searching border guards and mandatory three-strikes policies.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171584</id>
	<title>Valasco Martins</title>
	<author>Elektroschock</author>
	<datestamp>1265047740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here you find a video of <a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xbneje\_acta-explained-by-the-european-comm\_news" title="dailymotion.com">Valasco-Martins as he explains the agenda behind the ACTA agreement to lobbyists</a> [dailymotion.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here you find a video of Valasco-Martins as he explains the agenda behind the ACTA agreement to lobbyists [ dailymotion.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here you find a video of Valasco-Martins as he explains the agenda behind the ACTA agreement to lobbyists [dailymotion.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31176330</id>
	<title>Re:Sounds on the up and up</title>
	<author>calmofthestorm</author>
	<datestamp>1265019960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They're trying to use weasel words to lump file sharing and counterfeiting together so they can take advantage of preexisting laws and treaties involving siezing goods that are "about" to have counterfeit logos put on them, property forfeiture, and the like.</p><p>Not to mention that it's far easier to make a case for counterfeit goods (think food, medicine, etc) to be a matter of national security (and thus above hte rule of law) than it is for a little unlicensed copying.</p><p>It's bullshit, of course, since a bit-identical copy is, in fact, bit-identical, but there you go.</p><p>I'm also somewhat reminded of that screwed up law in France where you can't sell name-brand things on eBay without violating "counterfeiting" laws because you're not a licensed dealer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're trying to use weasel words to lump file sharing and counterfeiting together so they can take advantage of preexisting laws and treaties involving siezing goods that are " about " to have counterfeit logos put on them , property forfeiture , and the like.Not to mention that it 's far easier to make a case for counterfeit goods ( think food , medicine , etc ) to be a matter of national security ( and thus above hte rule of law ) than it is for a little unlicensed copying.It 's bullshit , of course , since a bit-identical copy is , in fact , bit-identical , but there you go.I 'm also somewhat reminded of that screwed up law in France where you ca n't sell name-brand things on eBay without violating " counterfeiting " laws because you 're not a licensed dealer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're trying to use weasel words to lump file sharing and counterfeiting together so they can take advantage of preexisting laws and treaties involving siezing goods that are "about" to have counterfeit logos put on them, property forfeiture, and the like.Not to mention that it's far easier to make a case for counterfeit goods (think food, medicine, etc) to be a matter of national security (and thus above hte rule of law) than it is for a little unlicensed copying.It's bullshit, of course, since a bit-identical copy is, in fact, bit-identical, but there you go.I'm also somewhat reminded of that screwed up law in France where you can't sell name-brand things on eBay without violating "counterfeiting" laws because you're not a licensed dealer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171350</id>
	<title>Re:Sounds on the up and up</title>
	<author>schon</author>
	<datestamp>1265047020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really?  What exactly does "ACTA" stand for again?   Oh right - "Anti-<b>Counterfeiting</b> Trade Agreement".   Which means that they should be talking about <b>counterfeiting</b>, right?</p><p>So tell me - in a trade agreement that is supposed to deal with <b>counterfeiting</b>, why are they talking about penalties for <i>file sharing</i>?</p><p>Now, if it was dealing with mass for-profit media duplication with the intent of passing off the product as the original, that would make sense.. but they're not.  The discussions are about "three strikes" and other bullshit to combat file sharing.</p><p>What exactly does file sharing have to do with counterfeiting?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?
What exactly does " ACTA " stand for again ?
Oh right - " Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement " .
Which means that they should be talking about counterfeiting , right ? So tell me - in a trade agreement that is supposed to deal with counterfeiting , why are they talking about penalties for file sharing ? Now , if it was dealing with mass for-profit media duplication with the intent of passing off the product as the original , that would make sense.. but they 're not .
The discussions are about " three strikes " and other bullshit to combat file sharing.What exactly does file sharing have to do with counterfeiting ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?
What exactly does "ACTA" stand for again?
Oh right - "Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement".
Which means that they should be talking about counterfeiting, right?So tell me - in a trade agreement that is supposed to deal with counterfeiting, why are they talking about penalties for file sharing?Now, if it was dealing with mass for-profit media duplication with the intent of passing off the product as the original, that would make sense.. but they're not.
The discussions are about "three strikes" and other bullshit to combat file sharing.What exactly does file sharing have to do with counterfeiting?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171428</id>
	<title>I think...</title>
	<author>DemonBeaver</author>
	<datestamp>1265047260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... I'll start investing in MicroSD chips... lets see border guards search me for those!<br>
Bastards...</htmltext>
<tokenext>... I 'll start investing in MicroSD chips... lets see border guards search me for those !
Bastards.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... I'll start investing in MicroSD chips... lets see border guards search me for those!
Bastards...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171372</id>
	<title>A good one yes.</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1265047080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If my own government is anything to go by (Netherlands) then the counteroffensive will be "you just don't understand it". The time politicians felt accountable to the public has long gone.
</p><p>Mind you, the public keeps voting for the same guys over and over.
</p><p>The biggest scammers are the media, in Holland you got something called to "kiez wijzer", a site that records the various parties (yes America, you can have more then 2) election PROMISES and ask you how you feel about various issues and then gives a recommendation. It is actually fairly fair, except that the attentive reader will have noticed I said PROMISES. It does NOT base its advice on YOUR preferences and a parties PAST behavior. So the advice in on what parties say they will do, not what they have done. And almost every falls for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If my own government is anything to go by ( Netherlands ) then the counteroffensive will be " you just do n't understand it " .
The time politicians felt accountable to the public has long gone .
Mind you , the public keeps voting for the same guys over and over .
The biggest scammers are the media , in Holland you got something called to " kiez wijzer " , a site that records the various parties ( yes America , you can have more then 2 ) election PROMISES and ask you how you feel about various issues and then gives a recommendation .
It is actually fairly fair , except that the attentive reader will have noticed I said PROMISES .
It does NOT base its advice on YOUR preferences and a parties PAST behavior .
So the advice in on what parties say they will do , not what they have done .
And almost every falls for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If my own government is anything to go by (Netherlands) then the counteroffensive will be "you just don't understand it".
The time politicians felt accountable to the public has long gone.
Mind you, the public keeps voting for the same guys over and over.
The biggest scammers are the media, in Holland you got something called to "kiez wijzer", a site that records the various parties (yes America, you can have more then 2) election PROMISES and ask you how you feel about various issues and then gives a recommendation.
It is actually fairly fair, except that the attentive reader will have noticed I said PROMISES.
It does NOT base its advice on YOUR preferences and a parties PAST behavior.
So the advice in on what parties say they will do, not what they have done.
And almost every falls for it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170542</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171418</id>
	<title>Property rights for me, none for thee</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265047260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm a big supporter for copyright in principle, but I have no sympathy for the big content companies losing money left and right to pirates because most of them are by anti-property rights leftists and are constantly harping on "Capitalism is bad, mmmmkay?" If things were philosophically balanced where the little guy's property rights were as rigidly secure as big corps' IP, and those same big corps didn't spew out an anti-property rights, anti-"rich" mentality, I might have some mercy for them getting more aggressive in protecting their rights.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a big supporter for copyright in principle , but I have no sympathy for the big content companies losing money left and right to pirates because most of them are by anti-property rights leftists and are constantly harping on " Capitalism is bad , mmmmkay ?
" If things were philosophically balanced where the little guy 's property rights were as rigidly secure as big corps ' IP , and those same big corps did n't spew out an anti-property rights , anti- " rich " mentality , I might have some mercy for them getting more aggressive in protecting their rights .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a big supporter for copyright in principle, but I have no sympathy for the big content companies losing money left and right to pirates because most of them are by anti-property rights leftists and are constantly harping on "Capitalism is bad, mmmmkay?
" If things were philosophically balanced where the little guy's property rights were as rigidly secure as big corps' IP, and those same big corps didn't spew out an anti-property rights, anti-"rich" mentality, I might have some mercy for them getting more aggressive in protecting their rights.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31180560</id>
	<title>Re:New Zealand situation</title>
	<author>LuNa7ic</author>
	<datestamp>1265048460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh, if I had mod points...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , if I had mod points.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, if I had mod points...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31176312</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171852</id>
	<title>I'd like to see more</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1265048460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Like an analysis as to whether ACTA will block evidence discovery in support of foreign trials.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Like an analysis as to whether ACTA will block evidence discovery in support of foreign trials .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like an analysis as to whether ACTA will block evidence discovery in support of foreign trials.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31176236</id>
	<title>Treason</title>
	<author>syousef</author>
	<datestamp>1265019600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Secret laws are a slippery slope that eventually encourage lawlessness and act against the interests of the citizenry. Why should any citizen obey the laws they do know, if they can always be punished severely for breaking laws they aren't permitted to know about? It's unconstitutional in most places, and especially the US that is founded on rule "by the people for the people". Anyone enacting these laws should be brought up on charges of treason, as should anyone attempting to enforce them. Quite ironically, there are probably anti-terror laws that apply too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Secret laws are a slippery slope that eventually encourage lawlessness and act against the interests of the citizenry .
Why should any citizen obey the laws they do know , if they can always be punished severely for breaking laws they are n't permitted to know about ?
It 's unconstitutional in most places , and especially the US that is founded on rule " by the people for the people " .
Anyone enacting these laws should be brought up on charges of treason , as should anyone attempting to enforce them .
Quite ironically , there are probably anti-terror laws that apply too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Secret laws are a slippery slope that eventually encourage lawlessness and act against the interests of the citizenry.
Why should any citizen obey the laws they do know, if they can always be punished severely for breaking laws they aren't permitted to know about?
It's unconstitutional in most places, and especially the US that is founded on rule "by the people for the people".
Anyone enacting these laws should be brought up on charges of treason, as should anyone attempting to enforce them.
Quite ironically, there are probably anti-terror laws that apply too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31177532</id>
	<title>Non-military secrets have no place in representati</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265024820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Non-military secrets have no place in representative governments.</p><p>Every committee chamber needs a C-SPAN camera broadcasting and the ability to share the documents being discussed so we can keep our eyes on these<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... "representatives."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Non-military secrets have no place in representative governments.Every committee chamber needs a C-SPAN camera broadcasting and the ability to share the documents being discussed so we can keep our eyes on these ... .
" representatives. "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Non-military secrets have no place in representative governments.Every committee chamber needs a C-SPAN camera broadcasting and the ability to share the documents being discussed so we can keep our eyes on these ....
"representatives."</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170372</id>
	<title>show me what's on the table</title>
	<author>Attila Dimedici</author>
	<datestamp>1265044020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Until they show me what's on the table, I will not consider anything rebutted. The politicians can say all they want that xyz is not in the proposed treaty, but until they show me what is actually in the treaty, I won't believe them. Politicians often say that something is not in a bill or treaty or other document imposing government regulation and when you read the document, sure enough it isn't there. However, when you analyze what is there you discover that, while what they told you wasn't there isn't, the stuff that is there allows for them to just implement it at any time in the future that they choose without any further public notice.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Until they show me what 's on the table , I will not consider anything rebutted .
The politicians can say all they want that xyz is not in the proposed treaty , but until they show me what is actually in the treaty , I wo n't believe them .
Politicians often say that something is not in a bill or treaty or other document imposing government regulation and when you read the document , sure enough it is n't there .
However , when you analyze what is there you discover that , while what they told you was n't there is n't , the stuff that is there allows for them to just implement it at any time in the future that they choose without any further public notice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Until they show me what's on the table, I will not consider anything rebutted.
The politicians can say all they want that xyz is not in the proposed treaty, but until they show me what is actually in the treaty, I won't believe them.
Politicians often say that something is not in a bill or treaty or other document imposing government regulation and when you read the document, sure enough it isn't there.
However, when you analyze what is there you discover that, while what they told you wasn't there isn't, the stuff that is there allows for them to just implement it at any time in the future that they choose without any further public notice.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31177522</id>
	<title>Re:I think...</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1265024760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>... I'll start investing in MicroSD chips... lets see border guards search me for those!</p></div><p>Invest in backups too.
<a href="http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=10/02/16/1454246" title="slashdot.org">http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=10/02/16/1454246</a> [slashdot.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... I 'll start investing in MicroSD chips... lets see border guards search me for those ! Invest in backups too .
http : //hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl ? sid = 10/02/16/1454246 [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ... I'll start investing in MicroSD chips... lets see border guards search me for those!Invest in backups too.
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=10/02/16/1454246 [slashdot.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171448</id>
	<title>My New Bumper Sticker</title>
	<author>sexconker</author>
	<datestamp>1265047320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Every time a politician lies, I buy another gun.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Every time a politician lies , I buy another gun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every time a politician lies, I buy another gun.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171736</id>
	<title>Re:Property rights for me, none for thee</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265048160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have no issue with companies doing what they can to make a buck. But when they take precious resources from our government (the one we "voted" and pay taxes for) on bullcrap like this when we need to be focused on JOBS JOBS JOBS I have to draw the line. There are already laws for stealing crap...let the companies go through the normal channels to prosecute the thieves. But to hijack our government for BS is STOOPID!</p><p>Maybe we should put bullets in electronics so we can get someone like the gun lobby to protect peoples rights. It's funny how much noise we hear from the right regarding guns when governments talk about new gun laws, but it is perfectly OK to allow companies to pay for laws to be created that treat ALL people like criminals and invade our privacy. I guess constitutional amendments with numbers greater that 2 don't really count.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have no issue with companies doing what they can to make a buck .
But when they take precious resources from our government ( the one we " voted " and pay taxes for ) on bullcrap like this when we need to be focused on JOBS JOBS JOBS I have to draw the line .
There are already laws for stealing crap...let the companies go through the normal channels to prosecute the thieves .
But to hijack our government for BS is STOOPID ! Maybe we should put bullets in electronics so we can get someone like the gun lobby to protect peoples rights .
It 's funny how much noise we hear from the right regarding guns when governments talk about new gun laws , but it is perfectly OK to allow companies to pay for laws to be created that treat ALL people like criminals and invade our privacy .
I guess constitutional amendments with numbers greater that 2 do n't really count .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have no issue with companies doing what they can to make a buck.
But when they take precious resources from our government (the one we "voted" and pay taxes for) on bullcrap like this when we need to be focused on JOBS JOBS JOBS I have to draw the line.
There are already laws for stealing crap...let the companies go through the normal channels to prosecute the thieves.
But to hijack our government for BS is STOOPID!Maybe we should put bullets in electronics so we can get someone like the gun lobby to protect peoples rights.
It's funny how much noise we hear from the right regarding guns when governments talk about new gun laws, but it is perfectly OK to allow companies to pay for laws to be created that treat ALL people like criminals and invade our privacy.
I guess constitutional amendments with numbers greater that 2 don't really count.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171418</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170464</id>
	<title>Re:Three strikes policies?</title>
	<author>Conchobair</author>
	<datestamp>1265044320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it's enemy action." - Auric Goldfinger</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Once is happenstance .
Twice is coincidence .
The third time it 's enemy action .
" - Auric Goldfinger</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Once is happenstance.
Twice is coincidence.
The third time it's enemy action.
" - Auric Goldfinger</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170124</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170542</id>
	<title>Solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265044620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>A good counteroffensive to rebut these claims would be to remove all the secrecy and let us see what's going on</htmltext>
<tokenext>A good counteroffensive to rebut these claims would be to remove all the secrecy and let us see what 's going on</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A good counteroffensive to rebut these claims would be to remove all the secrecy and let us see what's going on</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31176312</id>
	<title>New Zealand situation</title>
	<author>shermo</author>
	<datestamp>1265019900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>New Zealand recently proposed our own version of the anti file-sharing law. It had a 3-strikes and you're out provision, but it was so convoluted that it would never actually get to disconnecting someone as it is currently written. I figured that it was just included to appease our American overlords, and it seems as if I was right.</p><p>I wrote this letter</p><p>Dear [New Zealand Prime Minister]</p><p>I notice that our country has joined the latest international fad and is implementing our own version of the three strikes policy to deter potential file-sharers.</p><p>However, as I'm sure you're aware, no one in New Zealand plays baseball. So, I propose the following changes:</p><p>The word "strike" is replaced with the word "wicket".<br>You only have one "wicket". So if you are accused of file-sharing once, you are 'out'.<br>You don't actually go to jail until 9 of your good friends have also been accused of file sharing.<br>There is a neutral party which can review any decisions. (I think this may have been called a 'judge' at some point, but I would rename it to 'third umpire').</p><p>These changes satisfy the intention of writing laws based on popular sports rules, but they add a nice "kiwi" touch.</p><p>Yours Sincerely,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>I never got a reply<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>New Zealand recently proposed our own version of the anti file-sharing law .
It had a 3-strikes and you 're out provision , but it was so convoluted that it would never actually get to disconnecting someone as it is currently written .
I figured that it was just included to appease our American overlords , and it seems as if I was right.I wrote this letterDear [ New Zealand Prime Minister ] I notice that our country has joined the latest international fad and is implementing our own version of the three strikes policy to deter potential file-sharers.However , as I 'm sure you 're aware , no one in New Zealand plays baseball .
So , I propose the following changes : The word " strike " is replaced with the word " wicket " .You only have one " wicket " .
So if you are accused of file-sharing once , you are 'out'.You do n't actually go to jail until 9 of your good friends have also been accused of file sharing.There is a neutral party which can review any decisions .
( I think this may have been called a 'judge ' at some point , but I would rename it to 'third umpire ' ) .These changes satisfy the intention of writing laws based on popular sports rules , but they add a nice " kiwi " touch.Yours Sincerely , ...I never got a reply : (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>New Zealand recently proposed our own version of the anti file-sharing law.
It had a 3-strikes and you're out provision, but it was so convoluted that it would never actually get to disconnecting someone as it is currently written.
I figured that it was just included to appease our American overlords, and it seems as if I was right.I wrote this letterDear [New Zealand Prime Minister]I notice that our country has joined the latest international fad and is implementing our own version of the three strikes policy to deter potential file-sharers.However, as I'm sure you're aware, no one in New Zealand plays baseball.
So, I propose the following changes:The word "strike" is replaced with the word "wicket".You only have one "wicket".
So if you are accused of file-sharing once, you are 'out'.You don't actually go to jail until 9 of your good friends have also been accused of file sharing.There is a neutral party which can review any decisions.
(I think this may have been called a 'judge' at some point, but I would rename it to 'third umpire').These changes satisfy the intention of writing laws based on popular sports rules, but they add a nice "kiwi" touch.Yours Sincerely, ...I never got a reply :(</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171556</id>
	<title>Rebut?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265047620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The document notes that governments are planning a counter-offensive to rebut claims of iPod searching border guards and mandatory three strikes policies."</p><p>A) so, are the claims true or not?</p><p>B) if they released the fricking document in the first place, they wouldn't have to "rebut" (supposedly) false claims.  They could just refer people to the document.</p><p>C) until I see the actual document I won't believe whatever "rebuttal" they are cooking up anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The document notes that governments are planning a counter-offensive to rebut claims of iPod searching border guards and mandatory three strikes policies .
" A ) so , are the claims true or not ? B ) if they released the fricking document in the first place , they would n't have to " rebut " ( supposedly ) false claims .
They could just refer people to the document.C ) until I see the actual document I wo n't believe whatever " rebuttal " they are cooking up anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The document notes that governments are planning a counter-offensive to rebut claims of iPod searching border guards and mandatory three strikes policies.
"A) so, are the claims true or not?B) if they released the fricking document in the first place, they wouldn't have to "rebut" (supposedly) false claims.
They could just refer people to the document.C) until I see the actual document I won't believe whatever "rebuttal" they are cooking up anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170124</id>
	<title>Three strikes policies?</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1265043060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Man, that buzzword just keeps coming up. Can you imagine if baseball was based around 4 strikes instead of 3?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Man , that buzzword just keeps coming up .
Can you imagine if baseball was based around 4 strikes instead of 3 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Man, that buzzword just keeps coming up.
Can you imagine if baseball was based around 4 strikes instead of 3?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31172198</id>
	<title>Re:Sounds on the up and up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265049540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Really? What exactly does "ACTA" stand for again?</i></p><p>Anti-Consumer Trade Agreement</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?
What exactly does " ACTA " stand for again ? Anti-Consumer Trade Agreement</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?
What exactly does "ACTA" stand for again?Anti-Consumer Trade Agreement</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31173378</id>
	<title>Bullshit</title>
	<author>schon</author>
	<datestamp>1265053140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Counterfeiting is fundamentally about trademarks and copyrights.</p></div><p>That sentence is complete and utter bullshit.</p><p>If it were true, then why do we have counterfeiting laws?  Why not just prosecute under trademark and copyright?</p><p>If it were true, why do we talk about counterfeit <i>money</i>, when money is neither trademarked or copyrighted?</p><p>If it were true, why is passing off a fake DaVinci counterfeiting?</p><p>As Entropius said - counterfeiting is primarily about <b>fraud</b>.  It <i>can</i> deal with trademark infringement if the product is marked, and it <i>can</i> deal with copyright if (as I said) the copyright infringement is large-scale for-profit copying with the intent to pass it off as the original.  But it's fraud that makes it counterfeiting, not the trademark or copyright status.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Counterfeiting is fundamentally about trademarks and copyrights.That sentence is complete and utter bullshit.If it were true , then why do we have counterfeiting laws ?
Why not just prosecute under trademark and copyright ? If it were true , why do we talk about counterfeit money , when money is neither trademarked or copyrighted ? If it were true , why is passing off a fake DaVinci counterfeiting ? As Entropius said - counterfeiting is primarily about fraud .
It can deal with trademark infringement if the product is marked , and it can deal with copyright if ( as I said ) the copyright infringement is large-scale for-profit copying with the intent to pass it off as the original .
But it 's fraud that makes it counterfeiting , not the trademark or copyright status .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Counterfeiting is fundamentally about trademarks and copyrights.That sentence is complete and utter bullshit.If it were true, then why do we have counterfeiting laws?
Why not just prosecute under trademark and copyright?If it were true, why do we talk about counterfeit money, when money is neither trademarked or copyrighted?If it were true, why is passing off a fake DaVinci counterfeiting?As Entropius said - counterfeiting is primarily about fraud.
It can deal with trademark infringement if the product is marked, and it can deal with copyright if (as I said) the copyright infringement is large-scale for-profit copying with the intent to pass it off as the original.
But it's fraud that makes it counterfeiting, not the trademark or copyright status.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171868</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170472</id>
	<title>Re:Three strikes policies?</title>
	<author>sconeu</author>
	<datestamp>1265044320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I refer you to the <a href="http://espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=290916102" title="go.com">Sept 16, 2009 game</a> [go.com] between the Angels and the Red Sox, where Nick Green got 5 strikes before walking?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I refer you to the Sept 16 , 2009 game [ go.com ] between the Angels and the Red Sox , where Nick Green got 5 strikes before walking ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I refer you to the Sept 16, 2009 game [go.com] between the Angels and the Red Sox, where Nick Green got 5 strikes before walking?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170124</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171278</id>
	<title>They are "committed to conclude ACTA in 2010"</title>
	<author>phypsilon</author>
	<datestamp>1265046840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The document is very sparse on details. They seem to be negotiating four topics:<br>1. civil enforcements<br>2. customs<br>3. internet<br>4. transparency (wtf??)</p><p>But the most interesting quote is: "Parties remain committed to conclude ACTA in 2010."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The document is very sparse on details .
They seem to be negotiating four topics : 1. civil enforcements2 .
customs3. internet4 .
transparency ( wtf ? ?
) But the most interesting quote is : " Parties remain committed to conclude ACTA in 2010 .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The document is very sparse on details.
They seem to be negotiating four topics:1. civil enforcements2.
customs3. internet4.
transparency (wtf??
)But the most interesting quote is: "Parties remain committed to conclude ACTA in 2010.
"
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31175442</id>
	<title>Re:Solution</title>
	<author>xOneca</author>
	<datestamp>1265016960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>They say 'downloading is killing music.' A few days ago I heard someone that said 'it's like saying that downloading porn is killing sex.'</htmltext>
<tokenext>They say 'downloading is killing music .
' A few days ago I heard someone that said 'it 's like saying that downloading porn is killing sex .
'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They say 'downloading is killing music.
' A few days ago I heard someone that said 'it's like saying that downloading porn is killing sex.
'</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170542</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31177228</id>
	<title>I've got a better one for you.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265023740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>My New Bumper Sticker...Every time a politician lies, I buy another gun.</i></p><p>This says the same thing more concisely:</p><p>"I'm a fucking nutcase."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My New Bumper Sticker...Every time a politician lies , I buy another gun.This says the same thing more concisely : " I 'm a fucking nutcase .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My New Bumper Sticker...Every time a politician lies, I buy another gun.This says the same thing more concisely:"I'm a fucking nutcase.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171448</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170912</id>
	<title>Great! What's in it about patents??</title>
	<author>H4x0r Jim Duggan</author>
	<datestamp>1265045820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Make a backup.  We don't want another case like Wikileaks, where a leaked draft goes online and then the site comes down for planning and doesn't come back up.</p><p>Whatever's in there about patents, please make notes here:</p><p>* <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]</p><p>Thanks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Make a backup .
We do n't want another case like Wikileaks , where a leaked draft goes online and then the site comes down for planning and does n't come back up.Whatever 's in there about patents , please make notes here : * http : //en.swpat.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting \ _Trade \ _Agreement [ swpat.org ] Thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Make a backup.
We don't want another case like Wikileaks, where a leaked draft goes online and then the site comes down for planning and doesn't come back up.Whatever's in there about patents, please make notes here:* http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting\_Trade\_Agreement [swpat.org]Thanks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171868</id>
	<title>Re:Sounds on the up and up</title>
	<author>TubeSteak</author>
	<datestamp>1265048520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So tell me - in a trade agreement that is supposed to deal with <b>counterfeiting</b>, why are they talking about penalties for <i>file sharing</i>?</p></div><p>Counterfeiting is fundamentally about trademarks and copyrights.<br>That's why they're talking about copyright infringement over the internet aka file sharing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So tell me - in a trade agreement that is supposed to deal with counterfeiting , why are they talking about penalties for file sharing ? Counterfeiting is fundamentally about trademarks and copyrights.That 's why they 're talking about copyright infringement over the internet aka file sharing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So tell me - in a trade agreement that is supposed to deal with counterfeiting, why are they talking about penalties for file sharing?Counterfeiting is fundamentally about trademarks and copyrights.That's why they're talking about copyright infringement over the internet aka file sharing.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31177308</id>
	<title>Re:My New Bumper Sticker</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265024040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>so basically you have enough guns to equip a very large army.</htmltext>
<tokenext>so basically you have enough guns to equip a very large army .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so basically you have enough guns to equip a very large army.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171448</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170170</id>
	<title>Sounds on the up and up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265043240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uniformity of procedures.</p><p>Guess we were all worried for nothing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uniformity of procedures.Guess we were all worried for nothing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uniformity of procedures.Guess we were all worried for nothing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170576</id>
	<title>Same old stuff</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265044740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So its still a one sided document being written up by those in the big industries and no input from anybody this document will most likely effect, the people. They are trying to control and impact technologies they don't understand in the least. I mean if they actually had real knowledge of the technology they were trying to control they would realize that they should be using this to their advantage instead of trying to stop it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So its still a one sided document being written up by those in the big industries and no input from anybody this document will most likely effect , the people .
They are trying to control and impact technologies they do n't understand in the least .
I mean if they actually had real knowledge of the technology they were trying to control they would realize that they should be using this to their advantage instead of trying to stop it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So its still a one sided document being written up by those in the big industries and no input from anybody this document will most likely effect, the people.
They are trying to control and impact technologies they don't understand in the least.
I mean if they actually had real knowledge of the technology they were trying to control they would realize that they should be using this to their advantage instead of trying to stop it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31181834</id>
	<title>Re:Three strikes policies?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266488940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The it would be called something else, like the three wishes policy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The it would be called something else , like the three wishes policy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The it would be called something else, like the three wishes policy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170124</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31178092</id>
	<title>Re:Sounds on the up and up</title>
	<author>okooolo</author>
	<datestamp>1265027280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>oh c'mon<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. trade agreement is just a broad umbrella for all kinds of laws that often have nothing to do with the name..

just like any other acts (ie patriot act)</htmltext>
<tokenext>oh c'mon .. trade agreement is just a broad umbrella for all kinds of laws that often have nothing to do with the name. . just like any other acts ( ie patriot act )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>oh c'mon .. trade agreement is just a broad umbrella for all kinds of laws that often have nothing to do with the name..

just like any other acts (ie patriot act)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171718</id>
	<title>Re:Great! What's in it about patents??</title>
	<author>HeckRuler</author>
	<datestamp>1265048100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually, this is the ideal sort of thing for bittorrent. Collect everything, pack it up, and start seeding. Post links. I'll be pitching in at 5:20pm.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , this is the ideal sort of thing for bittorrent .
Collect everything , pack it up , and start seeding .
Post links .
I 'll be pitching in at 5 : 20pm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, this is the ideal sort of thing for bittorrent.
Collect everything, pack it up, and start seeding.
Post links.
I'll be pitching in at 5:20pm.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31172368</id>
	<title>why wont this one world order</title>
	<author>nimbius</author>
	<datestamp>1265050080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>just hurry up and die already.  if the same fervent effort were applied to research, development, and innovation of pirated products as was applied to relentlessly combing the globe with jackboots and bayonets in a systematic attempt to pre-exterminate all general interest yet inability to consume monetarily, im certain i would have a music player that did what i wanted and needed it to do, a video medium that didnt treat me like a car thief, and software that didnt have to send half my computer to its corporate headquarters before i got to use it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>just hurry up and die already .
if the same fervent effort were applied to research , development , and innovation of pirated products as was applied to relentlessly combing the globe with jackboots and bayonets in a systematic attempt to pre-exterminate all general interest yet inability to consume monetarily , im certain i would have a music player that did what i wanted and needed it to do , a video medium that didnt treat me like a car thief , and software that didnt have to send half my computer to its corporate headquarters before i got to use it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>just hurry up and die already.
if the same fervent effort were applied to research, development, and innovation of pirated products as was applied to relentlessly combing the globe with jackboots and bayonets in a systematic attempt to pre-exterminate all general interest yet inability to consume monetarily, im certain i would have a music player that did what i wanted and needed it to do, a video medium that didnt treat me like a car thief, and software that didnt have to send half my computer to its corporate headquarters before i got to use it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31174012</id>
	<title>Re:Sounds on the up and up</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1265055300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Simple.</p><p>They both compete with entertainment industry profits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Simple.They both compete with entertainment industry profits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Simple.They both compete with entertainment industry profits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171144</id>
	<title>Re:Three strikes policies?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265046480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It has more to with the being able to get a strike with little to no evidence and thing that this makes for a very easy DOS to pull off.</p><p>and the lack of court is very bad thing and can BE USED TO TAKE THE 1ST away form PEOPLE.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It has more to with the being able to get a strike with little to no evidence and thing that this makes for a very easy DOS to pull off.and the lack of court is very bad thing and can BE USED TO TAKE THE 1ST away form PEOPLE .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It has more to with the being able to get a strike with little to no evidence and thing that this makes for a very easy DOS to pull off.and the lack of court is very bad thing and can BE USED TO TAKE THE 1ST away form PEOPLE.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170124</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171620</id>
	<title>Re:show me what's on the table</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265047860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The politicians can say all they want that xyz is not in the proposed treaty, but until they show me what is actually in the treaty, I won't believe them.</p></div></blockquote><p>Not to mention we have conclusive <em>evidence</em>, right in our faces, of US government still acting in bad faith: DMCA has not been repealed.  They can lie all they want about ACTA being harmless, but failure to undo the previous damage shows that being harmless isn't on the government's agenda.</p><p>If ACTA wants credibility, they should leak that ACTA signatories who have anti-circumvention provisions in their laws, will be in noncompliance of ACTA and won't have international copyright protection in countries that <em>do</em> adhere to ACTA.  That would go a long way toward both protecting consumers <em>and</em> copyright holders.  DRM is <em>the</em> biggest creator of piracy right now.  Get rid of it, and pretty much everyone wins except the war3zd00ds.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The politicians can say all they want that xyz is not in the proposed treaty , but until they show me what is actually in the treaty , I wo n't believe them.Not to mention we have conclusive evidence , right in our faces , of US government still acting in bad faith : DMCA has not been repealed .
They can lie all they want about ACTA being harmless , but failure to undo the previous damage shows that being harmless is n't on the government 's agenda.If ACTA wants credibility , they should leak that ACTA signatories who have anti-circumvention provisions in their laws , will be in noncompliance of ACTA and wo n't have international copyright protection in countries that do adhere to ACTA .
That would go a long way toward both protecting consumers and copyright holders .
DRM is the biggest creator of piracy right now .
Get rid of it , and pretty much everyone wins except the war3zd00ds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The politicians can say all they want that xyz is not in the proposed treaty, but until they show me what is actually in the treaty, I won't believe them.Not to mention we have conclusive evidence, right in our faces, of US government still acting in bad faith: DMCA has not been repealed.
They can lie all they want about ACTA being harmless, but failure to undo the previous damage shows that being harmless isn't on the government's agenda.If ACTA wants credibility, they should leak that ACTA signatories who have anti-circumvention provisions in their laws, will be in noncompliance of ACTA and won't have international copyright protection in countries that do adhere to ACTA.
That would go a long way toward both protecting consumers and copyright holders.
DRM is the biggest creator of piracy right now.
Get rid of it, and pretty much everyone wins except the war3zd00ds.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170372</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1521239_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31181834
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170124
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1521239_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171620
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170372
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1521239_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31173378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170170
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1521239_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171718
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170912
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1521239_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170542
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1521239_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31178092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170170
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1521239_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31176236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170372
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1521239_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170124
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1521239_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31180560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31176312
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1521239_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170124
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1521239_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31177522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171428
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1521239_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31176330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170170
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1521239_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31177308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171448
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1521239_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31172198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170170
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1521239_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31175442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170542
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1521239_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171736
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171418
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1521239_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31174012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170170
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1521239_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31177228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171448
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1521239_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170464
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170124
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1521239.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170170
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171350
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31174012
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171868
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31173378
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31172198
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31178092
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31176330
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1521239.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171428
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31177522
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1521239.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170576
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1521239.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171736
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1521239.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31172368
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1521239.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170372
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31176236
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171620
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1521239.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170124
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170472
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170464
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171144
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31181834
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1521239.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170542
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171372
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31175442
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1521239.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31170912
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171718
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1521239.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31176312
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31180560
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1521239.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31171448
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31177308
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1521239.31177228
</commentlist>
</conversation>
