<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_22_1615259</id>
	<title>Delicious Details of Open Source Court Victory</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1266859440000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>jammag writes <i>"Open source advocate  Bruce Perens tells the inside story of the recently concluded <a href="http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/features/article.php/3866316/Bruce-Perens-Inside-Open-Sources-Historic-Victory.htm">Jacobsen v. Katzer court case</a>, in which an open source developer was awarded $100,000. Perens, an expert witness in the case, details the blow by blow, including how developers need to make sure they're using the correct open source license for legal protection. The actual court ruling is almost like some kind of Hollywood movie ending for Open Source, with the judge unequivocally siding with the underfunded open source developer."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>jammag writes " Open source advocate Bruce Perens tells the inside story of the recently concluded Jacobsen v. Katzer court case , in which an open source developer was awarded $ 100,000 .
Perens , an expert witness in the case , details the blow by blow , including how developers need to make sure they 're using the correct open source license for legal protection .
The actual court ruling is almost like some kind of Hollywood movie ending for Open Source , with the judge unequivocally siding with the underfunded open source developer .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>jammag writes "Open source advocate  Bruce Perens tells the inside story of the recently concluded Jacobsen v. Katzer court case, in which an open source developer was awarded $100,000.
Perens, an expert witness in the case, details the blow by blow, including how developers need to make sure they're using the correct open source license for legal protection.
The actual court ruling is almost like some kind of Hollywood movie ending for Open Source, with the judge unequivocally siding with the underfunded open source developer.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232462</id>
	<title>Bad news for Open Source</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266865860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Open Source software has just become outlawed at a LOT OF COMPANIES.  I realize that not all open source is that GPL stupidity, but with it still existing in a lot of projects like Linux and Samba, not many companies are going to bother making the distinction and the new policy will be "no open source at all".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Open Source software has just become outlawed at a LOT OF COMPANIES .
I realize that not all open source is that GPL stupidity , but with it still existing in a lot of projects like Linux and Samba , not many companies are going to bother making the distinction and the new policy will be " no open source at all " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Open Source software has just become outlawed at a LOT OF COMPANIES.
I realize that not all open source is that GPL stupidity, but with it still existing in a lot of projects like Linux and Samba, not many companies are going to bother making the distinction and the new policy will be "no open source at all".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231908</id>
	<title>Re:So, the article is about cocaine?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266864180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Heh. His lack of composition skills is apparent but I doubt it has much to do with where he went to college. Is Hope College that awful?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Heh .
His lack of composition skills is apparent but I doubt it has much to do with where he went to college .
Is Hope College that awful ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Heh.
His lack of composition skills is apparent but I doubt it has much to do with where he went to college.
Is Hope College that awful?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231652</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231584</id>
	<title>what has this got to do with open source?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266863280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't it just an abuse of the patent system being corrected for?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't it just an abuse of the patent system being corrected for ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't it just an abuse of the patent system being corrected for?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231472</id>
	<title>"the correct one"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266863100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Thaaaaaaat's my problem!  I've been using zeros this whole time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Thaaaaaaat 's my problem !
I 've been using zeros this whole time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thaaaaaaat's my problem!
I've been using zeros this whole time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233000</id>
	<title>Re:Bad news for Open Source</title>
	<author>mqduck</author>
	<datestamp>1266867720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Aww, such a cute little troll. Yes you are. Yes you are! Does my little Trolly need attention?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Aww , such a cute little troll .
Yes you are .
Yes you are !
Does my little Trolly need attention ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Aww, such a cute little troll.
Yes you are.
Yes you are!
Does my little Trolly need attention?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232462</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31242562</id>
	<title>Re:A few corrections to the preface here at Slashd</title>
	<author>RogerWilco</author>
	<datestamp>1266925260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mr. Bruce Perens,</p><p>I just want to say that I think it's very much appreciated that you spend time to not only be an expert witness in these cases pro bono, but also to discuss this at length here and elsewhere and pointing out such things as flaws in certain licences.</p><p>I'm not sure if you will read this, but I've learned that especially in the more technical professions, we do not often enough give compliments when they are appropriate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mr. Bruce Perens,I just want to say that I think it 's very much appreciated that you spend time to not only be an expert witness in these cases pro bono , but also to discuss this at length here and elsewhere and pointing out such things as flaws in certain licences.I 'm not sure if you will read this , but I 've learned that especially in the more technical professions , we do not often enough give compliments when they are appropriate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mr. Bruce Perens,I just want to say that I think it's very much appreciated that you spend time to not only be an expert witness in these cases pro bono, but also to discuss this at length here and elsewhere and pointing out such things as flaws in certain licences.I'm not sure if you will read this, but I've learned that especially in the more technical professions, we do not often enough give compliments when they are appropriate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31238232</id>
	<title>Patents, not copyrights</title>
	<author>Brandybuck</author>
	<datestamp>1266842400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Reading through the story, it appears that the culprit was patents not copyright. In other words no copyright license was violated. This is a much different kettle of fish than one would assume from the blurb. I've got no problem with pushing back against patents, but I am completely opposed to people using "free" software licenses as offensive legal weapons. That's what the proprietary goons do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Reading through the story , it appears that the culprit was patents not copyright .
In other words no copyright license was violated .
This is a much different kettle of fish than one would assume from the blurb .
I 've got no problem with pushing back against patents , but I am completely opposed to people using " free " software licenses as offensive legal weapons .
That 's what the proprietary goons do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reading through the story, it appears that the culprit was patents not copyright.
In other words no copyright license was violated.
This is a much different kettle of fish than one would assume from the blurb.
I've got no problem with pushing back against patents, but I am completely opposed to people using "free" software licenses as offensive legal weapons.
That's what the proprietary goons do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31238162</id>
	<title>Re:A victory with a high cost...</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1266841980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So, by not using the right OSI license,</p></div><p>What is an OSI license? A license created by the OSI, I hope. Because an "OSI approved" license is just that; it does not become the property of the OSI, as "OSI license" implies.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , by not using the right OSI license,What is an OSI license ?
A license created by the OSI , I hope .
Because an " OSI approved " license is just that ; it does not become the property of the OSI , as " OSI license " implies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, by not using the right OSI license,What is an OSI license?
A license created by the OSI, I hope.
Because an "OSI approved" license is just that; it does not become the property of the OSI, as "OSI license" implies.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231858</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31235194</id>
	<title>Re:Believe It or Not</title>
	<author>darien</author>
	<datestamp>1266831480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did you tell them you weren't signing it? If so, and they agreed, then bully for you. But if you just ignored it and started work as if you had signed it, be warned that a judge could rule that you implicitly agreed to it. After all, nothing other than your agreement to your terms of employment entitles you to draw a salary.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did you tell them you were n't signing it ?
If so , and they agreed , then bully for you .
But if you just ignored it and started work as if you had signed it , be warned that a judge could rule that you implicitly agreed to it .
After all , nothing other than your agreement to your terms of employment entitles you to draw a salary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did you tell them you weren't signing it?
If so, and they agreed, then bully for you.
But if you just ignored it and started work as if you had signed it, be warned that a judge could rule that you implicitly agreed to it.
After all, nothing other than your agreement to your terms of employment entitles you to draw a salary.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231582</id>
	<title>ummm...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266863280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"...using the correct one..." - the correct what?  Bad summary.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...using the correct one... " - the correct what ?
Bad summary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...using the correct one..." - the correct what?
Bad summary.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233624</id>
	<title>Good News for Open Source</title>
	<author>Chibi Merrow</author>
	<datestamp>1266869880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know, I'm usually on the side of "GPL/FSF is a bit too fundamentalist" myself... But I find your obvious troll to be laughably ridiculous.</p><p>You're saying a court case that says "You can't use Open Source software in violation of said software's license" will cause companies to not use Open Source software? Then these are probably the companies we DON'T want using it in the first place! How is that not obvious to everyone?</p><p>Someone using your code in violation of the license you picked for it is not a "win" for you. If all a developer cared about was having as many people as possible use his or her code, then it would be released in the public domain. A developer of Open Source software obviously has different goals in mind.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , I 'm usually on the side of " GPL/FSF is a bit too fundamentalist " myself... But I find your obvious troll to be laughably ridiculous.You 're saying a court case that says " You ca n't use Open Source software in violation of said software 's license " will cause companies to not use Open Source software ?
Then these are probably the companies we DO N'T want using it in the first place !
How is that not obvious to everyone ? Someone using your code in violation of the license you picked for it is not a " win " for you .
If all a developer cared about was having as many people as possible use his or her code , then it would be released in the public domain .
A developer of Open Source software obviously has different goals in mind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, I'm usually on the side of "GPL/FSF is a bit too fundamentalist" myself... But I find your obvious troll to be laughably ridiculous.You're saying a court case that says "You can't use Open Source software in violation of said software's license" will cause companies to not use Open Source software?
Then these are probably the companies we DON'T want using it in the first place!
How is that not obvious to everyone?Someone using your code in violation of the license you picked for it is not a "win" for you.
If all a developer cared about was having as many people as possible use his or her code, then it would be released in the public domain.
A developer of Open Source software obviously has different goals in mind.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232462</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233436</id>
	<title>Re:Believe It or Not</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266869280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Just be mindful of what you signed when you were hired by your employer.  Some companies have terrible "everything you do even outside of work is ours" clauses.</p></div><p>The company for which I work gave me one of those to sign. I never signed it.</p><p>For me, it works on a reciprocity basis. If the company wants to own everything I do outside of work, then the company needs to PAY ME for everything I do outside of work.</p><p>Time in front of Wii? PAY ME (gives me game ideas)<br>Time on toilet? PAY ME (quiet time to think)<br>Time sleeping? PAY ME (dreaming up new ideas)<br>Time having sex? PAY ME (less distracted by internet porn when at computer)</p><p>Now, if the company wants to go for something a little more reasonable, like paying me for 40 hours/wk instead of 120 hours/wk, then maybe they'd be willing to let me keep the rights to my little World of Warcraft AddOn that they probably don't give two shits about?</p><p>Thought so.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just be mindful of what you signed when you were hired by your employer .
Some companies have terrible " everything you do even outside of work is ours " clauses.The company for which I work gave me one of those to sign .
I never signed it.For me , it works on a reciprocity basis .
If the company wants to own everything I do outside of work , then the company needs to PAY ME for everything I do outside of work.Time in front of Wii ?
PAY ME ( gives me game ideas ) Time on toilet ?
PAY ME ( quiet time to think ) Time sleeping ?
PAY ME ( dreaming up new ideas ) Time having sex ?
PAY ME ( less distracted by internet porn when at computer ) Now , if the company wants to go for something a little more reasonable , like paying me for 40 hours/wk instead of 120 hours/wk , then maybe they 'd be willing to let me keep the rights to my little World of Warcraft AddOn that they probably do n't give two shits about ? Thought so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just be mindful of what you signed when you were hired by your employer.
Some companies have terrible "everything you do even outside of work is ours" clauses.The company for which I work gave me one of those to sign.
I never signed it.For me, it works on a reciprocity basis.
If the company wants to own everything I do outside of work, then the company needs to PAY ME for everything I do outside of work.Time in front of Wii?
PAY ME (gives me game ideas)Time on toilet?
PAY ME (quiet time to think)Time sleeping?
PAY ME (dreaming up new ideas)Time having sex?
PAY ME (less distracted by internet porn when at computer)Now, if the company wants to go for something a little more reasonable, like paying me for 40 hours/wk instead of 120 hours/wk, then maybe they'd be willing to let me keep the rights to my little World of Warcraft AddOn that they probably don't give two shits about?Thought so.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232054</id>
	<title>Open Source Won</title>
	<author>Murdoch5</author>
	<datestamp>1266864600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Alright, it's time for Open Source to take one for the team<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Alright , it 's time for Open Source to take one for the team : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Alright, it's time for Open Source to take one for the team :-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232436</id>
	<title>Re:Good Guys</title>
	<author>vivaoporto</author>
	<datestamp>1266865800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is by far the best article I read on Slashdot, and one of the most insightful cautionary tales about open source and the convoluted world of software patents in the U.S.

Congratulations to Slashdot to let this indeed delicious article to filter through the usual two minutes of hate, and also to Bruce Perens, for writing this simple and concise summary of what must have been a neverending story of legal slapfest.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is by far the best article I read on Slashdot , and one of the most insightful cautionary tales about open source and the convoluted world of software patents in the U.S . Congratulations to Slashdot to let this indeed delicious article to filter through the usual two minutes of hate , and also to Bruce Perens , for writing this simple and concise summary of what must have been a neverending story of legal slapfest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is by far the best article I read on Slashdot, and one of the most insightful cautionary tales about open source and the convoluted world of software patents in the U.S.

Congratulations to Slashdot to let this indeed delicious article to filter through the usual two minutes of hate, and also to Bruce Perens, for writing this simple and concise summary of what must have been a neverending story of legal slapfest.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231918</id>
	<title>Victory?</title>
	<author>Kjella</author>
	<datestamp>1266864240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Over 5 years, Bob Jacobsen put in thousands of hours of work on this case. He was threatened with loss of his employment, and with all of the money and property that he had. The $100,000 he eventually received doesn't compensate him for this. But I'm sure that the feeling of achievement does.</p></div><p>If you count being tied up in court for five years, getting lots and lots of pro bono lawyer time and still not breaking even. I call this "How to snuff out a potential upstart for $100,000" even though he probably wasn't competition in the first place.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Over 5 years , Bob Jacobsen put in thousands of hours of work on this case .
He was threatened with loss of his employment , and with all of the money and property that he had .
The $ 100,000 he eventually received does n't compensate him for this .
But I 'm sure that the feeling of achievement does.If you count being tied up in court for five years , getting lots and lots of pro bono lawyer time and still not breaking even .
I call this " How to snuff out a potential upstart for $ 100,000 " even though he probably was n't competition in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Over 5 years, Bob Jacobsen put in thousands of hours of work on this case.
He was threatened with loss of his employment, and with all of the money and property that he had.
The $100,000 he eventually received doesn't compensate him for this.
But I'm sure that the feeling of achievement does.If you count being tied up in court for five years, getting lots and lots of pro bono lawyer time and still not breaking even.
I call this "How to snuff out a potential upstart for $100,000" even though he probably wasn't competition in the first place.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231858</id>
	<title>A victory with a high cost...</title>
	<author>ndykman</author>
	<datestamp>1266864060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At the start, the open source developer got hit with a large SLAPP fine (urgh), and finally got the judgement reversed and was awarded damages, but the article notes that: "This doesn't fully compensate Jacobsen for all of his time and expense over 5 years, but it was the best he could get." So, by not using the right OSI license, the developer opened himself to years of legal hassles and woes.</p><p>Also, one wonders if by proactively suing, he ended up being worse off than by not waiting and then countersuing. Finally, it is noteworthy that since the DMCA was used on behalf of the open source developer, this may not be seen by opponents of that law as a victory at all, as it provides validation (if weak) of it's existence.</p><p>If this is victory for the little guy, I'd really hate to see what defeat is like.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At the start , the open source developer got hit with a large SLAPP fine ( urgh ) , and finally got the judgement reversed and was awarded damages , but the article notes that : " This does n't fully compensate Jacobsen for all of his time and expense over 5 years , but it was the best he could get .
" So , by not using the right OSI license , the developer opened himself to years of legal hassles and woes.Also , one wonders if by proactively suing , he ended up being worse off than by not waiting and then countersuing .
Finally , it is noteworthy that since the DMCA was used on behalf of the open source developer , this may not be seen by opponents of that law as a victory at all , as it provides validation ( if weak ) of it 's existence.If this is victory for the little guy , I 'd really hate to see what defeat is like .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At the start, the open source developer got hit with a large SLAPP fine (urgh), and finally got the judgement reversed and was awarded damages, but the article notes that: "This doesn't fully compensate Jacobsen for all of his time and expense over 5 years, but it was the best he could get.
" So, by not using the right OSI license, the developer opened himself to years of legal hassles and woes.Also, one wonders if by proactively suing, he ended up being worse off than by not waiting and then countersuing.
Finally, it is noteworthy that since the DMCA was used on behalf of the open source developer, this may not be seen by opponents of that law as a victory at all, as it provides validation (if weak) of it's existence.If this is victory for the little guy, I'd really hate to see what defeat is like.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31242004</id>
	<title>Re:So Slashdot is in favor of copyright today?</title>
	<author>vadim\_t</author>
	<datestamp>1266917340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The copyright laws are a tool that can be used to different ends.</p><p>Think a hammer. When you use it to build a house, that's good. When you use it to bash somebody's head in, that's bad.</p><p>Similarly with copyright. When you use it to help spread knowledge, it's good. When you use it to stiffle expression, that's bad.</p><p>Hope this helps.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The copyright laws are a tool that can be used to different ends.Think a hammer .
When you use it to build a house , that 's good .
When you use it to bash somebody 's head in , that 's bad.Similarly with copyright .
When you use it to help spread knowledge , it 's good .
When you use it to stiffle expression , that 's bad.Hope this helps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The copyright laws are a tool that can be used to different ends.Think a hammer.
When you use it to build a house, that's good.
When you use it to bash somebody's head in, that's bad.Similarly with copyright.
When you use it to help spread knowledge, it's good.
When you use it to stiffle expression, that's bad.Hope this helps.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31239588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232552</id>
	<title>Thanks Bruce</title>
	<author>gr8\_phk</author>
	<datestamp>1266866100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As someone who has occasionally been a critic of some of your bloggings, I must say Good Job !!  It was always clear to me that the first cases in this area MUST be won, else we have unfortunate precedents.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone who has occasionally been a critic of some of your bloggings , I must say Good Job ! !
It was always clear to me that the first cases in this area MUST be won , else we have unfortunate precedents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone who has occasionally been a critic of some of your bloggings, I must say Good Job !!
It was always clear to me that the first cases in this area MUST be won, else we have unfortunate precedents.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231998</id>
	<title>Programmers writing licenses</title>
	<author>l2718</author>
	<datestamp>1266864480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>are like lawyers writing code -- attempting to go beyond their field of expertise.  <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division\_of\_labour" title="wikipedia.org">division of labour</a> [wikipedia.org] rocks.  It's one reason our modern world is so productive. This isn't to say that an individual programmer might have legal training, or that an individual lawyer might not also know how to program.  But it means that you'll get better results by doing what you are good at and enlisting the help of others who are good at what they do.</htmltext>
<tokenext>are like lawyers writing code -- attempting to go beyond their field of expertise .
division of labour [ wikipedia.org ] rocks .
It 's one reason our modern world is so productive .
This is n't to say that an individual programmer might have legal training , or that an individual lawyer might not also know how to program .
But it means that you 'll get better results by doing what you are good at and enlisting the help of others who are good at what they do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>are like lawyers writing code -- attempting to go beyond their field of expertise.
division of labour [wikipedia.org] rocks.
It's one reason our modern world is so productive.
This isn't to say that an individual programmer might have legal training, or that an individual lawyer might not also know how to program.
But it means that you'll get better results by doing what you are good at and enlisting the help of others who are good at what they do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232238</id>
	<title>Yay!</title>
	<author>Locke2005</author>
	<datestamp>1266865080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So, when will this case be made into a major motion picture, with Julia Roberts playing the part of Victoria Hall?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , when will this case be made into a major motion picture , with Julia Roberts playing the part of Victoria Hall ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, when will this case be made into a major motion picture, with Julia Roberts playing the part of Victoria Hall?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232332</id>
	<title>The lesson? The Perl Man slips</title>
	<author>GPLDAN</author>
	<datestamp>1266865380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Larry Wall's Artistic License (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artistic\_License) got ripped to shreds under court scrutiny. <br> <br>
Understand when to use the LGPL or the GPL: <a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html" title="gnu.org">http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html</a> [gnu.org] <br> <br>
use them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Larry Wall 's Artistic License ( http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artistic \ _License ) got ripped to shreds under court scrutiny .
Understand when to use the LGPL or the GPL : http : //www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html [ gnu.org ] use them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Larry Wall's Artistic License (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artistic\_License) got ripped to shreds under court scrutiny.
Understand when to use the LGPL or the GPL: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html [gnu.org]  
use them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31235366</id>
	<title>Good Guys...but bad physicists</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266832020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nice to see OSS win but I wish the physics had been written up just a little more correctly. The 2008 Nobel prize was awarded for the theory of how a matter-antimatter asymmetry can arise in meson decays which was thought up a long time before Babar even existed and was first tested in Kaon decay experiments (one of which I worked on as a grad student). It was awarded to theorists who were not working on Babar - and since they were Japanese were more probably closely associated to Babar's rival, Belle. So it was hardly his "colleague" - unless you can call any particle physicist a "colleague" in which case we have all been colleagues to a lot of Nobel prize winners.

Secondly this DOES NOT explain the matter-antimatter asymmetry in the Universe - the effect is far, far too small. We don't know how this arose. Possible candidates are "strong CP" or a similar CP violation term in the neutrino mixing sector of the Standard Model (or something else). So while this effect might be a clue as to what is going on it is definitely not he full picture.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nice to see OSS win but I wish the physics had been written up just a little more correctly .
The 2008 Nobel prize was awarded for the theory of how a matter-antimatter asymmetry can arise in meson decays which was thought up a long time before Babar even existed and was first tested in Kaon decay experiments ( one of which I worked on as a grad student ) .
It was awarded to theorists who were not working on Babar - and since they were Japanese were more probably closely associated to Babar 's rival , Belle .
So it was hardly his " colleague " - unless you can call any particle physicist a " colleague " in which case we have all been colleagues to a lot of Nobel prize winners .
Secondly this DOES NOT explain the matter-antimatter asymmetry in the Universe - the effect is far , far too small .
We do n't know how this arose .
Possible candidates are " strong CP " or a similar CP violation term in the neutrino mixing sector of the Standard Model ( or something else ) .
So while this effect might be a clue as to what is going on it is definitely not he full picture .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nice to see OSS win but I wish the physics had been written up just a little more correctly.
The 2008 Nobel prize was awarded for the theory of how a matter-antimatter asymmetry can arise in meson decays which was thought up a long time before Babar even existed and was first tested in Kaon decay experiments (one of which I worked on as a grad student).
It was awarded to theorists who were not working on Babar - and since they were Japanese were more probably closely associated to Babar's rival, Belle.
So it was hardly his "colleague" - unless you can call any particle physicist a "colleague" in which case we have all been colleagues to a lot of Nobel prize winners.
Secondly this DOES NOT explain the matter-antimatter asymmetry in the Universe - the effect is far, far too small.
We don't know how this arose.
Possible candidates are "strong CP" or a similar CP violation term in the neutrino mixing sector of the Standard Model (or something else).
So while this effect might be a clue as to what is going on it is definitely not he full picture.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232794</id>
	<title>Re:A few corrections to the preface here at Slashd</title>
	<author>oldhack</author>
	<datestamp>1266866880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Nice writeup.
</p><p>
While it may be a win of sort for Jacobsen, I don't find it an encouraging precedent for OS people.
</p><p>
Threats and harrassment, five years of hassle, outright fraud (copyright infringement), all that resulted in measley 100k settlement over 18 months (minus 30k Jacobsen had to fork out previously?) after several trips up and down the appeal lanes, all with probono attorney service and even some prominent OS advocates' help.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nice writeup .
While it may be a win of sort for Jacobsen , I do n't find it an encouraging precedent for OS people .
Threats and harrassment , five years of hassle , outright fraud ( copyright infringement ) , all that resulted in measley 100k settlement over 18 months ( minus 30k Jacobsen had to fork out previously ?
) after several trips up and down the appeal lanes , all with probono attorney service and even some prominent OS advocates ' help .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Nice writeup.
While it may be a win of sort for Jacobsen, I don't find it an encouraging precedent for OS people.
Threats and harrassment, five years of hassle, outright fraud (copyright infringement), all that resulted in measley 100k settlement over 18 months (minus 30k Jacobsen had to fork out previously?
) after several trips up and down the appeal lanes, all with probono attorney service and even some prominent OS advocates' help.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31236396</id>
	<title>Unanswered Question.</title>
	<author>turkeyfish</author>
	<datestamp>1266835200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The article is quite an interesting look into the arcane details of American jurisprudence or the lack thereof.  However, it leaves a question posed unanswered.</p><p>In the article the author points out the problems with the use of the "Walls Open Source License" and goes on to state that other GLP licenses would have been a more prudent choice.</p><p>Given the twists and turns in argumentation, the question is what others GLP licenses would have been better?  There's a lot of nuance and experience here to suggest that certain wording in licenses would have offered the developer and the community better protection.  However, its not at all clear what the wording is and under what legal circumstances would different GLP licenses be superior.</p><p>Seems like a summary of this following on the heels of this interesting article would be helpful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The article is quite an interesting look into the arcane details of American jurisprudence or the lack thereof .
However , it leaves a question posed unanswered.In the article the author points out the problems with the use of the " Walls Open Source License " and goes on to state that other GLP licenses would have been a more prudent choice.Given the twists and turns in argumentation , the question is what others GLP licenses would have been better ?
There 's a lot of nuance and experience here to suggest that certain wording in licenses would have offered the developer and the community better protection .
However , its not at all clear what the wording is and under what legal circumstances would different GLP licenses be superior.Seems like a summary of this following on the heels of this interesting article would be helpful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article is quite an interesting look into the arcane details of American jurisprudence or the lack thereof.
However, it leaves a question posed unanswered.In the article the author points out the problems with the use of the "Walls Open Source License" and goes on to state that other GLP licenses would have been a more prudent choice.Given the twists and turns in argumentation, the question is what others GLP licenses would have been better?
There's a lot of nuance and experience here to suggest that certain wording in licenses would have offered the developer and the community better protection.
However, its not at all clear what the wording is and under what legal circumstances would different GLP licenses be superior.Seems like a summary of this following on the heels of this interesting article would be helpful.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232088</id>
	<title>Long, Long Road for an Open and Shut Case</title>
	<author>twmcneil</author>
	<datestamp>1266864720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>When I heard about this ruling last week, I was shocked that this apparently open and shut case had taken so long to conclude.  If I recall the details I read about years ago when this all started, it seems that Jacobsen was really being taken advantage of badly.  IANAL or a judge but I would have thought this case would have taken all of 45 minutes to decide, not years.<br> <br>There's something really wrong when someone like Katzer (or SCO) can so completely snow a court.  The crux of both cases come down to code ownership/authorship.  Is that something that just goes "Whoosh" to all judges?</htmltext>
<tokenext>When I heard about this ruling last week , I was shocked that this apparently open and shut case had taken so long to conclude .
If I recall the details I read about years ago when this all started , it seems that Jacobsen was really being taken advantage of badly .
IANAL or a judge but I would have thought this case would have taken all of 45 minutes to decide , not years .
There 's something really wrong when someone like Katzer ( or SCO ) can so completely snow a court .
The crux of both cases come down to code ownership/authorship .
Is that something that just goes " Whoosh " to all judges ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I heard about this ruling last week, I was shocked that this apparently open and shut case had taken so long to conclude.
If I recall the details I read about years ago when this all started, it seems that Jacobsen was really being taken advantage of badly.
IANAL or a judge but I would have thought this case would have taken all of 45 minutes to decide, not years.
There's something really wrong when someone like Katzer (or SCO) can so completely snow a court.
The crux of both cases come down to code ownership/authorship.
Is that something that just goes "Whoosh" to all judges?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31234082</id>
	<title>Re:A few corrections to the preface here at Slashd</title>
	<author>Toonol</author>
	<datestamp>1266871440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>"This code is free to redistribute, so long as no mention of the author is made.  Leaving the credits attached will revoke the license."</htmltext>
<tokenext>" This code is free to redistribute , so long as no mention of the author is made .
Leaving the credits attached will revoke the license .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"This code is free to redistribute, so long as no mention of the author is made.
Leaving the credits attached will revoke the license.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233282</id>
	<title>Re:Yay!</title>
	<author>mike260</author>
	<datestamp>1266868860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeeeesssss...I'm seeing Matt Damon as the earnest geek who refuses to back down, James Gandolfini as the litigious scumbag, and Brent Spiner as Bruce Perens.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeeeesssss...I 'm seeing Matt Damon as the earnest geek who refuses to back down , James Gandolfini as the litigious scumbag , and Brent Spiner as Bruce Perens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeeeesssss...I'm seeing Matt Damon as the earnest geek who refuses to back down, James Gandolfini as the litigious scumbag, and Brent Spiner as Bruce Perens.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232162</id>
	<title>Delicious?</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1266864900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We are talking about $100.000, my precious.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We are talking about $ 100.000 , my precious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We are talking about $100.000, my precious.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31258462</id>
	<title>"underfunded open source developer."</title>
	<author>h00manist</author>
	<datestamp>1265121600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's the part that need to be fixed in open source, and society in general.  Rewarding efforts needs to be more linked to the benefits produced for society, not on the ability to wring, extract, or corner rewards from society.  Don't know how the details of that should work, it's not too easy, but it is where debate has to go I think.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the part that need to be fixed in open source , and society in general .
Rewarding efforts needs to be more linked to the benefits produced for society , not on the ability to wring , extract , or corner rewards from society .
Do n't know how the details of that should work , it 's not too easy , but it is where debate has to go I think .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the part that need to be fixed in open source, and society in general.
Rewarding efforts needs to be more linked to the benefits produced for society, not on the ability to wring, extract, or corner rewards from society.
Don't know how the details of that should work, it's not too easy, but it is where debate has to go I think.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231602</id>
	<title>A few corrections to the preface here at Slashdot</title>
	<author>Bruce Perens</author>
	<datestamp>1266863340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
It's actually the appeals court that was sympathetic. Twice. The lower court seems
to have had less understanding of the Open Source developer's plight.
</p><p>Using "the right one": means the right Open Source license. A real key here is getting one that had competent legal help in its drafting. There are a few
real duds on the OSI list, including a font license that <i>I swear</i> allows
you to convert the font to the public domain. Only the programmers who wrote
it don't see it that way.
</p><p>
Sorry about the lack of paragraph breaks. I tend to write too many of
them and the editor responded by using too few of them. He might have
fixed that and the web cache hasn't been flushed yet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's actually the appeals court that was sympathetic .
Twice. The lower court seems to have had less understanding of the Open Source developer 's plight .
Using " the right one " : means the right Open Source license .
A real key here is getting one that had competent legal help in its drafting .
There are a few real duds on the OSI list , including a font license that I swear allows you to convert the font to the public domain .
Only the programmers who wrote it do n't see it that way .
Sorry about the lack of paragraph breaks .
I tend to write too many of them and the editor responded by using too few of them .
He might have fixed that and the web cache has n't been flushed yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
It's actually the appeals court that was sympathetic.
Twice. The lower court seems
to have had less understanding of the Open Source developer's plight.
Using "the right one": means the right Open Source license.
A real key here is getting one that had competent legal help in its drafting.
There are a few
real duds on the OSI list, including a font license that I swear allows
you to convert the font to the public domain.
Only the programmers who wrote
it don't see it that way.
Sorry about the lack of paragraph breaks.
I tend to write too many of
them and the editor responded by using too few of them.
He might have
fixed that and the web cache hasn't been flushed yet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31235904</id>
	<title>Re:"someone ... can so completely snow a court"</title>
	<author>rahvin112</author>
	<datestamp>1266833580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FYI, the $100,000 doesn't include legal fees, the agreement specifically includes that Katzer will pay the "reasonable" legal fees of Jacobsen. What this means is that if Katzer thinks the legal fees are too high he can complain to the judge and the judge will review but otherwise Katzer is going to pay the legal fee's separately from the $100,000 he's paying Jacobsen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FYI , the $ 100,000 does n't include legal fees , the agreement specifically includes that Katzer will pay the " reasonable " legal fees of Jacobsen .
What this means is that if Katzer thinks the legal fees are too high he can complain to the judge and the judge will review but otherwise Katzer is going to pay the legal fee 's separately from the $ 100,000 he 's paying Jacobsen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FYI, the $100,000 doesn't include legal fees, the agreement specifically includes that Katzer will pay the "reasonable" legal fees of Jacobsen.
What this means is that if Katzer thinks the legal fees are too high he can complain to the judge and the judge will review but otherwise Katzer is going to pay the legal fee's separately from the $100,000 he's paying Jacobsen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232366</id>
	<title>Re:"the correct one"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266865500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes... from the summary:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Perens, an expert witness in the case, details the blow by blow, including how developers need to make sure they're using the correct one for legal protection.</p></div><p>Make sure you're using the correct expert witness.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes... from the summary : Perens , an expert witness in the case , details the blow by blow , including how developers need to make sure they 're using the correct one for legal protection.Make sure you 're using the correct expert witness .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes... from the summary:Perens, an expert witness in the case, details the blow by blow, including how developers need to make sure they're using the correct one for legal protection.Make sure you're using the correct expert witness.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31234654</id>
	<title>Re:Believe It or Not</title>
	<author>marvinglenn</author>
	<datestamp>1266829800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Some companies have terrible "everything you do even outside of work is ours" clauses.</p></div><p>Check your state's laws.  Some states have laws protecting workers from this, making such clauses unenforceable.  I personally recall a co-worker I had who found our state's (Washington) law WRT this and challenged our employer over the issue (mid 90s).  (I wish I had the citation handy for my example, but I don't.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some companies have terrible " everything you do even outside of work is ours " clauses.Check your state 's laws .
Some states have laws protecting workers from this , making such clauses unenforceable .
I personally recall a co-worker I had who found our state 's ( Washington ) law WRT this and challenged our employer over the issue ( mid 90s ) .
( I wish I had the citation handy for my example , but I do n't .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some companies have terrible "everything you do even outside of work is ours" clauses.Check your state's laws.
Some states have laws protecting workers from this, making such clauses unenforceable.
I personally recall a co-worker I had who found our state's (Washington) law WRT this and challenged our employer over the issue (mid 90s).
(I wish I had the citation handy for my example, but I don't.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233182</id>
	<title>Re:A few corrections to the preface here at Slashd</title>
	<author>RyuuzakiTetsuya</author>
	<datestamp>1266868500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My code is horrible.  I wouldn't ever go to court to defend ownership of it.  If someone else wants to claim my crappy work as their own, fine.</p><p>Is there an open source license for this?  "If you plan on stealing, please let us know" Public License?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My code is horrible .
I would n't ever go to court to defend ownership of it .
If someone else wants to claim my crappy work as their own , fine.Is there an open source license for this ?
" If you plan on stealing , please let us know " Public License ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My code is horrible.
I wouldn't ever go to court to defend ownership of it.
If someone else wants to claim my crappy work as their own, fine.Is there an open source license for this?
"If you plan on stealing, please let us know" Public License?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233060</id>
	<title>Re:A few corrections to the preface here at Slashd</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266867960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is good news, Bruce. Too bad your writing style is sub-par.  "the right one"  What might that be, Bruce?</p><p>I discount anything Bruce Perens says about any subject due to his past demonstrations of laziness.  The way this article is written only reinforces that decision.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is good news , Bruce .
Too bad your writing style is sub-par .
" the right one " What might that be , Bruce ? I discount anything Bruce Perens says about any subject due to his past demonstrations of laziness .
The way this article is written only reinforces that decision .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is good news, Bruce.
Too bad your writing style is sub-par.
"the right one"  What might that be, Bruce?I discount anything Bruce Perens says about any subject due to his past demonstrations of laziness.
The way this article is written only reinforces that decision.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233974</id>
	<title>Re:what has this got to do with open source?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266871140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I tend to agree with you.  The only relevancy to Open Source I found in the entire article is that the court ruled that an Open Source license was not the same as public domain (a ridiculous argument the patent holder tried to make).  The rest of the article is just more David vs Goliath, with the Open Source angle being completely irrelevant.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I tend to agree with you .
The only relevancy to Open Source I found in the entire article is that the court ruled that an Open Source license was not the same as public domain ( a ridiculous argument the patent holder tried to make ) .
The rest of the article is just more David vs Goliath , with the Open Source angle being completely irrelevant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tend to agree with you.
The only relevancy to Open Source I found in the entire article is that the court ruled that an Open Source license was not the same as public domain (a ridiculous argument the patent holder tried to make).
The rest of the article is just more David vs Goliath, with the Open Source angle being completely irrelevant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231554</id>
	<title>Believe It or Not</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266863220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>There were a few people that smart at Pixar when I worked there, but there seem to be tons of them in the Open Source world.</p></div><p>Believe it or not, your two categories are not mutually exclusive.  I discover more and more that the brilliant people I am paid to work with have made improvements to open source projects.  Both through work <i>and</i> in their free time.  <br> <br>

I think something the open source community could use is an adjustment of this attitude that you're either gainfully employed or working for free<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... when I can attest that both are possible at once.  Just be mindful of what you signed when you were hired by your employer.  Some companies have terrible "everything you do even outside of work is ours" clauses.  Wish the employers would realize that it's a benefit for you to experience contributing and learning from open source.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There were a few people that smart at Pixar when I worked there , but there seem to be tons of them in the Open Source world.Believe it or not , your two categories are not mutually exclusive .
I discover more and more that the brilliant people I am paid to work with have made improvements to open source projects .
Both through work and in their free time .
I think something the open source community could use is an adjustment of this attitude that you 're either gainfully employed or working for free ... when I can attest that both are possible at once .
Just be mindful of what you signed when you were hired by your employer .
Some companies have terrible " everything you do even outside of work is ours " clauses .
Wish the employers would realize that it 's a benefit for you to experience contributing and learning from open source .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There were a few people that smart at Pixar when I worked there, but there seem to be tons of them in the Open Source world.Believe it or not, your two categories are not mutually exclusive.
I discover more and more that the brilliant people I am paid to work with have made improvements to open source projects.
Both through work and in their free time.
I think something the open source community could use is an adjustment of this attitude that you're either gainfully employed or working for free ... when I can attest that both are possible at once.
Just be mindful of what you signed when you were hired by your employer.
Some companies have terrible "everything you do even outside of work is ours" clauses.
Wish the employers would realize that it's a benefit for you to experience contributing and learning from open source.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231652</id>
	<title>So, the article is about cocaine?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266863460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Perens, an expert witness in the case, details the blow by blow, including how developers need to make sure they're using the correct one for legal protection.</p></div><p>Fine editing there, Taco.  What exactly does this sentence mean?</p><ul>
<li>Developers need to us the correct Arabic numeral for legal protection?</li><li>Developers need to use the correct cocaine for legal protection?</li><li>Developers need to use the correct Bruce Perens for legal protection?</li></ul><p>Hope College.  It shows.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perens , an expert witness in the case , details the blow by blow , including how developers need to make sure they 're using the correct one for legal protection.Fine editing there , Taco .
What exactly does this sentence mean ?
Developers need to us the correct Arabic numeral for legal protection ? Developers need to use the correct cocaine for legal protection ? Developers need to use the correct Bruce Perens for legal protection ? Hope College .
It shows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perens, an expert witness in the case, details the blow by blow, including how developers need to make sure they're using the correct one for legal protection.Fine editing there, Taco.
What exactly does this sentence mean?
Developers need to us the correct Arabic numeral for legal protection?Developers need to use the correct cocaine for legal protection?Developers need to use the correct Bruce Perens for legal protection?Hope College.
It shows.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233918</id>
	<title>Re:A few corrections to the preface here at Slashd</title>
	<author>nomadic</author>
	<datestamp>1266871020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"If you steal this code, then I insist you credit it to Alan Smithee."</htmltext>
<tokenext>" If you steal this code , then I insist you credit it to Alan Smithee .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"If you steal this code, then I insist you credit it to Alan Smithee.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231466</id>
	<title>Good Guys</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266863100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sometimes the good guy doesn't finish last.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes the good guy does n't finish last .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes the good guy doesn't finish last.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232674</id>
	<title>Re:seems a little inflated</title>
	<author>Bruce Perens</author>
	<datestamp>1266866520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe it would have been more accurate for me to say "more than a thousand". If you look at his case journal on the JMRI website, it has tons of documents, and I know that there are actually more documents than are listed in the index.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe it would have been more accurate for me to say " more than a thousand " .
If you look at his case journal on the JMRI website , it has tons of documents , and I know that there are actually more documents than are listed in the index .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe it would have been more accurate for me to say "more than a thousand".
If you look at his case journal on the JMRI website, it has tons of documents, and I know that there are actually more documents than are listed in the index.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231946</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233430</id>
	<title>Re:A few corrections to the preface here at Slashd</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266869280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey, idiot: Bruce didn't write the summary. Way to go, Ox.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , idiot : Bruce did n't write the summary .
Way to go , Ox .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, idiot: Bruce didn't write the summary.
Way to go, Ox.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232454</id>
	<title>It rather sounds as a defeat to FOSS</title>
	<author>gyepi</author>
	<datestamp>1266865860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The article says that the $100.000 Jacobsen was awarded doesn't compensate him for going through the procedure. <br> <br>

If this is true and projects to future cases, then developers still won't have incentive to fight their case in the court (even if they have a decent chance to win), and infringing companies will have reason to think that they are not going to be brought to court, which rather increases the chance of indulging in infringement. The deterrence factor is low.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The article says that the $ 100.000 Jacobsen was awarded does n't compensate him for going through the procedure .
If this is true and projects to future cases , then developers still wo n't have incentive to fight their case in the court ( even if they have a decent chance to win ) , and infringing companies will have reason to think that they are not going to be brought to court , which rather increases the chance of indulging in infringement .
The deterrence factor is low .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article says that the $100.000 Jacobsen was awarded doesn't compensate him for going through the procedure.
If this is true and projects to future cases, then developers still won't have incentive to fight their case in the court (even if they have a decent chance to win), and infringing companies will have reason to think that they are not going to be brought to court, which rather increases the chance of indulging in infringement.
The deterrence factor is low.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233706</id>
	<title>"someone ... can so completely snow a court"</title>
	<author>jeko</author>
	<datestamp>1266870240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><b>(I'd like to deeply, deeply apologize to Perens, Jacobsen and all the other People of Virtue who worked on this case for the wet blanket I'm about to throw. God knows you all deserve better.</b></p><p><b>I'm sorry, I'm so sorry, and here goes...)</b></p><p>You should never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by stupidity.</p><p>But no Court is this stupid. At some point you have to concede the problem is corruption.</p><p>Katzer's outright theft is painfully obvious. It took $30,000 up front and five years of legal wrangling. WORLD CLASS MINDS had to engage on the side of the good guys. Look at the outcome.</p><p>$100,000 over 18 months and future disputes are sent to arbitration.</p><p>$100,000 does not even begin to cover the legal costs of the angels here. If the good guy attorneys hadn't been working pro bono, our Hero would still be in ruinous debt. If not for the amazing charity in this case, Jacobsen's victory would be declaring bankruptcy. $100,000 probably doesn't even put a chip in the profits Katzer made by his theft. $100,000 isn't even $100,000 since it's being paid over time, which means the real net present value is less.</p><p>Worse, "Both parties have agreed to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... arbitration." Do some googling on modern arbitration. It's so blatantly rigged you can't even properly call it a fraud. Corporate interest prevail over the little guys in something like 98\% of all cases, and the remaining two percent get such token amounts you can't legitimately call it a "win." Katzer is free to pull some heinous new stunt tomorrow -- like filing entirely new patents claiming ownership of Jacobsen's work -- and he can remain comfortable in the knowledge that he has a 98\% chance of getting away with it.</p><p><i>"Aw, shut the Hell up, man. We got the precedent and that's what really counts." </i></p><p>Really? A precedent that costs $30,000 up front to try to use?</p><p><i>"Dude, seriously, STFU. We're making incremental progress towards a larger victory here. FOSS is gaining legitimacy in the legal world, and that's what really matters." </i></p><p>I know. I've been hearing that for 20 years now. After twenty years of gaining legitimacy, it still only takes five years, two appeals and a team of pro bono attorneys to recover a token amount of somewhat less than $100K and a decision that all future disputes will be resolved in the favor of the bad guys. We're making wonderful progress. A few more such victories and we'll be lost.</p><p><i>"Frackin' Hell, man, what the frack is your problem?!"</i></p><p>My problem is that I want everyone else to come to the same excruciating conclusion I have. The System has a horrible bias in favor of the rich and powerful. The System will go out of its way to screw the weak and defenseless. That by Bruce's own admission, the System will take a tool like SLAPP, expressly designed to level the playing field, and use it to deny justice to those not rich enough to afford it. If Jacobsen hadn't had an extra $30,000 laying around, this case would have been over before it began.</p><p>Justice is no longer blindly weighing merits, but is instead whoring herself out to the highest bidder. I want to change that, and we can change that when enough of my fellow citizens begin to understand just how corrupt things have become.</p><p>But wearing rose-colored lenses and seeing this as a "victory" doesn't help us. Jacobsen and company had to wage a heroic, epic battle for a very. very tepid victory. The real costs of his case weren't covered, he hasn't been made whole for the time he lost, Katzer kept his profits and is still out there free to start stealing again tomorrow.</p><p>We shouldn't be celebrating this outcome. It doesn't vindicate the Courts.</p><p>It indicts them.</p><p><b>(And again, my sincerest apologies and deepest thanks to the wonderful people who fought this fight.)</b></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>( I 'd like to deeply , deeply apologize to Perens , Jacobsen and all the other People of Virtue who worked on this case for the wet blanket I 'm about to throw .
God knows you all deserve better.I 'm sorry , I 'm so sorry , and here goes... ) You should never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by stupidity.But no Court is this stupid .
At some point you have to concede the problem is corruption.Katzer 's outright theft is painfully obvious .
It took $ 30,000 up front and five years of legal wrangling .
WORLD CLASS MINDS had to engage on the side of the good guys .
Look at the outcome. $ 100,000 over 18 months and future disputes are sent to arbitration. $ 100,000 does not even begin to cover the legal costs of the angels here .
If the good guy attorneys had n't been working pro bono , our Hero would still be in ruinous debt .
If not for the amazing charity in this case , Jacobsen 's victory would be declaring bankruptcy .
$ 100,000 probably does n't even put a chip in the profits Katzer made by his theft .
$ 100,000 is n't even $ 100,000 since it 's being paid over time , which means the real net present value is less.Worse , " Both parties have agreed to .. .
arbitration. " Do some googling on modern arbitration .
It 's so blatantly rigged you ca n't even properly call it a fraud .
Corporate interest prevail over the little guys in something like 98 \ % of all cases , and the remaining two percent get such token amounts you ca n't legitimately call it a " win .
" Katzer is free to pull some heinous new stunt tomorrow -- like filing entirely new patents claiming ownership of Jacobsen 's work -- and he can remain comfortable in the knowledge that he has a 98 \ % chance of getting away with it .
" Aw , shut the Hell up , man .
We got the precedent and that 's what really counts .
" Really ?
A precedent that costs $ 30,000 up front to try to use ?
" Dude , seriously , STFU .
We 're making incremental progress towards a larger victory here .
FOSS is gaining legitimacy in the legal world , and that 's what really matters .
" I know .
I 've been hearing that for 20 years now .
After twenty years of gaining legitimacy , it still only takes five years , two appeals and a team of pro bono attorneys to recover a token amount of somewhat less than $ 100K and a decision that all future disputes will be resolved in the favor of the bad guys .
We 're making wonderful progress .
A few more such victories and we 'll be lost .
" Frackin ' Hell , man , what the frack is your problem ? !
" My problem is that I want everyone else to come to the same excruciating conclusion I have .
The System has a horrible bias in favor of the rich and powerful .
The System will go out of its way to screw the weak and defenseless .
That by Bruce 's own admission , the System will take a tool like SLAPP , expressly designed to level the playing field , and use it to deny justice to those not rich enough to afford it .
If Jacobsen had n't had an extra $ 30,000 laying around , this case would have been over before it began.Justice is no longer blindly weighing merits , but is instead whoring herself out to the highest bidder .
I want to change that , and we can change that when enough of my fellow citizens begin to understand just how corrupt things have become.But wearing rose-colored lenses and seeing this as a " victory " does n't help us .
Jacobsen and company had to wage a heroic , epic battle for a very .
very tepid victory .
The real costs of his case were n't covered , he has n't been made whole for the time he lost , Katzer kept his profits and is still out there free to start stealing again tomorrow.We should n't be celebrating this outcome .
It does n't vindicate the Courts.It indicts them .
( And again , my sincerest apologies and deepest thanks to the wonderful people who fought this fight .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(I'd like to deeply, deeply apologize to Perens, Jacobsen and all the other People of Virtue who worked on this case for the wet blanket I'm about to throw.
God knows you all deserve better.I'm sorry, I'm so sorry, and here goes...)You should never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by stupidity.But no Court is this stupid.
At some point you have to concede the problem is corruption.Katzer's outright theft is painfully obvious.
It took $30,000 up front and five years of legal wrangling.
WORLD CLASS MINDS had to engage on the side of the good guys.
Look at the outcome.$100,000 over 18 months and future disputes are sent to arbitration.$100,000 does not even begin to cover the legal costs of the angels here.
If the good guy attorneys hadn't been working pro bono, our Hero would still be in ruinous debt.
If not for the amazing charity in this case, Jacobsen's victory would be declaring bankruptcy.
$100,000 probably doesn't even put a chip in the profits Katzer made by his theft.
$100,000 isn't even $100,000 since it's being paid over time, which means the real net present value is less.Worse, "Both parties have agreed to ...
arbitration." Do some googling on modern arbitration.
It's so blatantly rigged you can't even properly call it a fraud.
Corporate interest prevail over the little guys in something like 98\% of all cases, and the remaining two percent get such token amounts you can't legitimately call it a "win.
" Katzer is free to pull some heinous new stunt tomorrow -- like filing entirely new patents claiming ownership of Jacobsen's work -- and he can remain comfortable in the knowledge that he has a 98\% chance of getting away with it.
"Aw, shut the Hell up, man.
We got the precedent and that's what really counts.
" Really?
A precedent that costs $30,000 up front to try to use?
"Dude, seriously, STFU.
We're making incremental progress towards a larger victory here.
FOSS is gaining legitimacy in the legal world, and that's what really matters.
" I know.
I've been hearing that for 20 years now.
After twenty years of gaining legitimacy, it still only takes five years, two appeals and a team of pro bono attorneys to recover a token amount of somewhat less than $100K and a decision that all future disputes will be resolved in the favor of the bad guys.
We're making wonderful progress.
A few more such victories and we'll be lost.
"Frackin' Hell, man, what the frack is your problem?!
"My problem is that I want everyone else to come to the same excruciating conclusion I have.
The System has a horrible bias in favor of the rich and powerful.
The System will go out of its way to screw the weak and defenseless.
That by Bruce's own admission, the System will take a tool like SLAPP, expressly designed to level the playing field, and use it to deny justice to those not rich enough to afford it.
If Jacobsen hadn't had an extra $30,000 laying around, this case would have been over before it began.Justice is no longer blindly weighing merits, but is instead whoring herself out to the highest bidder.
I want to change that, and we can change that when enough of my fellow citizens begin to understand just how corrupt things have become.But wearing rose-colored lenses and seeing this as a "victory" doesn't help us.
Jacobsen and company had to wage a heroic, epic battle for a very.
very tepid victory.
The real costs of his case weren't covered, he hasn't been made whole for the time he lost, Katzer kept his profits and is still out there free to start stealing again tomorrow.We shouldn't be celebrating this outcome.
It doesn't vindicate the Courts.It indicts them.
(And again, my sincerest apologies and deepest thanks to the wonderful people who fought this fight.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232088</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31239588</id>
	<title>So Slashdot is in favor of copyright today?</title>
	<author>bonch</author>
	<datestamp>1266850440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So Slashdot is in favor of copyright licenses today?  Just checking, since in piracy articles, they seem to be vehemently against them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So Slashdot is in favor of copyright licenses today ?
Just checking , since in piracy articles , they seem to be vehemently against them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So Slashdot is in favor of copyright licenses today?
Just checking, since in piracy articles, they seem to be vehemently against them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232672</id>
	<title>Precedents?</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1266866520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What important precedents where set by this case.  It seems like it was settled out of court, which would usually mean that a judge didn't rule, and therefore didn't set an precedents.  The appeals court did rule that an attribution clause is legally binding, which is good.  Was there anything else established?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What important precedents where set by this case .
It seems like it was settled out of court , which would usually mean that a judge did n't rule , and therefore did n't set an precedents .
The appeals court did rule that an attribution clause is legally binding , which is good .
Was there anything else established ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What important precedents where set by this case.
It seems like it was settled out of court, which would usually mean that a judge didn't rule, and therefore didn't set an precedents.
The appeals court did rule that an attribution clause is legally binding, which is good.
Was there anything else established?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231946</id>
	<title>seems a little inflated</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266864300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Over 5 years, Bob Jacobsen put in thousands of hours of work on this case. He was threatened with loss of his employment, and with all of the money and property that he had. The $100,000 he eventually received doesn't compensate him for this. But I'm sure that the feeling of achievement does.</i>
<br>
<br>
Uhhh...thousands of hours?  A full-time job is generally around 1800 hours a YEAR; we're expected to believe this guy spent more time than his lawyers should have?  Doing what?  And how exactly was his employment threatened?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Over 5 years , Bob Jacobsen put in thousands of hours of work on this case .
He was threatened with loss of his employment , and with all of the money and property that he had .
The $ 100,000 he eventually received does n't compensate him for this .
But I 'm sure that the feeling of achievement does .
Uhhh...thousands of hours ?
A full-time job is generally around 1800 hours a YEAR ; we 're expected to believe this guy spent more time than his lawyers should have ?
Doing what ?
And how exactly was his employment threatened ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Over 5 years, Bob Jacobsen put in thousands of hours of work on this case.
He was threatened with loss of his employment, and with all of the money and property that he had.
The $100,000 he eventually received doesn't compensate him for this.
But I'm sure that the feeling of achievement does.
Uhhh...thousands of hours?
A full-time job is generally around 1800 hours a YEAR; we're expected to believe this guy spent more time than his lawyers should have?
Doing what?
And how exactly was his employment threatened?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31235770</id>
	<title>Re:A few corrections to the preface here at Slashd</title>
	<author>yuhong</author>
	<datestamp>1266833160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In fact, the FSF lists the Artistic License as non-free "because it is so vague you cannot determine what rights you have".</htmltext>
<tokenext>In fact , the FSF lists the Artistic License as non-free " because it is so vague you can not determine what rights you have " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In fact, the FSF lists the Artistic License as non-free "because it is so vague you cannot determine what rights you have".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231602</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_1615259_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231602
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_1615259_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_1615259_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31234082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231602
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_1615259_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231602
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_1615259_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231466
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_1615259_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231602
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_1615259_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31235770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231602
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_1615259_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232674
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231946
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_1615259_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231908
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231652
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_1615259_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31242004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31239588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231466
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_1615259_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31242562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231602
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_1615259_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232462
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_1615259_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231472
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_1615259_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31235194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_1615259_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31236396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231466
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_1615259_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233000
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232462
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_1615259_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231602
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_1615259_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31235904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232088
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_1615259_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_1615259_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31235366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231466
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_1615259_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31238162
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_1615259_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31234654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_1615259.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231652
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231908
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_1615259.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232672
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_1615259.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232674
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_1615259.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232454
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_1615259.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233974
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_1615259.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31234654
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233436
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31235194
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_1615259.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232088
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233706
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31235904
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_1615259.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232462
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233624
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233000
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_1615259.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232332
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_1615259.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232162
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_1615259.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231918
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_1615259.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231466
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31239588
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31242004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31236396
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31235366
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_1615259.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232238
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233282
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_1615259.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231998
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_1615259.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231602
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232552
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31235770
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232794
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233182
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233918
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31234082
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31242562
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233060
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31233430
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_1615259.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231472
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31232366
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_1615259.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31231858
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_1615259.31238162
</commentlist>
</conversation>
