<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_23_1231255</id>
	<title>Microsoft, Amazon Ink Kindle and Linux Patent Deal</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1266933000000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>theodp writes <i>"Microsoft says it has <a href="http://techflash.com/seattle/2010/02/microsoft\_amazon\_in\_patent\_deal.html">reached a wide-ranging IP agreement with Amazon</a> in which each company has granted the other a license to its patent portfolio. Microsoft says the agreement covers technologies in products such as Amazon's Kindle &mdash; including open-source and proprietary technologies used in the e-reader &mdash; in addition to the use of Linux-based servers. Microsoft issued a <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2010/feb10/02-22MSAmazonPR.mspx">news release celebrating the accord</a>, while Amazon declined to comment. 'We are pleased to have entered into this patent license agreement with Amazon.com,' said Microsoft's deputy general counsel. 'Microsoft's patent portfolio is the largest and strongest in the software industry, and this agreement demonstrates our mutual respect for intellectual property as well as our ability to reach pragmatic solutions to IP issues regardless of whether proprietary or open source software is involved.' A Microsoft representative declined to say which of its products are covered by the deal."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>theodp writes " Microsoft says it has reached a wide-ranging IP agreement with Amazon in which each company has granted the other a license to its patent portfolio .
Microsoft says the agreement covers technologies in products such as Amazon 's Kindle    including open-source and proprietary technologies used in the e-reader    in addition to the use of Linux-based servers .
Microsoft issued a news release celebrating the accord , while Amazon declined to comment .
'We are pleased to have entered into this patent license agreement with Amazon.com, ' said Microsoft 's deputy general counsel .
'Microsoft 's patent portfolio is the largest and strongest in the software industry , and this agreement demonstrates our mutual respect for intellectual property as well as our ability to reach pragmatic solutions to IP issues regardless of whether proprietary or open source software is involved .
' A Microsoft representative declined to say which of its products are covered by the deal .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>theodp writes "Microsoft says it has reached a wide-ranging IP agreement with Amazon in which each company has granted the other a license to its patent portfolio.
Microsoft says the agreement covers technologies in products such as Amazon's Kindle — including open-source and proprietary technologies used in the e-reader — in addition to the use of Linux-based servers.
Microsoft issued a news release celebrating the accord, while Amazon declined to comment.
'We are pleased to have entered into this patent license agreement with Amazon.com,' said Microsoft's deputy general counsel.
'Microsoft's patent portfolio is the largest and strongest in the software industry, and this agreement demonstrates our mutual respect for intellectual property as well as our ability to reach pragmatic solutions to IP issues regardless of whether proprietary or open source software is involved.
' A Microsoft representative declined to say which of its products are covered by the deal.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31253674</id>
	<title>Re:You Know What Else This Means ...</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1266933660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's proprietary about LIT? Isn't it just CHM, which itself is just a bundle of HTML compressed using an open and well-known compression algorithm?</p><p>(which isn't to say that ePub is the way to go, if only because it's also HTML-in-a-bundle, and has much wider support)</p><p>Anyway, calibre will happily convert all this stuff back and forth, so it's not a big deal either way. Formats are only a problem when DRM is involved (as, presumably, you can no longer format-shift without breaking it). Which is why I'd very much prefer all those ebook stores out there to finally settle on ePub.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's proprietary about LIT ?
Is n't it just CHM , which itself is just a bundle of HTML compressed using an open and well-known compression algorithm ?
( which is n't to say that ePub is the way to go , if only because it 's also HTML-in-a-bundle , and has much wider support ) Anyway , calibre will happily convert all this stuff back and forth , so it 's not a big deal either way .
Formats are only a problem when DRM is involved ( as , presumably , you can no longer format-shift without breaking it ) .
Which is why I 'd very much prefer all those ebook stores out there to finally settle on ePub .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's proprietary about LIT?
Isn't it just CHM, which itself is just a bundle of HTML compressed using an open and well-known compression algorithm?
(which isn't to say that ePub is the way to go, if only because it's also HTML-in-a-bundle, and has much wider support)Anyway, calibre will happily convert all this stuff back and forth, so it's not a big deal either way.
Formats are only a problem when DRM is involved (as, presumably, you can no longer format-shift without breaking it).
Which is why I'd very much prefer all those ebook stores out there to finally settle on ePub.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243730</id>
	<title>You Know What Else This Means ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266936600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>

From Microsoft's press release:<p><div class="quote"><p>The agreement provides each company with access to the other&rsquo;s patent portfolio and covers a broad range of products and technology<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div><p>Now Microsoft will be able to sell all its products <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/11/22/1756237" title="slashdot.org">with just one click</a> [slashdot.org]! <br> <br>

But seriously where does this end?  Will we see the death of Microsoft's<nobr> <wbr></nobr><a href="http://www.microsoft.com/reader/" title="microsoft.com">.lit format</a> [microsoft.com] in favor of Kindle's<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.azw?  Will Amazon <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/windowsazure/" title="microsoft.com">push out and offer Azure on EC2</a> [microsoft.com]?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From Microsoft 's press release : The agreement provides each company with access to the other    s patent portfolio and covers a broad range of products and technology ...Now Microsoft will be able to sell all its products with just one click [ slashdot.org ] !
But seriously where does this end ?
Will we see the death of Microsoft 's .lit format [ microsoft.com ] in favor of Kindle 's .azw ?
Will Amazon push out and offer Azure on EC2 [ microsoft.com ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>

From Microsoft's press release:The agreement provides each company with access to the other’s patent portfolio and covers a broad range of products and technology ...Now Microsoft will be able to sell all its products with just one click [slashdot.org]!
But seriously where does this end?
Will we see the death of Microsoft's .lit format [microsoft.com] in favor of Kindle's .azw?
Will Amazon push out and offer Azure on EC2 [microsoft.com]?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31255986</id>
	<title>Microsoft/Amazon Deal: Nothing to See Here</title>
	<author>simplexion</author>
	<datestamp>1266951360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.linuxfoundation.org/news-media/blogs/browse/2010/02/microsoftamazon-deal-nothing-see-here" title="linuxfoundation.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.linuxfoundation.org/news-media/blogs/browse/2010/02/microsoftamazon-deal-nothing-see-here</a> [linuxfoundation.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.linuxfoundation.org/news-media/blogs/browse/2010/02/microsoftamazon-deal-nothing-see-here [ linuxfoundation.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.linuxfoundation.org/news-media/blogs/browse/2010/02/microsoftamazon-deal-nothing-see-here [linuxfoundation.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245768</id>
	<title>Re:Sounds one-sided to me</title>
	<author>Locutus</author>
	<datestamp>1266947100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>my first guess would be that this has something to do with the Microsoft extensions to FAT and Amazon's use of those to access VFAT based files on SD cards. I think they dropped the SD support on the latest model but they might already have been caught in Microsoft's patent web with the earlier release of Kindle supporting VFAT. There might be others but this seems like the obvious threat since Tom Tom was hit with it too.

So, do the Mono clowns still think that there is nothing to be concerned with running around using Microsoft's<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Net software in unlicensed products( aka Linux desktops )?

LoB</htmltext>
<tokenext>my first guess would be that this has something to do with the Microsoft extensions to FAT and Amazon 's use of those to access VFAT based files on SD cards .
I think they dropped the SD support on the latest model but they might already have been caught in Microsoft 's patent web with the earlier release of Kindle supporting VFAT .
There might be others but this seems like the obvious threat since Tom Tom was hit with it too .
So , do the Mono clowns still think that there is nothing to be concerned with running around using Microsoft 's .Net software in unlicensed products ( aka Linux desktops ) ?
LoB</tokentext>
<sentencetext>my first guess would be that this has something to do with the Microsoft extensions to FAT and Amazon's use of those to access VFAT based files on SD cards.
I think they dropped the SD support on the latest model but they might already have been caught in Microsoft's patent web with the earlier release of Kindle supporting VFAT.
There might be others but this seems like the obvious threat since Tom Tom was hit with it too.
So, do the Mono clowns still think that there is nothing to be concerned with running around using Microsoft's .Net software in unlicensed products( aka Linux desktops )?
LoB</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31254378</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft's anti-Linux patent strategy</title>
	<author>Kalriath</author>
	<datestamp>1266938160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In the deranged world of software patents, there is not exactly any such thing as sane legal reasoning. But as Microsoft convinces more companies to pay them for their use of Linux, then their patent claim gains a slimy veneer of legitimacy (or so they hope). Otherwise "why would so many people pay them?" This circular reasoning strengthens them in their eventual legal battles to come, as they attempt to hurt (or even end) the use of Linux.</p></div><p>Well, at least Microsoft hasn't sued anyone yet over Linux.  The same can't be said for another even more evil company with a dubious patent on the number of times one's finger contacts with one's mouse while conducting online purchases, with a name rather similar to a particular rainforest.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In the deranged world of software patents , there is not exactly any such thing as sane legal reasoning .
But as Microsoft convinces more companies to pay them for their use of Linux , then their patent claim gains a slimy veneer of legitimacy ( or so they hope ) .
Otherwise " why would so many people pay them ?
" This circular reasoning strengthens them in their eventual legal battles to come , as they attempt to hurt ( or even end ) the use of Linux.Well , at least Microsoft has n't sued anyone yet over Linux .
The same ca n't be said for another even more evil company with a dubious patent on the number of times one 's finger contacts with one 's mouse while conducting online purchases , with a name rather similar to a particular rainforest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the deranged world of software patents, there is not exactly any such thing as sane legal reasoning.
But as Microsoft convinces more companies to pay them for their use of Linux, then their patent claim gains a slimy veneer of legitimacy (or so they hope).
Otherwise "why would so many people pay them?
" This circular reasoning strengthens them in their eventual legal battles to come, as they attempt to hurt (or even end) the use of Linux.Well, at least Microsoft hasn't sued anyone yet over Linux.
The same can't be said for another even more evil company with a dubious patent on the number of times one's finger contacts with one's mouse while conducting online purchases, with a name rather similar to a particular rainforest.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31253560</id>
	<title>Re:Lie down with the dog, wake up with the fleas</title>
	<author>ignavus</author>
	<datestamp>1266933000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are socially better places to buy books online than Amazon.</p><p>I switched over to BetterWorld books because they devote money to literacy campaigns and have other socially worthwhile goals that I support.</p><p><a href="http://www.betterworldbooks.com/" title="betterworldbooks.com">http://www.betterworldbooks.com/</a> [betterworldbooks.com]</p><p>So far they have raised over $7.5 million towards global literacy.</p><p>I am not affiliated in any way, I am just a customer. But I like their idea and buy everything there now, instead of Amazon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are socially better places to buy books online than Amazon.I switched over to BetterWorld books because they devote money to literacy campaigns and have other socially worthwhile goals that I support.http : //www.betterworldbooks.com/ [ betterworldbooks.com ] So far they have raised over $ 7.5 million towards global literacy.I am not affiliated in any way , I am just a customer .
But I like their idea and buy everything there now , instead of Amazon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are socially better places to buy books online than Amazon.I switched over to BetterWorld books because they devote money to literacy campaigns and have other socially worthwhile goals that I support.http://www.betterworldbooks.com/ [betterworldbooks.com]So far they have raised over $7.5 million towards global literacy.I am not affiliated in any way, I am just a customer.
But I like their idea and buy everything there now, instead of Amazon.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243986</id>
	<title>Boycott Amazon...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266938100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They have helped Microsoft spread their FUD on patent issues and Linux.</p><p>I'll not be making any more purchases from Amazon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They have helped Microsoft spread their FUD on patent issues and Linux.I 'll not be making any more purchases from Amazon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They have helped Microsoft spread their FUD on patent issues and Linux.I'll not be making any more purchases from Amazon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244990</id>
	<title>Re:You Know What Else This Means ...</title>
	<author>Ltap</author>
	<datestamp>1266943380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Pirates seem to love the Lit format, I have no idea why. Out of all the ebooks I've seen, most are in either lit, pdf, or html. I personally convert 90\% of the stuff I get to epub, but most people seem almost idiotically short-sighted - crying about how epub can be DRM'd (password-protected container, I guess), and ignoring the fact that lit is a proprietary format that very little works with properly. Anyone with a brain knows that ePub is the only proper format. My theory is that there's very few people suitable for it - you need almost a web designer to handle the markup properly, but most web designers are lazy hacks and idiots who still use HTML 4.01 transitional, and ePub calls for XHTML 1.1 Strict.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pirates seem to love the Lit format , I have no idea why .
Out of all the ebooks I 've seen , most are in either lit , pdf , or html .
I personally convert 90 \ % of the stuff I get to epub , but most people seem almost idiotically short-sighted - crying about how epub can be DRM 'd ( password-protected container , I guess ) , and ignoring the fact that lit is a proprietary format that very little works with properly .
Anyone with a brain knows that ePub is the only proper format .
My theory is that there 's very few people suitable for it - you need almost a web designer to handle the markup properly , but most web designers are lazy hacks and idiots who still use HTML 4.01 transitional , and ePub calls for XHTML 1.1 Strict .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pirates seem to love the Lit format, I have no idea why.
Out of all the ebooks I've seen, most are in either lit, pdf, or html.
I personally convert 90\% of the stuff I get to epub, but most people seem almost idiotically short-sighted - crying about how epub can be DRM'd (password-protected container, I guess), and ignoring the fact that lit is a proprietary format that very little works with properly.
Anyone with a brain knows that ePub is the only proper format.
My theory is that there's very few people suitable for it - you need almost a web designer to handle the markup properly, but most web designers are lazy hacks and idiots who still use HTML 4.01 transitional, and ePub calls for XHTML 1.1 Strict.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244230</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244122</id>
	<title>Patent Deal</title>
	<author>dontgetshocked</author>
	<datestamp>1266938760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Resistance is futile.You will be assimilated.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Resistance is futile.You will be assimilated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Resistance is futile.You will be assimilated.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244412</id>
	<title>Re:Lie down with the dog, wake up with the fleas</title>
	<author>MrFurious5150</author>
	<datestamp>1266940140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So long Amazon, it was nice knowing you.</p></div><p>You said it.  If you get in bed with Microsoft, you don't get out.  Just ask Sega.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So long Amazon , it was nice knowing you.You said it .
If you get in bed with Microsoft , you do n't get out .
Just ask Sega .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So long Amazon, it was nice knowing you.You said it.
If you get in bed with Microsoft, you don't get out.
Just ask Sega.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245174</id>
	<title>this agreement demonstrates...</title>
	<author>istartedi</author>
	<datestamp>1266944340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>this agreement demonstrates...  yet another facet
of corporate control.  Large corporations can cross-license.
Small companies and individual entrepreneurs will continue to get squashed
by patents.</p><p>There, fixed that for him.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>this agreement demonstrates... yet another facet of corporate control .
Large corporations can cross-license .
Small companies and individual entrepreneurs will continue to get squashed by patents.There , fixed that for him .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this agreement demonstrates...  yet another facet
of corporate control.
Large corporations can cross-license.
Small companies and individual entrepreneurs will continue to get squashed
by patents.There, fixed that for him.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244294</id>
	<title>Re:You Know What Else This Means ...</title>
	<author>Daengbo</author>
	<datestamp>1266939540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's probably the same patent issues claimed in 2004: <a href="http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513\_22-137530.html" title="zdnet.com" rel="nofollow">Linux potentially infringes 283 patents</a> [zdnet.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's probably the same patent issues claimed in 2004 : Linux potentially infringes 283 patents [ zdnet.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's probably the same patent issues claimed in 2004: Linux potentially infringes 283 patents [zdnet.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244224</id>
	<title>it's about precedent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266939180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If MS can get some well known companies like Amazon to license open source software for them, then when they approach the next set of companies with an "agreement", they'll have a precedent.  Open source violates MS patents, so MS must be paid if you use it, and here's a list of other companies which have already agreed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If MS can get some well known companies like Amazon to license open source software for them , then when they approach the next set of companies with an " agreement " , they 'll have a precedent .
Open source violates MS patents , so MS must be paid if you use it , and here 's a list of other companies which have already agreed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If MS can get some well known companies like Amazon to license open source software for them, then when they approach the next set of companies with an "agreement", they'll have a precedent.
Open source violates MS patents, so MS must be paid if you use it, and here's a list of other companies which have already agreed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31247536</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft patent racketeering</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266953100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everyone knows that patenting is a bubble. The assets are not worth what it seems. Hard landing ahead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone knows that patenting is a bubble .
The assets are not worth what it seems .
Hard landing ahead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone knows that patenting is a bubble.
The assets are not worth what it seems.
Hard landing ahead.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244388</id>
	<title>More Descriptive Terminology</title>
	<author>Nerdfest</author>
	<datestamp>1266940020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Microsoft's patent portfolio is the largest and strongest in the software industry</p></div><p>I like to mentally replace 'patent portfolio' with the more accurate term 'bullshit'. It certainly makes this sentence read better. Are companies at point now that lawyers outnumber engineers and software developers?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft 's patent portfolio is the largest and strongest in the software industryI like to mentally replace 'patent portfolio ' with the more accurate term 'bullshit' .
It certainly makes this sentence read better .
Are companies at point now that lawyers outnumber engineers and software developers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft's patent portfolio is the largest and strongest in the software industryI like to mentally replace 'patent portfolio' with the more accurate term 'bullshit'.
It certainly makes this sentence read better.
Are companies at point now that lawyers outnumber engineers and software developers?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31248742</id>
	<title>Re:Lie down with the dog, wake up with the fleas</title>
	<author>Lorien\_the\_first\_one</author>
	<datestamp>1266957120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's probably all anyone can say at this point.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's probably all anyone can say at this point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's probably all anyone can say at this point.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245880</id>
	<title>Re:You Know What Else This Means ...</title>
	<author>einhverfr</author>
	<datestamp>1266947400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Now Microsoft will be able to sell all its products with just one click! </i></p><p>Right.  No more will you have to double-click!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now Microsoft will be able to sell all its products with just one click !
Right. No more will you have to double-click !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now Microsoft will be able to sell all its products with just one click!
Right.  No more will you have to double-click!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31336366</id>
	<title>Re:Boycott Amazon...</title>
	<author>yuhong</author>
	<datestamp>1267527240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, here is an article from Boycott Novell on this:
<a href="http://boycottnovell.com/2010/02/23/boycott-amazon/" title="boycottnovell.com" rel="nofollow">http://boycottnovell.com/2010/02/23/boycott-amazon/</a> [boycottnovell.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , here is an article from Boycott Novell on this : http : //boycottnovell.com/2010/02/23/boycott-amazon/ [ boycottnovell.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, here is an article from Boycott Novell on this:
http://boycottnovell.com/2010/02/23/boycott-amazon/ [boycottnovell.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243986</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243972</id>
	<title>Software patents are evil</title>
	<author>apexwm</author>
	<datestamp>1266938040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This statement is scary: "this agreement demonstrates our mutual respect for intellectual property as well as our ability to reach pragmatic solutions to IP issues regardless of whether proprietary or open source software is involved."  The fact that they brought in open source is scary.  And the fact that Amazon is paying Microsoft, only adds to the fire that Microsoft started with their software patent rage.  Hopefully, software patents will eventually go away, as it is now being revisited in court.  Software patents are giving Microsoft uncompetitive advantages in many areas.  It's essentially giving Microsoft monopolistic advantages all over again, after the anti-trust cases of the 1990's.

<a href="http://members.apex-internet.com/sa/windowslinux" title="apex-internet.com" rel="nofollow">http://members.apex-internet.com/sa/windowslinux</a> [apex-internet.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>This statement is scary : " this agreement demonstrates our mutual respect for intellectual property as well as our ability to reach pragmatic solutions to IP issues regardless of whether proprietary or open source software is involved .
" The fact that they brought in open source is scary .
And the fact that Amazon is paying Microsoft , only adds to the fire that Microsoft started with their software patent rage .
Hopefully , software patents will eventually go away , as it is now being revisited in court .
Software patents are giving Microsoft uncompetitive advantages in many areas .
It 's essentially giving Microsoft monopolistic advantages all over again , after the anti-trust cases of the 1990 's .
http : //members.apex-internet.com/sa/windowslinux [ apex-internet.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This statement is scary: "this agreement demonstrates our mutual respect for intellectual property as well as our ability to reach pragmatic solutions to IP issues regardless of whether proprietary or open source software is involved.
"  The fact that they brought in open source is scary.
And the fact that Amazon is paying Microsoft, only adds to the fire that Microsoft started with their software patent rage.
Hopefully, software patents will eventually go away, as it is now being revisited in court.
Software patents are giving Microsoft uncompetitive advantages in many areas.
It's essentially giving Microsoft monopolistic advantages all over again, after the anti-trust cases of the 1990's.
http://members.apex-internet.com/sa/windowslinux [apex-internet.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244072</id>
	<title>Re:Sounds one-sided to me</title>
	<author>walterbyrd</author>
	<datestamp>1266938520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It sounds like Amazon got caught violating one or more of Microsoft's patents, and this deal was arranged to avoid a lawsuit.</p></div><p>Exactly what patent was that? Why is it a secret?</p><p>Is it possible that msft's "patent" was just another one of msft's bogus patents, but it was cheaper for amazon to sign an agreement, rather than spend the next ten years in court?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It sounds like Amazon got caught violating one or more of Microsoft 's patents , and this deal was arranged to avoid a lawsuit.Exactly what patent was that ?
Why is it a secret ? Is it possible that msft 's " patent " was just another one of msft 's bogus patents , but it was cheaper for amazon to sign an agreement , rather than spend the next ten years in court ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It sounds like Amazon got caught violating one or more of Microsoft's patents, and this deal was arranged to avoid a lawsuit.Exactly what patent was that?
Why is it a secret?Is it possible that msft's "patent" was just another one of msft's bogus patents, but it was cheaper for amazon to sign an agreement, rather than spend the next ten years in court?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244168</id>
	<title>Re:You Know What Else This Means ...</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1266939000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>.Lit was already rotting on the vine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>.Lit was already rotting on the vine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.Lit was already rotting on the vine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31247932</id>
	<title>Re:That secret, submarine patent</title>
	<author>Dr\_Barnowl</author>
	<datestamp>1266954420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What then, if that secret, submarine patent is about something else entirely, or for that matter, does not even exist?</p></div><p>If such a thing <em>does</em> exist, then it's secrecy is part of it's power. You can be fairly sure that if it was revealed, there would be an immediate and concerted effort by the open source community to do any or all of the following..</p><ul><li>Reimplement patent infringing features without using the patented method</li><li>Locate and present prior art for these patents</li><li>Debunk the infringed patents as being obvious</li><li>Remove inessential but infringing features</li></ul><p>I wouldn't be surprised to find that one or more of the major vendors had an engineering group devoted to constructing a case against MS patents. I can imagine that it opens you up to a certain amount of risk though - if you know about an infringement, it lays you open to triple damages. It would be hard for a programmer to function as both a productive developer and a patent underminer. The same goes for an open community effort... reviewing MS patents could leave you liable to accusations of wilful infringement.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What then , if that secret , submarine patent is about something else entirely , or for that matter , does not even exist ? If such a thing does exist , then it 's secrecy is part of it 's power .
You can be fairly sure that if it was revealed , there would be an immediate and concerted effort by the open source community to do any or all of the following..Reimplement patent infringing features without using the patented methodLocate and present prior art for these patentsDebunk the infringed patents as being obviousRemove inessential but infringing featuresI would n't be surprised to find that one or more of the major vendors had an engineering group devoted to constructing a case against MS patents .
I can imagine that it opens you up to a certain amount of risk though - if you know about an infringement , it lays you open to triple damages .
It would be hard for a programmer to function as both a productive developer and a patent underminer .
The same goes for an open community effort... reviewing MS patents could leave you liable to accusations of wilful infringement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What then, if that secret, submarine patent is about something else entirely, or for that matter, does not even exist?If such a thing does exist, then it's secrecy is part of it's power.
You can be fairly sure that if it was revealed, there would be an immediate and concerted effort by the open source community to do any or all of the following..Reimplement patent infringing features without using the patented methodLocate and present prior art for these patentsDebunk the infringed patents as being obviousRemove inessential but infringing featuresI wouldn't be surprised to find that one or more of the major vendors had an engineering group devoted to constructing a case against MS patents.
I can imagine that it opens you up to a certain amount of risk though - if you know about an infringement, it lays you open to triple damages.
It would be hard for a programmer to function as both a productive developer and a patent underminer.
The same goes for an open community effort... reviewing MS patents could leave you liable to accusations of wilful infringement.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31246518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243780</id>
	<title>Anti-trust anyone?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266936900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If all copyright holders on software patents start to create bilateral agreements, it will eventually become clear that software patents are only an artificial entry barrier.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If all copyright holders on software patents start to create bilateral agreements , it will eventually become clear that software patents are only an artificial entry barrier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If all copyright holders on software patents start to create bilateral agreements, it will eventually become clear that software patents are only an artificial entry barrier.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243916</id>
	<title>INK</title>
	<author>killmenow</author>
	<datestamp>1266937740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's a verb and a noun. Like this...<br>
<br>
VERB: Microsoft and Amazon ink a deal.<br>
NOUN: Microsoft fscks Amazon before the ink is dry.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a verb and a noun .
Like this.. . VERB : Microsoft and Amazon ink a deal .
NOUN : Microsoft fscks Amazon before the ink is dry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a verb and a noun.
Like this...

VERB: Microsoft and Amazon ink a deal.
NOUN: Microsoft fscks Amazon before the ink is dry.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31246854</id>
	<title>Re:You Know What Else This Means ...</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1266950700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So, did Microsoft show Amazon patents that Linux infringes?  If so, under clause 7 of the GPL, Amazon must either have an agreement with Microsoft that permits unlimited sublicensing of Microsoft's patents, or they must stop distributing Linux.  I'm not sure which outcome I'd consider more amusing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , did Microsoft show Amazon patents that Linux infringes ?
If so , under clause 7 of the GPL , Amazon must either have an agreement with Microsoft that permits unlimited sublicensing of Microsoft 's patents , or they must stop distributing Linux .
I 'm not sure which outcome I 'd consider more amusing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, did Microsoft show Amazon patents that Linux infringes?
If so, under clause 7 of the GPL, Amazon must either have an agreement with Microsoft that permits unlimited sublicensing of Microsoft's patents, or they must stop distributing Linux.
I'm not sure which outcome I'd consider more amusing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31247608</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft's anti-Linux patent strategy</title>
	<author>harlows\_monkeys</author>
	<datestamp>1266953280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Microsoft struck a patent deal with struggling Novel, and it feels very similar to what we see here. The implication: Novel agrees its use of Linux somehow infringed on Microsoft's patents, and that it (and by extension everyone else) must pay Microsoft to use Linux.</p></div><p>Is there any serious disagreement about Linux distributions infringing patents? In a speech against software patents, Stallman cited a whole bunch of patents the Linux likely infringes, as part of his argument that software patents are harmful.</p><p>Anyway, the Novell deal is not Novell agreeing that Linux infringes patent. It is Novell agreeing that business customers worry that Linux might infringe patents. That's one of the reasons these kind of deals are often broad cross licensing agreements.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft struck a patent deal with struggling Novel , and it feels very similar to what we see here .
The implication : Novel agrees its use of Linux somehow infringed on Microsoft 's patents , and that it ( and by extension everyone else ) must pay Microsoft to use Linux.Is there any serious disagreement about Linux distributions infringing patents ?
In a speech against software patents , Stallman cited a whole bunch of patents the Linux likely infringes , as part of his argument that software patents are harmful.Anyway , the Novell deal is not Novell agreeing that Linux infringes patent .
It is Novell agreeing that business customers worry that Linux might infringe patents .
That 's one of the reasons these kind of deals are often broad cross licensing agreements .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Microsoft struck a patent deal with struggling Novel, and it feels very similar to what we see here.
The implication: Novel agrees its use of Linux somehow infringed on Microsoft's patents, and that it (and by extension everyone else) must pay Microsoft to use Linux.Is there any serious disagreement about Linux distributions infringing patents?
In a speech against software patents, Stallman cited a whole bunch of patents the Linux likely infringes, as part of his argument that software patents are harmful.Anyway, the Novell deal is not Novell agreeing that Linux infringes patent.
It is Novell agreeing that business customers worry that Linux might infringe patents.
That's one of the reasons these kind of deals are often broad cross licensing agreements.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31246806</id>
	<title>Maybe Amazon started it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266950460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some of the posters are speculating that Amazon was infringing some patent that MS holds and that MS came after them with a devil deal.</p><p>I think it's at least possible that the opposite happened - Amazon, with it's history of patent litigation, tried to engage Microsoft on a patent issue... and MS turned around, laughed, and said "Hah! We'll squash you like a BUG. A small one. Unless...."</p><p>It's possible no money changed hands. Amazon is a name recognized by far more people than would recognize Novell or SuSE. Just the public announcement of the suggestion that a company as well-known as Amazon thought it necessary to get patent license coverage for their Linux servers from MS must have the Grand High FUDmaster at Microsoft cackling over his lunch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some of the posters are speculating that Amazon was infringing some patent that MS holds and that MS came after them with a devil deal.I think it 's at least possible that the opposite happened - Amazon , with it 's history of patent litigation , tried to engage Microsoft on a patent issue... and MS turned around , laughed , and said " Hah !
We 'll squash you like a BUG .
A small one .
Unless.... " It 's possible no money changed hands .
Amazon is a name recognized by far more people than would recognize Novell or SuSE .
Just the public announcement of the suggestion that a company as well-known as Amazon thought it necessary to get patent license coverage for their Linux servers from MS must have the Grand High FUDmaster at Microsoft cackling over his lunch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some of the posters are speculating that Amazon was infringing some patent that MS holds and that MS came after them with a devil deal.I think it's at least possible that the opposite happened - Amazon, with it's history of patent litigation, tried to engage Microsoft on a patent issue... and MS turned around, laughed, and said "Hah!
We'll squash you like a BUG.
A small one.
Unless...."It's possible no money changed hands.
Amazon is a name recognized by far more people than would recognize Novell or SuSE.
Just the public announcement of the suggestion that a company as well-known as Amazon thought it necessary to get patent license coverage for their Linux servers from MS must have the Grand High FUDmaster at Microsoft cackling over his lunch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244414</id>
	<title>Re:Anti-trust anyone?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266940200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Government-enabled cartels.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Government-enabled cartels .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Government-enabled cartels.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243780</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243990</id>
	<title>Re:You Know What Else This Means ...</title>
	<author>gtall</author>
	<datestamp>1266938160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How does Amazon give access to open source to Microsoft. Would MS already have access to it? Either MS is bullshitting about the meaning or something is nefarious is in the details that MS will attempt to pull out in a future court case against FOSS....probably a bit of both. Come to think of it, MS has been using Amazon's One Click IP when their software blue screens with but one click of the mouse.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How does Amazon give access to open source to Microsoft .
Would MS already have access to it ?
Either MS is bullshitting about the meaning or something is nefarious is in the details that MS will attempt to pull out in a future court case against FOSS....probably a bit of both .
Come to think of it , MS has been using Amazon 's One Click IP when their software blue screens with but one click of the mouse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does Amazon give access to open source to Microsoft.
Would MS already have access to it?
Either MS is bullshitting about the meaning or something is nefarious is in the details that MS will attempt to pull out in a future court case against FOSS....probably a bit of both.
Come to think of it, MS has been using Amazon's One Click IP when their software blue screens with but one click of the mouse.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31246366</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft licenses Linux to Amazon</title>
	<author>akgooseman</author>
	<datestamp>1266949080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>andydread, instead of calling on the various organizations to SPEAK UP! and do something, do something yourself! If you can't do anything effective on your own,  donate to the aforementioned organizations. If you're as outraged as you sound, give $100, $1,000, $10,000<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... whatever your budget will bear. Nothing will be fixed unless and until we fix it ourselves.</htmltext>
<tokenext>andydread , instead of calling on the various organizations to SPEAK UP !
and do something , do something yourself !
If you ca n't do anything effective on your own , donate to the aforementioned organizations .
If you 're as outraged as you sound , give $ 100 , $ 1,000 , $ 10,000 ... whatever your budget will bear .
Nothing will be fixed unless and until we fix it ourselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>andydread, instead of calling on the various organizations to SPEAK UP!
and do something, do something yourself!
If you can't do anything effective on your own,  donate to the aforementioned organizations.
If you're as outraged as you sound, give $100, $1,000, $10,000 ... whatever your budget will bear.
Nothing will be fixed unless and until we fix it ourselves.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243886</id>
	<title>Crap, what next</title>
	<author>Zerth</author>
	<datestamp>1266937620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>American automakers team up with Japanese automakers to produce an electric car?<br>Walmart inks a deal to take over every state's welfare department?<br>In an effort to keep Microsoft in the US, Canada becomes a wholly owned subsidiary of Google?</p><p>Wait, those last two sound feasible...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>American automakers team up with Japanese automakers to produce an electric car ? Walmart inks a deal to take over every state 's welfare department ? In an effort to keep Microsoft in the US , Canada becomes a wholly owned subsidiary of Google ? Wait , those last two sound feasible.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>American automakers team up with Japanese automakers to produce an electric car?Walmart inks a deal to take over every state's welfare department?In an effort to keep Microsoft in the US, Canada becomes a wholly owned subsidiary of Google?Wait, those last two sound feasible...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31248264</id>
	<title>How do I feel?</title>
	<author>CherniyVolk</author>
	<datestamp>1266955740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Half infuriated, half ecstatic.</p><p>On one hand, Microsoft's bloat may lend some weight should they shift momentum of their extortion efforts into the direction of others in the industry.</p><p>On the other hand, perhaps this will stack within the mile high evidence showing how software patents are pure bullshit through and through.</p><p>Considering either way, is really a resistance or lashing out with something I believe in.  Politicians had better get a clue, it's only sad that they only speak currency rather than logic.  So, to play their game, I'm probably going to be upping my FSF membership status.  Should I ever get my hands on any one of these politicians, who make stupid decisions regarding law and technology, perhaps I'll nickname him Marcus Crassus; I'm sure I have enough gold.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Half infuriated , half ecstatic.On one hand , Microsoft 's bloat may lend some weight should they shift momentum of their extortion efforts into the direction of others in the industry.On the other hand , perhaps this will stack within the mile high evidence showing how software patents are pure bullshit through and through.Considering either way , is really a resistance or lashing out with something I believe in .
Politicians had better get a clue , it 's only sad that they only speak currency rather than logic .
So , to play their game , I 'm probably going to be upping my FSF membership status .
Should I ever get my hands on any one of these politicians , who make stupid decisions regarding law and technology , perhaps I 'll nickname him Marcus Crassus ; I 'm sure I have enough gold .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Half infuriated, half ecstatic.On one hand, Microsoft's bloat may lend some weight should they shift momentum of their extortion efforts into the direction of others in the industry.On the other hand, perhaps this will stack within the mile high evidence showing how software patents are pure bullshit through and through.Considering either way, is really a resistance or lashing out with something I believe in.
Politicians had better get a clue, it's only sad that they only speak currency rather than logic.
So, to play their game, I'm probably going to be upping my FSF membership status.
Should I ever get my hands on any one of these politicians, who make stupid decisions regarding law and technology, perhaps I'll nickname him Marcus Crassus; I'm sure I have enough gold.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31284368</id>
	<title>It could also be seen as collusion</title>
	<author>h00manist</author>
	<datestamp>1267196340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If it were about prices or products and not patents, it could be seen as anti-competitive I think. In my view, given that copyrights/patents effectively function as a privatization of public property, (thought and ideas), for large organizations to merge these properties is akin to creating a monopoly of ideas and thoughts.  If they were to include a few other large organizations and aggressively and cooperatively enforce all their intellectual property rights, they would create an unassailable monopoly on products, both new and existing.  Anyone outside their covenant would have a hard time selling any technical products, as just about anything could be interpreted as infringing on some patent or the group.  A monopoly created by IP law. Come to think of it, perhaps we already have some of that situation, given these groups already refrain from suing each other all the time for every single possible issue, a protection not granted to smaller groups which can't counter-sue. Or to use the proper terms, counter-attack.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If it were about prices or products and not patents , it could be seen as anti-competitive I think .
In my view , given that copyrights/patents effectively function as a privatization of public property , ( thought and ideas ) , for large organizations to merge these properties is akin to creating a monopoly of ideas and thoughts .
If they were to include a few other large organizations and aggressively and cooperatively enforce all their intellectual property rights , they would create an unassailable monopoly on products , both new and existing .
Anyone outside their covenant would have a hard time selling any technical products , as just about anything could be interpreted as infringing on some patent or the group .
A monopoly created by IP law .
Come to think of it , perhaps we already have some of that situation , given these groups already refrain from suing each other all the time for every single possible issue , a protection not granted to smaller groups which ca n't counter-sue .
Or to use the proper terms , counter-attack .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it were about prices or products and not patents, it could be seen as anti-competitive I think.
In my view, given that copyrights/patents effectively function as a privatization of public property, (thought and ideas), for large organizations to merge these properties is akin to creating a monopoly of ideas and thoughts.
If they were to include a few other large organizations and aggressively and cooperatively enforce all their intellectual property rights, they would create an unassailable monopoly on products, both new and existing.
Anyone outside their covenant would have a hard time selling any technical products, as just about anything could be interpreted as infringing on some patent or the group.
A monopoly created by IP law.
Come to think of it, perhaps we already have some of that situation, given these groups already refrain from suing each other all the time for every single possible issue, a protection not granted to smaller groups which can't counter-sue.
Or to use the proper terms, counter-attack.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244792</id>
	<title>ClearType</title>
	<author>peppepz</author>
	<datestamp>1266942240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Perhaps this agreement is about ClearType. It's covered by known MS patents, and that's why subpixel font rendering is disabled in many Linux distributions.
Amazon might need it, or some related technology, for its Kindle.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps this agreement is about ClearType .
It 's covered by known MS patents , and that 's why subpixel font rendering is disabled in many Linux distributions .
Amazon might need it , or some related technology , for its Kindle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps this agreement is about ClearType.
It's covered by known MS patents, and that's why subpixel font rendering is disabled in many Linux distributions.
Amazon might need it, or some related technology, for its Kindle.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245710</id>
	<title>Re:You Know What Else This Means ...</title>
	<author>Com2Kid</author>
	<datestamp>1266946920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who the hell still uses<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.lit?</p><p>Wonderful reader software though, works great, if you can find any content for it.  Also works great on what few, old, smart phones it runs on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who the hell still uses .lit ? Wonderful reader software though , works great , if you can find any content for it .
Also works great on what few , old , smart phones it runs on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who the hell still uses .lit?Wonderful reader software though, works great, if you can find any content for it.
Also works great on what few, old, smart phones it runs on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31246488</id>
	<title>one-click installs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266949560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe Windows 8 will have a "one-click" install?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe Windows 8 will have a " one-click " install ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe Windows 8 will have a "one-click" install?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243890</id>
	<title>Sounds one-sided to me</title>
	<author>Akido37</author>
	<datestamp>1266937620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Microsoft issued a news release celebrating the accord, while Amazon declined to comment.</p></div><p><div class="quote"><p>Microsoft says the agreement covers technologies in products such as Amazon's Kindle</p></div><p><div class="quote"><p>A Microsoft representative declined to say which of its products are covered by the deal.</p></div><p>
It sounds like Amazon got caught violating one or more of Microsoft's patents, and this deal was arranged to avoid a lawsuit.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft issued a news release celebrating the accord , while Amazon declined to comment.Microsoft says the agreement covers technologies in products such as Amazon 's KindleA Microsoft representative declined to say which of its products are covered by the deal .
It sounds like Amazon got caught violating one or more of Microsoft 's patents , and this deal was arranged to avoid a lawsuit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft issued a news release celebrating the accord, while Amazon declined to comment.Microsoft says the agreement covers technologies in products such as Amazon's KindleA Microsoft representative declined to say which of its products are covered by the deal.
It sounds like Amazon got caught violating one or more of Microsoft's patents, and this deal was arranged to avoid a lawsuit.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243846</id>
	<title>Stupid headline</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266937320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Spot the verb in the headline? I didn't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Spot the verb in the headline ?
I did n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spot the verb in the headline?
I didn't.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244290</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft patent racketeering</title>
	<author>twiddlingbits</author>
	<datestamp>1266939480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>

I can't imagine lawyers in India that are in-depth knowledgeable about the US Legal System and what is required to file and what arguments to make, not to mention admitted to the bar in the USA Taking depositions and actually going to court would be difficult from India! Maybe those guys type the standard form letters MS sends out alleging patent and copyright violations. Actually their web site says they do all the legwork paralegals normally do like case law and other research, etc for IP law cases. So they aren't lawyers but lawyers helpers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't imagine lawyers in India that are in-depth knowledgeable about the US Legal System and what is required to file and what arguments to make , not to mention admitted to the bar in the USA Taking depositions and actually going to court would be difficult from India !
Maybe those guys type the standard form letters MS sends out alleging patent and copyright violations .
Actually their web site says they do all the legwork paralegals normally do like case law and other research , etc for IP law cases .
So they are n't lawyers but lawyers helpers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>

I can't imagine lawyers in India that are in-depth knowledgeable about the US Legal System and what is required to file and what arguments to make, not to mention admitted to the bar in the USA Taking depositions and actually going to court would be difficult from India!
Maybe those guys type the standard form letters MS sends out alleging patent and copyright violations.
Actually their web site says they do all the legwork paralegals normally do like case law and other research, etc for IP law cases.
So they aren't lawyers but lawyers helpers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244570</id>
	<title>Re:"Largest and Strongest" overcompensating?</title>
	<author>MartinSchou</author>
	<datestamp>1266940980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well to be fair, how many of Microsoft's patents covers software? And how many of IBM's patents covers software?</p><p>IBM gets a crapload of patents every year, but since IBM has a huge hardware division most of those patents are probably hardware related.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well to be fair , how many of Microsoft 's patents covers software ?
And how many of IBM 's patents covers software ? IBM gets a crapload of patents every year , but since IBM has a huge hardware division most of those patents are probably hardware related .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well to be fair, how many of Microsoft's patents covers software?
And how many of IBM's patents covers software?IBM gets a crapload of patents every year, but since IBM has a huge hardware division most of those patents are probably hardware related.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243958</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244058</id>
	<title>Tell us the patents</title>
	<author>dandart</author>
	<datestamp>1266938460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think MS should tell infringing parties which of its patents are being infringed, otherwise its patent claim should be invalidated due to insufficient proof.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think MS should tell infringing parties which of its patents are being infringed , otherwise its patent claim should be invalidated due to insufficient proof .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think MS should tell infringing parties which of its patents are being infringed, otherwise its patent claim should be invalidated due to insufficient proof.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244220</id>
	<title>Microsoft protection racket</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266939180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"It sounds like Amazon got caught violating one or more of Microsoft's patents, and this deal was arranged to avoid a lawsuit</i>"<br> <br>
It sounds an awfull lot like a protection racket. Some people we don't know say you violation some patents we don't want to talk about. Best give us a cut of the house takings, just to be safe mind, else something bad might happen.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" It sounds like Amazon got caught violating one or more of Microsoft 's patents , and this deal was arranged to avoid a lawsuit " It sounds an awfull lot like a protection racket .
Some people we do n't know say you violation some patents we do n't want to talk about .
Best give us a cut of the house takings , just to be safe mind , else something bad might happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"It sounds like Amazon got caught violating one or more of Microsoft's patents, and this deal was arranged to avoid a lawsuit" 
It sounds an awfull lot like a protection racket.
Some people we don't know say you violation some patents we don't want to talk about.
Best give us a cut of the house takings, just to be safe mind, else something bad might happen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244448</id>
	<title>Re:Anti-trust anyone?</title>
	<author>Inconexo</author>
	<datestamp>1266940320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I heart that at an RMS conference years ago. Software patents mean nothing to big companies, who have enough patents to do patent-crossing (I think that was name). Little developers, on the other side, can't take advantage of them, since they have no patents to trade.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I heart that at an RMS conference years ago .
Software patents mean nothing to big companies , who have enough patents to do patent-crossing ( I think that was name ) .
Little developers , on the other side , ca n't take advantage of them , since they have no patents to trade .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I heart that at an RMS conference years ago.
Software patents mean nothing to big companies, who have enough patents to do patent-crossing (I think that was name).
Little developers, on the other side, can't take advantage of them, since they have no patents to trade.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243780</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243870</id>
	<title>Microsoft</title>
	<author>muckracer</author>
	<datestamp>1266937500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"We're really good at making money off of other people's products! Even free software we get paid for. We're sooooo cool!! [insert crazy monkey dance here]"</p><p>Seriously...this company needs to SCO!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" We 're really good at making money off of other people 's products !
Even free software we get paid for .
We 're sooooo cool ! !
[ insert crazy monkey dance here ] " Seriously...this company needs to SCO !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"We're really good at making money off of other people's products!
Even free software we get paid for.
We're sooooo cool!!
[insert crazy monkey dance here]"Seriously...this company needs to SCO!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245840</id>
	<title>Re:You Know What Else This Means ...</title>
	<author>commodore64\_love</author>
	<datestamp>1266947280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;&gt;But seriously where does this end? Will we see the death of Microsoft's<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.lit format in favor of Kindle's<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.azw?</p><p>Possibly but Microsoft will still win:<br>- EMBRACE (amazon's standard)<br>- EXTEND (azw with new features which will be MS proprietary &amp; only readable from Windows)<br>- EXTINGUISH (because amazon kindles will no longer be able to read the new azw2 format that MS now controls, people will buy the Microsoft Zune Reader instead - Kindles will disappear)</p><p>If you don't know what I'm talking about just read wikipedia's article about Microsoft during the 1990s.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; &gt; But seriously where does this end ?
Will we see the death of Microsoft 's .lit format in favor of Kindle 's .azw ? Possibly but Microsoft will still win : - EMBRACE ( amazon 's standard ) - EXTEND ( azw with new features which will be MS proprietary &amp; only readable from Windows ) - EXTINGUISH ( because amazon kindles will no longer be able to read the new azw2 format that MS now controls , people will buy the Microsoft Zune Reader instead - Kindles will disappear ) If you do n't know what I 'm talking about just read wikipedia 's article about Microsoft during the 1990s .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;&gt;But seriously where does this end?
Will we see the death of Microsoft's .lit format in favor of Kindle's .azw?Possibly but Microsoft will still win:- EMBRACE (amazon's standard)- EXTEND (azw with new features which will be MS proprietary &amp; only readable from Windows)- EXTINGUISH (because amazon kindles will no longer be able to read the new azw2 format that MS now controls, people will buy the Microsoft Zune Reader instead - Kindles will disappear)If you don't know what I'm talking about just read wikipedia's article about Microsoft during the 1990s.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244486</id>
	<title>Re:Crap, what next</title>
	<author>Bill\_the\_Engineer</author>
	<datestamp>1266940500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Walmart inks a deal to take over every state's welfare department?</p></div></blockquote><p>Walmart wouldn't take over what it considers a free employee benefit.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Walmart inks a deal to take over every state 's welfare department ? Walmart would n't take over what it considers a free employee benefit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Walmart inks a deal to take over every state's welfare department?Walmart wouldn't take over what it considers a free employee benefit.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243886</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244780</id>
	<title>Re:Stupid headline</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266942180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>English is more robust than most people think. I always think it is funny when people take archaic terms like, "to ink a deal" and make fun of it for not being proper English. Ink has been used as a transitive verb since the 1500s.</p><p>http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=ink</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>English is more robust than most people think .
I always think it is funny when people take archaic terms like , " to ink a deal " and make fun of it for not being proper English .
Ink has been used as a transitive verb since the 1500s.http : //www.etymonline.com/index.php ? term = ink</tokentext>
<sentencetext>English is more robust than most people think.
I always think it is funny when people take archaic terms like, "to ink a deal" and make fun of it for not being proper English.
Ink has been used as a transitive verb since the 1500s.http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=ink</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31246518</id>
	<title>That secret, submarine patent</title>
	<author>badger.foo</author>
	<datestamp>1266949620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>It struck me that Microsoft over the last few years has made a series of deals with other corporations over patents, but in each case

<ul>
<li>whatever is published is too unspecific to interpret</li>
<li>Microsoft's announcement mentions Linux in vague language, with the intention of making it sound less than legit</li>
</ul><p>

What then, if that secret, submarine patent is <i>about something else entirely</i>, or for that matter, <i>does not even exist</i>? For that matter, there could be several threats in play, patent based or otherwise, but anyway the main point of any such deal is to make sure the non-Microsoft party stays quiet, leaving Microsoft free to create the impression that Linux is somehow not quite legit, with no factual basis whatsoever.
</p><p>
We have no way of actually knowing, but it does appear that the US legal system somehow allows the kind of of behavior I suspect here as long as the actual underlying facts are not available to the public.
</p><p>
It doesn't even have to be a patent or a real issue at all, given the likely size of Microsoft's legal budget the threat of prolonged litigation backed up by the famous PR machine would be quite sufficient to intimidate smaller players to silence. Most of us are, after all, smaller players than Microsoft.
</p><p>
All idle speculation of course, but as long as they keep us in the dark about the facts of these deals, speculation <b>will</b> flourish.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It struck me that Microsoft over the last few years has made a series of deals with other corporations over patents , but in each case whatever is published is too unspecific to interpret Microsoft 's announcement mentions Linux in vague language , with the intention of making it sound less than legit What then , if that secret , submarine patent is about something else entirely , or for that matter , does not even exist ?
For that matter , there could be several threats in play , patent based or otherwise , but anyway the main point of any such deal is to make sure the non-Microsoft party stays quiet , leaving Microsoft free to create the impression that Linux is somehow not quite legit , with no factual basis whatsoever .
We have no way of actually knowing , but it does appear that the US legal system somehow allows the kind of of behavior I suspect here as long as the actual underlying facts are not available to the public .
It does n't even have to be a patent or a real issue at all , given the likely size of Microsoft 's legal budget the threat of prolonged litigation backed up by the famous PR machine would be quite sufficient to intimidate smaller players to silence .
Most of us are , after all , smaller players than Microsoft .
All idle speculation of course , but as long as they keep us in the dark about the facts of these deals , speculation will flourish .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It struck me that Microsoft over the last few years has made a series of deals with other corporations over patents, but in each case


whatever is published is too unspecific to interpret
Microsoft's announcement mentions Linux in vague language, with the intention of making it sound less than legit


What then, if that secret, submarine patent is about something else entirely, or for that matter, does not even exist?
For that matter, there could be several threats in play, patent based or otherwise, but anyway the main point of any such deal is to make sure the non-Microsoft party stays quiet, leaving Microsoft free to create the impression that Linux is somehow not quite legit, with no factual basis whatsoever.
We have no way of actually knowing, but it does appear that the US legal system somehow allows the kind of of behavior I suspect here as long as the actual underlying facts are not available to the public.
It doesn't even have to be a patent or a real issue at all, given the likely size of Microsoft's legal budget the threat of prolonged litigation backed up by the famous PR machine would be quite sufficient to intimidate smaller players to silence.
Most of us are, after all, smaller players than Microsoft.
All idle speculation of course, but as long as they keep us in the dark about the facts of these deals, speculation will flourish.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244340</id>
	<title>Microsoft's anti-Linux patent strategy</title>
	<author>Concern</author>
	<datestamp>1266939780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This suggests Microsoft's anti-Linux patent strategy is alive and well.</p><p>For those just getting up to speed:</p><p>Microsoft doesn't feel like competing fairly against open source products. So it attempts to use dubious legal trickery instead.</p><p>This started with SCO - a failed Unix company that took Microsoft investment in exchange for executing a legal attack on Linux vendors and users (based on copyright and licensing issues). The claim: that Linux infringed on their intellectual property rights. Their conduct in the case was truly awful (making the claim but resisting an explanation about what infringed; trying to shake down any and every Linux owner). Latest status here:</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO-Linux\_controversies" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO-Linux\_controversies</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>This was only one aspect of the FUD campaign. Patents were another. Microsoft struck a patent deal with struggling Novel, and it feels very similar to what we see here. The implication: Novel agrees its use of Linux somehow infringed on Microsoft's patents, and that it (and by extension everyone else) must pay Microsoft to use Linux.</p><p>The FSF's response explains the problem:</p><p><a href="http://www.fsf.org/news/microsoft\_response" title="fsf.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.fsf.org/news/microsoft\_response</a> [fsf.org]</p><p>The article describes other similar cases.</p><p>Now we have Amazon making a deal. They have far fewer reasons on the surface, but I imagine we'll find out why at some point, and it probably has something to do with a much stronger, non-Linux-related, perhaps non-software patent that Microsoft holds and which they violate. In the process of being sued and settling, Microsoft enticed them to accept terms which included a similar "Linux-FUD" clause - allowing an announcement just like this.</p><p>Although software patents are utterly and obviously ridiculous, and although most first world nations besides the US don't allow them, and although even the US is moving away from them (see Bilski)... even given that many large companies such as IBM have announced that they will defend Linux with their own patent portfolios... even after Microsoft has weathered an antitrust trial (and should feel themselves on thin ice when it comes to anticompetitive behavior)... they appear to still be pursuing a legal strategy of attacking Linux via barratry.</p><p>In the deranged world of software patents, there is not exactly any such thing as sane legal reasoning. But as Microsoft convinces more companies to pay them for their use of Linux, then their patent claim gains a slimy veneer of legitimacy (or so they hope). Otherwise "why would so many people pay them?" This circular reasoning strengthens them in their eventual legal battles to come, as they attempt to hurt (or even end) the use of Linux.</p><p>Of course, this is not just about Linux. Were Microsoft or any other company to succeed at this game, they would effectively make open source software impossible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This suggests Microsoft 's anti-Linux patent strategy is alive and well.For those just getting up to speed : Microsoft does n't feel like competing fairly against open source products .
So it attempts to use dubious legal trickery instead.This started with SCO - a failed Unix company that took Microsoft investment in exchange for executing a legal attack on Linux vendors and users ( based on copyright and licensing issues ) .
The claim : that Linux infringed on their intellectual property rights .
Their conduct in the case was truly awful ( making the claim but resisting an explanation about what infringed ; trying to shake down any and every Linux owner ) .
Latest status here : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO-Linux \ _controversies [ wikipedia.org ] This was only one aspect of the FUD campaign .
Patents were another .
Microsoft struck a patent deal with struggling Novel , and it feels very similar to what we see here .
The implication : Novel agrees its use of Linux somehow infringed on Microsoft 's patents , and that it ( and by extension everyone else ) must pay Microsoft to use Linux.The FSF 's response explains the problem : http : //www.fsf.org/news/microsoft \ _response [ fsf.org ] The article describes other similar cases.Now we have Amazon making a deal .
They have far fewer reasons on the surface , but I imagine we 'll find out why at some point , and it probably has something to do with a much stronger , non-Linux-related , perhaps non-software patent that Microsoft holds and which they violate .
In the process of being sued and settling , Microsoft enticed them to accept terms which included a similar " Linux-FUD " clause - allowing an announcement just like this.Although software patents are utterly and obviously ridiculous , and although most first world nations besides the US do n't allow them , and although even the US is moving away from them ( see Bilski ) ... even given that many large companies such as IBM have announced that they will defend Linux with their own patent portfolios... even after Microsoft has weathered an antitrust trial ( and should feel themselves on thin ice when it comes to anticompetitive behavior ) ... they appear to still be pursuing a legal strategy of attacking Linux via barratry.In the deranged world of software patents , there is not exactly any such thing as sane legal reasoning .
But as Microsoft convinces more companies to pay them for their use of Linux , then their patent claim gains a slimy veneer of legitimacy ( or so they hope ) .
Otherwise " why would so many people pay them ?
" This circular reasoning strengthens them in their eventual legal battles to come , as they attempt to hurt ( or even end ) the use of Linux.Of course , this is not just about Linux .
Were Microsoft or any other company to succeed at this game , they would effectively make open source software impossible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This suggests Microsoft's anti-Linux patent strategy is alive and well.For those just getting up to speed:Microsoft doesn't feel like competing fairly against open source products.
So it attempts to use dubious legal trickery instead.This started with SCO - a failed Unix company that took Microsoft investment in exchange for executing a legal attack on Linux vendors and users (based on copyright and licensing issues).
The claim: that Linux infringed on their intellectual property rights.
Their conduct in the case was truly awful (making the claim but resisting an explanation about what infringed; trying to shake down any and every Linux owner).
Latest status here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO-Linux\_controversies [wikipedia.org]This was only one aspect of the FUD campaign.
Patents were another.
Microsoft struck a patent deal with struggling Novel, and it feels very similar to what we see here.
The implication: Novel agrees its use of Linux somehow infringed on Microsoft's patents, and that it (and by extension everyone else) must pay Microsoft to use Linux.The FSF's response explains the problem:http://www.fsf.org/news/microsoft\_response [fsf.org]The article describes other similar cases.Now we have Amazon making a deal.
They have far fewer reasons on the surface, but I imagine we'll find out why at some point, and it probably has something to do with a much stronger, non-Linux-related, perhaps non-software patent that Microsoft holds and which they violate.
In the process of being sued and settling, Microsoft enticed them to accept terms which included a similar "Linux-FUD" clause - allowing an announcement just like this.Although software patents are utterly and obviously ridiculous, and although most first world nations besides the US don't allow them, and although even the US is moving away from them (see Bilski)... even given that many large companies such as IBM have announced that they will defend Linux with their own patent portfolios... even after Microsoft has weathered an antitrust trial (and should feel themselves on thin ice when it comes to anticompetitive behavior)... they appear to still be pursuing a legal strategy of attacking Linux via barratry.In the deranged world of software patents, there is not exactly any such thing as sane legal reasoning.
But as Microsoft convinces more companies to pay them for their use of Linux, then their patent claim gains a slimy veneer of legitimacy (or so they hope).
Otherwise "why would so many people pay them?
" This circular reasoning strengthens them in their eventual legal battles to come, as they attempt to hurt (or even end) the use of Linux.Of course, this is not just about Linux.
Were Microsoft or any other company to succeed at this game, they would effectively make open source software impossible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244806</id>
	<title>Pack it up. FOSS is done for.</title>
	<author>andydread</author>
	<datestamp>1266942300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Microsoft has won.  Open Source/Free Sofware as we know it will never be the same.  They have effectively put a cost on any serious use of Linux in the marketplace.   "You open source folks are free to tinker but any serious deployments or projects will have to pay us the Microsoft tax."   This will effectively slow the rate of adoption of Linux/GNU in the marketplace.  And why do i think they won?  Because the FOSS community is just sitting back burying their heads and doing nothing about this.   HELLO LINUS!!, ODSL, FSF, SAMBA, Microsoft is making money on your back in the most egregious manner while continuing to spread fear in the marketplace.  Are you going to continue to bury your collective heads in the sand or are you going to do something about this extortion racket that Microsoft is running behind your backs?   If the community does nothing then Microsoft wins.  This is terrible.  What a nightmare.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft has won .
Open Source/Free Sofware as we know it will never be the same .
They have effectively put a cost on any serious use of Linux in the marketplace .
" You open source folks are free to tinker but any serious deployments or projects will have to pay us the Microsoft tax .
" This will effectively slow the rate of adoption of Linux/GNU in the marketplace .
And why do i think they won ?
Because the FOSS community is just sitting back burying their heads and doing nothing about this .
HELLO LINUS !
! , ODSL , FSF , SAMBA , Microsoft is making money on your back in the most egregious manner while continuing to spread fear in the marketplace .
Are you going to continue to bury your collective heads in the sand or are you going to do something about this extortion racket that Microsoft is running behind your backs ?
If the community does nothing then Microsoft wins .
This is terrible .
What a nightmare .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft has won.
Open Source/Free Sofware as we know it will never be the same.
They have effectively put a cost on any serious use of Linux in the marketplace.
"You open source folks are free to tinker but any serious deployments or projects will have to pay us the Microsoft tax.
"   This will effectively slow the rate of adoption of Linux/GNU in the marketplace.
And why do i think they won?
Because the FOSS community is just sitting back burying their heads and doing nothing about this.
HELLO LINUS!
!, ODSL, FSF, SAMBA, Microsoft is making money on your back in the most egregious manner while continuing to spread fear in the marketplace.
Are you going to continue to bury your collective heads in the sand or are you going to do something about this extortion racket that Microsoft is running behind your backs?
If the community does nothing then Microsoft wins.
This is terrible.
What a nightmare.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244066</id>
	<title>This speaks volumes</title>
	<author>HangingChad</author>
	<datestamp>1266938520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>Microsoft issued a news release celebrating the accord, while Amazon declined to comment.</i>

</p><p>Sometimes which dog is barking tells you a lot about what's going on out in the pasture.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft issued a news release celebrating the accord , while Amazon declined to comment .
Sometimes which dog is barking tells you a lot about what 's going on out in the pasture .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Microsoft issued a news release celebrating the accord, while Amazon declined to comment.
Sometimes which dog is barking tells you a lot about what's going on out in the pasture.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243844</id>
	<title>More Patents for Microsoft</title>
	<author>Stregano</author>
	<datestamp>1266937320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is pretty obvious that this move was done in order for Microsoft to get ahold of more patents.  Sure, they share the patents, but Microsoft can use even more patents now.<br> <br>
I do think that Amazon should use this to their advantage as soon as possible.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is pretty obvious that this move was done in order for Microsoft to get ahold of more patents .
Sure , they share the patents , but Microsoft can use even more patents now .
I do think that Amazon should use this to their advantage as soon as possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is pretty obvious that this move was done in order for Microsoft to get ahold of more patents.
Sure, they share the patents, but Microsoft can use even more patents now.
I do think that Amazon should use this to their advantage as soon as possible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31246780</id>
	<title>How does this tie in to the GPL?</title>
	<author>A nonymous Coward</author>
	<datestamp>1266950400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The GPL is not patent friendly.  If you distribute GPL code, you have to include royalty free patent licenses to everybody.  Or something like that, pardon the vague non-lawyer language, IANAL.</p><p>Anyways, if Amazon distributes the GPL's kernel sources with the Kindle, doesn't it now include access to all Microsoft's patents too?  And if it can't because Microsoft won't allow it, doesn't this revoke Amazon's license to redistribute GPL code, and thus sell the Kindle?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The GPL is not patent friendly .
If you distribute GPL code , you have to include royalty free patent licenses to everybody .
Or something like that , pardon the vague non-lawyer language , IANAL.Anyways , if Amazon distributes the GPL 's kernel sources with the Kindle , does n't it now include access to all Microsoft 's patents too ?
And if it ca n't because Microsoft wo n't allow it , does n't this revoke Amazon 's license to redistribute GPL code , and thus sell the Kindle ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The GPL is not patent friendly.
If you distribute GPL code, you have to include royalty free patent licenses to everybody.
Or something like that, pardon the vague non-lawyer language, IANAL.Anyways, if Amazon distributes the GPL's kernel sources with the Kindle, doesn't it now include access to all Microsoft's patents too?
And if it can't because Microsoft won't allow it, doesn't this revoke Amazon's license to redistribute GPL code, and thus sell the Kindle?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245362</id>
	<title>Awesome</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266945360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"...but I imagine... probably has something to do with... they appear to..."</i> <br> <br>

That's just awesome. You got +5 informative explaining how Microsoft mighht be guilty of unknown shenanigans.<br> <br>

Slashdot's just plain broken.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...but I imagine... probably has something to do with... they appear to... " That 's just awesome .
You got + 5 informative explaining how Microsoft mighht be guilty of unknown shenanigans .
Slashdot 's just plain broken .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...but I imagine... probably has something to do with... they appear to..."  

That's just awesome.
You got +5 informative explaining how Microsoft mighht be guilty of unknown shenanigans.
Slashdot's just plain broken.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244582</id>
	<title>Azure is crap, MS knows it. They need to learn fro</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266940980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Azure is crap, MS knows it. They need to learn from Amazon.</p><p>Sadly, one of our largest clients has signed a deal with MS to deploy Azure over all the competing technologies in the x86 space. The deal was signed at the top, without input from the technical people who know the crap they will have to deal with. VMware isn't perfect, but everyone would agree it is the most mature of the x86.</p><p>Previous leadership has inked a few deals with Oracle and Microsoft that turned out to waste over a 2 yrs each in 200+ IT people and millions in IT infrastructure. Both ended up being thrown out in the 3rd year when the projects were know were near completion and WAY over budget. They never learn that golf course deals rarely turn out well.</p><p>Does anyone still use Biztalk in a high volume enterprise? No?  Failure is the term we use for it.  Azure will probably end up similar. Even since MS gives the software away, gives 10 consultants to make it work, they don't pay us for the 200 additional people it takes to make it work from now until future leadership finally pulls the plug. Boo.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Azure is crap , MS knows it .
They need to learn from Amazon.Sadly , one of our largest clients has signed a deal with MS to deploy Azure over all the competing technologies in the x86 space .
The deal was signed at the top , without input from the technical people who know the crap they will have to deal with .
VMware is n't perfect , but everyone would agree it is the most mature of the x86.Previous leadership has inked a few deals with Oracle and Microsoft that turned out to waste over a 2 yrs each in 200 + IT people and millions in IT infrastructure .
Both ended up being thrown out in the 3rd year when the projects were know were near completion and WAY over budget .
They never learn that golf course deals rarely turn out well.Does anyone still use Biztalk in a high volume enterprise ?
No ? Failure is the term we use for it .
Azure will probably end up similar .
Even since MS gives the software away , gives 10 consultants to make it work , they do n't pay us for the 200 additional people it takes to make it work from now until future leadership finally pulls the plug .
Boo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Azure is crap, MS knows it.
They need to learn from Amazon.Sadly, one of our largest clients has signed a deal with MS to deploy Azure over all the competing technologies in the x86 space.
The deal was signed at the top, without input from the technical people who know the crap they will have to deal with.
VMware isn't perfect, but everyone would agree it is the most mature of the x86.Previous leadership has inked a few deals with Oracle and Microsoft that turned out to waste over a 2 yrs each in 200+ IT people and millions in IT infrastructure.
Both ended up being thrown out in the 3rd year when the projects were know were near completion and WAY over budget.
They never learn that golf course deals rarely turn out well.Does anyone still use Biztalk in a high volume enterprise?
No?  Failure is the term we use for it.
Azure will probably end up similar.
Even since MS gives the software away, gives 10 consultants to make it work, they don't pay us for the 200 additional people it takes to make it work from now until future leadership finally pulls the plug.
Boo.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245618</id>
	<title>Re:Crap, what next</title>
	<author>http</author>
	<datestamp>1266946560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nah, Google would never take on such a debt laden company.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nah , Google would never take on such a debt laden company .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nah, Google would never take on such a debt laden company.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243886</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244672</id>
	<title>Re:"Largest and Strongest" overcompensating?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266941460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>..for certain definitions of "the software industry" which exclude the International Business Machines Corporation.</i> </p><p>How many patents are cross-licensed between IBM and Microsoft? I am betting the number is greater than zero.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>..for certain definitions of " the software industry " which exclude the International Business Machines Corporation .
How many patents are cross-licensed between IBM and Microsoft ?
I am betting the number is greater than zero .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>..for certain definitions of "the software industry" which exclude the International Business Machines Corporation.
How many patents are cross-licensed between IBM and Microsoft?
I am betting the number is greater than zero.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243958</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243908</id>
	<title>iPad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266937740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hope you guys realize that this is Amazon's and MS way to battle iTunes? I think the iPad was the final push that Amazon needed to fall for going to Microsoft.</p><p>I expect som XPad with WindowsMobile7 to be anounced and an integration with the Amazon e-bookstore.</p><p>The problem is that just like Android the WindowsMobile7 offers little new and as seen on the Droid, Hero and Legend -- the quality is not there yet in a long shot.</p><p>Apple has done some real unintentional good, it transformed the industry completely. Too bad the options aren't really options. I'm hoping for Nokias QT to start working on iPhone, Android and WM7 as well. That way, the apps become less relevant and the consumers can pick the phones that fit them best.</p><p>Personally I hate the slowness of Android, everyhting feel so slow on the Legend. But, I guess it will be better with time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope you guys realize that this is Amazon 's and MS way to battle iTunes ?
I think the iPad was the final push that Amazon needed to fall for going to Microsoft.I expect som XPad with WindowsMobile7 to be anounced and an integration with the Amazon e-bookstore.The problem is that just like Android the WindowsMobile7 offers little new and as seen on the Droid , Hero and Legend -- the quality is not there yet in a long shot.Apple has done some real unintentional good , it transformed the industry completely .
Too bad the options are n't really options .
I 'm hoping for Nokias QT to start working on iPhone , Android and WM7 as well .
That way , the apps become less relevant and the consumers can pick the phones that fit them best.Personally I hate the slowness of Android , everyhting feel so slow on the Legend .
But , I guess it will be better with time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope you guys realize that this is Amazon's and MS way to battle iTunes?
I think the iPad was the final push that Amazon needed to fall for going to Microsoft.I expect som XPad with WindowsMobile7 to be anounced and an integration with the Amazon e-bookstore.The problem is that just like Android the WindowsMobile7 offers little new and as seen on the Droid, Hero and Legend -- the quality is not there yet in a long shot.Apple has done some real unintentional good, it transformed the industry completely.
Too bad the options aren't really options.
I'm hoping for Nokias QT to start working on iPhone, Android and WM7 as well.
That way, the apps become less relevant and the consumers can pick the phones that fit them best.Personally I hate the slowness of Android, everyhting feel so slow on the Legend.
But, I guess it will be better with time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243958</id>
	<title>"Largest and Strongest" overcompensating?</title>
	<author>LaminatorX</author>
	<datestamp>1266937920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Microsoft's patent portfolio is the largest and strongest in the software industry...</p><p><div class="quote"><p>..for certain definitions of "the software industry" which exclude the International Business Machines Corporation.</p></div></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft 's patent portfolio is the largest and strongest in the software industry.....for certain definitions of " the software industry " which exclude the International Business Machines Corporation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft's patent portfolio is the largest and strongest in the software industry.....for certain definitions of "the software industry" which exclude the International Business Machines Corporation.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243934</id>
	<title>Re:Stupid headline</title>
	<author>Elros</author>
	<datestamp>1266937860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Verb</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * S: (v) ink (append one's signature to) "They inked the contract"<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * S: (v) ink (mark, coat, cover, or stain with ink) "he inked his finger"<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * S: (v) ink (fill with ink) "ink a pen"</p><p><a href="http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=ink" title="princeton.edu" rel="nofollow">http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=ink</a> [princeton.edu]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Verb         * S : ( v ) ink ( append one 's signature to ) " They inked the contract "         * S : ( v ) ink ( mark , coat , cover , or stain with ink ) " he inked his finger "         * S : ( v ) ink ( fill with ink ) " ink a pen " http : //wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn ? s = ink [ princeton.edu ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Verb
        * S: (v) ink (append one's signature to) "They inked the contract"
        * S: (v) ink (mark, coat, cover, or stain with ink) "he inked his finger"
        * S: (v) ink (fill with ink) "ink a pen"http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=ink [princeton.edu]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31246142</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft's anti-Linux patent strategy</title>
	<author>ArtFart</author>
	<datestamp>1266948120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"This suggests Microsoft's anti-Linux patent strategy is alive and well."

Or not...

Microsoft's having entered into arrangements with a couple of other players (most notably Novell) to sell "protection" to large organizations was never really about making any significant money in and of itself--it was an attempt after the SCO fizzle to instill fear in the hearts of companies deploying Linux at the enterprise level.

Now, it appears Redmond negotiated some sort of deal with Amazon for heaven knows what, the main effect is that they get a chance to be quoted in the media making another threat to drop the IP hammer on anyone who dares deny the Windows Gospel.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" This suggests Microsoft 's anti-Linux patent strategy is alive and well .
" Or not.. . Microsoft 's having entered into arrangements with a couple of other players ( most notably Novell ) to sell " protection " to large organizations was never really about making any significant money in and of itself--it was an attempt after the SCO fizzle to instill fear in the hearts of companies deploying Linux at the enterprise level .
Now , it appears Redmond negotiated some sort of deal with Amazon for heaven knows what , the main effect is that they get a chance to be quoted in the media making another threat to drop the IP hammer on anyone who dares deny the Windows Gospel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"This suggests Microsoft's anti-Linux patent strategy is alive and well.
"

Or not...

Microsoft's having entered into arrangements with a couple of other players (most notably Novell) to sell "protection" to large organizations was never really about making any significant money in and of itself--it was an attempt after the SCO fizzle to instill fear in the hearts of companies deploying Linux at the enterprise level.
Now, it appears Redmond negotiated some sort of deal with Amazon for heaven knows what, the main effect is that they get a chance to be quoted in the media making another threat to drop the IP hammer on anyone who dares deny the Windows Gospel.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244646</id>
	<title>info on http://en.swpat.org</title>
	<author>H4x0r Jim Duggan</author>
	<datestamp>1266941280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
  Here's some background info on these deals:
</p><ul>
<li> <a href="http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Novell-Microsoft\_patent\_deals" title="swpat.org">Novell-Microsoft patent deals</a> [swpat.org] </li><li> <a href="http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Free\_software\_distributors\_paying\_patent\_tax" title="swpat.org">Free software distributors paying patent tax</a> [swpat.org] </li><li> <a href="http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Microsoft" title="swpat.org">Microsoft</a> [swpat.org] </li><li> <a href="http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Amazon" title="swpat.org">Amazon</a> [swpat.org] </li></ul><p>
  I don't time right now to look into this deal, so if someone could add info to en.swpat.org about it, that would be great.  Otherwise I'll do it later.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's some background info on these deals : Novell-Microsoft patent deals [ swpat.org ] Free software distributors paying patent tax [ swpat.org ] Microsoft [ swpat.org ] Amazon [ swpat.org ] I do n't time right now to look into this deal , so if someone could add info to en.swpat.org about it , that would be great .
Otherwise I 'll do it later .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
  Here's some background info on these deals:

 Novell-Microsoft patent deals [swpat.org]  Free software distributors paying patent tax [swpat.org]  Microsoft [swpat.org]  Amazon [swpat.org] 
  I don't time right now to look into this deal, so if someone could add info to en.swpat.org about it, that would be great.
Otherwise I'll do it later.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245154</id>
	<title>Re:Crap, what next</title>
	<author>EchaniDrgn</author>
	<datestamp>1266944220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Walmart inks a deal to take over every state's welfare department?</p></div><p>
Yeah, I think it'll be located between shoes and electronics, right by the bathrooms.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Walmart inks a deal to take over every state 's welfare department ?
Yeah , I think it 'll be located between shoes and electronics , right by the bathrooms .
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Walmart inks a deal to take over every state's welfare department?
Yeah, I think it'll be located between shoes and electronics, right by the bathrooms.
:-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243886</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31256244</id>
	<title>history of microsoft patent extortion</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266954180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's a <a href="http://slashdot.org/~twitter/journal/219107" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">history of Microsoft's patent extortion</a> [slashdot.org], told in Microsoft's own words.  What's really amazing is how these companies act like Biski never happened and that software patents have value.  It did and they don't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's a history of Microsoft 's patent extortion [ slashdot.org ] , told in Microsoft 's own words .
What 's really amazing is how these companies act like Biski never happened and that software patents have value .
It did and they do n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's a history of Microsoft's patent extortion [slashdot.org], told in Microsoft's own words.
What's really amazing is how these companies act like Biski never happened and that software patents have value.
It did and they don't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245444</id>
	<title>Re:Sounds one-sided to me</title>
	<author>hairyfeet</author>
	<datestamp>1266945720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Was the Kindle using FAT32? Because we know for the TomTom case that rightly or wrongly MSFT holds the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File\_Allocation\_Table#Patent\_infringement\_lawsuit" title="wikipedia.org">patents</a> [wikipedia.org] for FAT32. I personally think Linux distros are pushing their luck continuing to release Fat32 support knowing MSFT holds the patents.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Was the Kindle using FAT32 ?
Because we know for the TomTom case that rightly or wrongly MSFT holds the patents [ wikipedia.org ] for FAT32 .
I personally think Linux distros are pushing their luck continuing to release Fat32 support knowing MSFT holds the patents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Was the Kindle using FAT32?
Because we know for the TomTom case that rightly or wrongly MSFT holds the patents [wikipedia.org] for FAT32.
I personally think Linux distros are pushing their luck continuing to release Fat32 support knowing MSFT holds the patents.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243742</id>
	<title>Erm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266936720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>A Microsoft representative declined to say which of its products are covered by the deal."</p></div></blockquote><p>

Which is like doing the following:<br>
"Hey dude, I did something really cool!"<br>
"Oh yeah, what's that?"<br>
"Not telling! Tee hee!"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A Microsoft representative declined to say which of its products are covered by the deal .
" Which is like doing the following : " Hey dude , I did something really cool !
" " Oh yeah , what 's that ?
" " Not telling !
Tee hee !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A Microsoft representative declined to say which of its products are covered by the deal.
"

Which is like doing the following:
"Hey dude, I did something really cool!
"
"Oh yeah, what's that?
"
"Not telling!
Tee hee!
"
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244890</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft licenses Linux to Amazon</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266942780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is a horrible development and I am not sure if anyone but Microsoft understands the scope of the damage that they are doing to FOSS here.  I call on the FSF, OSDL/Linux Foundation and others to SPEAK UP! on this and do something about it.  I wonder if people like Linus even cares about this?</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a horrible development and I am not sure if anyone but Microsoft understands the scope of the damage that they are doing to FOSS here .
I call on the FSF , OSDL/Linux Foundation and others to SPEAK UP !
on this and do something about it .
I wonder if people like Linus even cares about this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a horrible development and I am not sure if anyone but Microsoft understands the scope of the damage that they are doing to FOSS here.
I call on the FSF, OSDL/Linux Foundation and others to SPEAK UP!
on this and do something about it.
I wonder if people like Linus even cares about this?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31254700</id>
	<title>Re:Sounds one-sided to me</title>
	<author>Kalriath</author>
	<datestamp>1266940200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who's to say, though, that Amazon was the one who got caught "violating"?  Who's to say Amazon didn't go after Microsoft for violating 1-click or something?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who 's to say , though , that Amazon was the one who got caught " violating " ?
Who 's to say Amazon did n't go after Microsoft for violating 1-click or something ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who's to say, though, that Amazon was the one who got caught "violating"?
Who's to say Amazon didn't go after Microsoft for violating 1-click or something?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244204</id>
	<title>Corporate blackmail</title>
	<author>kaaposc</author>
	<datestamp>1266939120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Rephrasing Al Capone's famous quote:</p><blockquote><div><p>"You can get further with a kind word and a <strong>mighty patent portfolio</strong> than you can with just a kind word."</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Rephrasing Al Capone 's famous quote : " You can get further with a kind word and a mighty patent portfolio than you can with just a kind word .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rephrasing Al Capone's famous quote:"You can get further with a kind word and a mighty patent portfolio than you can with just a kind word.
"
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244004</id>
	<title>Microsoft patent racketeering</title>
	<author>walterbyrd</author>
	<datestamp>1266938220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This patent stuff has got to be a gold mine for msft. IP extortion seems to be a brilliant business model.</p><p>February 22, 2010<br><b>Microsoft, Amazon strike patent deal covering Kindle and Linux</b></p><p>As would be expected, the actual patents that were supposedly violated are not disclosed. For many years msft claimed that Linux violates msft patents, but msft absolutely refuses to disclose which patents.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Microsoft says the deal grants Amazon patent-related "coverage" for its use of open-source and proprietary technologies in its Kindle e-reader, and its use of Linux-based computer servers.</p><p>At the same time, the deal has the potential to stir new controversy in the tech industry, if it's interpreted as Amazon implicitly endorsing Microsoft's claims that Linux and other open-source technologies violate its patents.</p></div><p>February 19, 2010<br><b>Nathan Myhrvold's Intellectual Ventures Could be Biggest Racketeering Operation in the United States and Beyond</b> </p><p><div class="quote"><p>Patent thug Nathan Myhrvold turns out to have over 1,000 patent proxies with which to potentially attack and extort those who do not pay "protection money"; he also spent over $1 million lobbying his government</p><p>THE New York Times has published this report about Microsoft's patent troll Nathan Myhrvold, who is backed by his colleague Bill Gates, his former employer Microsoft, and even Apple. He already terrorises the industry using patents that it spent literally billions of dollars acquiring (not actually working to invent anything of substance).</p></div><p> <a href="http://boycottnovell.com/2010/02/19/nathan-myhrvold-exposed-again/" title="boycottnovell.com">http://boycottnovell.com/2010/02/19/nathan-myhrvold-exposed-again/</a> [boycottnovell.com]</p><p>And here is the NYT article:</p><p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/18/technology/18patent.html" title="nytimes.com">http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/18/technology/18patent.html</a> [nytimes.com]</p><p>I suppose using the US legal system for patent extortion is especially cost effective since msft uses offshore labor for the legal work.</p><p>February 18, 2010<br><b>Microsoft to outsource general legal work to India</b> </p><p><div class="quote"><p>Software giant Microsoft will begin outsourcing general legal work to India after signing a deal with legal process outsourcing (LPO) company CPA Global. The news comes as CPA outlined plans to expand its Indian workforce from 600 to 1,000 by the end of 2011, and hinted at opening another outsourcing centre.</p></div><p> <a href="http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/microsoft-outsource-general-legal-work-india" title="lawgazette.co.uk">http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/microsoft-outsource-general-legal-work-india</a> [lawgazette.co.uk]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This patent stuff has got to be a gold mine for msft .
IP extortion seems to be a brilliant business model.February 22 , 2010Microsoft , Amazon strike patent deal covering Kindle and LinuxAs would be expected , the actual patents that were supposedly violated are not disclosed .
For many years msft claimed that Linux violates msft patents , but msft absolutely refuses to disclose which patents.Microsoft says the deal grants Amazon patent-related " coverage " for its use of open-source and proprietary technologies in its Kindle e-reader , and its use of Linux-based computer servers.At the same time , the deal has the potential to stir new controversy in the tech industry , if it 's interpreted as Amazon implicitly endorsing Microsoft 's claims that Linux and other open-source technologies violate its patents.February 19 , 2010Nathan Myhrvold 's Intellectual Ventures Could be Biggest Racketeering Operation in the United States and Beyond Patent thug Nathan Myhrvold turns out to have over 1,000 patent proxies with which to potentially attack and extort those who do not pay " protection money " ; he also spent over $ 1 million lobbying his governmentTHE New York Times has published this report about Microsoft 's patent troll Nathan Myhrvold , who is backed by his colleague Bill Gates , his former employer Microsoft , and even Apple .
He already terrorises the industry using patents that it spent literally billions of dollars acquiring ( not actually working to invent anything of substance ) .
http : //boycottnovell.com/2010/02/19/nathan-myhrvold-exposed-again/ [ boycottnovell.com ] And here is the NYT article : http : //www.nytimes.com/2010/02/18/technology/18patent.html [ nytimes.com ] I suppose using the US legal system for patent extortion is especially cost effective since msft uses offshore labor for the legal work.February 18 , 2010Microsoft to outsource general legal work to India Software giant Microsoft will begin outsourcing general legal work to India after signing a deal with legal process outsourcing ( LPO ) company CPA Global .
The news comes as CPA outlined plans to expand its Indian workforce from 600 to 1,000 by the end of 2011 , and hinted at opening another outsourcing centre .
http : //www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/microsoft-outsource-general-legal-work-india [ lawgazette.co.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This patent stuff has got to be a gold mine for msft.
IP extortion seems to be a brilliant business model.February 22, 2010Microsoft, Amazon strike patent deal covering Kindle and LinuxAs would be expected, the actual patents that were supposedly violated are not disclosed.
For many years msft claimed that Linux violates msft patents, but msft absolutely refuses to disclose which patents.Microsoft says the deal grants Amazon patent-related "coverage" for its use of open-source and proprietary technologies in its Kindle e-reader, and its use of Linux-based computer servers.At the same time, the deal has the potential to stir new controversy in the tech industry, if it's interpreted as Amazon implicitly endorsing Microsoft's claims that Linux and other open-source technologies violate its patents.February 19, 2010Nathan Myhrvold's Intellectual Ventures Could be Biggest Racketeering Operation in the United States and Beyond Patent thug Nathan Myhrvold turns out to have over 1,000 patent proxies with which to potentially attack and extort those who do not pay "protection money"; he also spent over $1 million lobbying his governmentTHE New York Times has published this report about Microsoft's patent troll Nathan Myhrvold, who is backed by his colleague Bill Gates, his former employer Microsoft, and even Apple.
He already terrorises the industry using patents that it spent literally billions of dollars acquiring (not actually working to invent anything of substance).
http://boycottnovell.com/2010/02/19/nathan-myhrvold-exposed-again/ [boycottnovell.com]And here is the NYT article:http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/18/technology/18patent.html [nytimes.com]I suppose using the US legal system for patent extortion is especially cost effective since msft uses offshore labor for the legal work.February 18, 2010Microsoft to outsource general legal work to India Software giant Microsoft will begin outsourcing general legal work to India after signing a deal with legal process outsourcing (LPO) company CPA Global.
The news comes as CPA outlined plans to expand its Indian workforce from 600 to 1,000 by the end of 2011, and hinted at opening another outsourcing centre.
http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/microsoft-outsource-general-legal-work-india [lawgazette.co.uk]
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244318</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft patent racketeering</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266939660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I suppose using the US legal system for patent extortion is especially cost effective since msft uses offshore labor for the legal work</i></p><p>More to the point, the US legal system is <i>designed</i> to make exploiting the law for profit easy -- for the elite who have the priveledge and resources to do it.</p><p>The more complex and ambiguous the law, the more lucrative and exploitable the law is for those who design the law. Not only does complexifying the law justify insane amounts of power and revenue just to manage it all, but it ensures that there is always a winning move for the legal elite.</p><p>In case anyone hasn't noticed, the US legal system is the most complex and ambiguous legal system in the entire world. That's no accident, and it's obviously not "by the people, for the people".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I suppose using the US legal system for patent extortion is especially cost effective since msft uses offshore labor for the legal workMore to the point , the US legal system is designed to make exploiting the law for profit easy -- for the elite who have the priveledge and resources to do it.The more complex and ambiguous the law , the more lucrative and exploitable the law is for those who design the law .
Not only does complexifying the law justify insane amounts of power and revenue just to manage it all , but it ensures that there is always a winning move for the legal elite.In case anyone has n't noticed , the US legal system is the most complex and ambiguous legal system in the entire world .
That 's no accident , and it 's obviously not " by the people , for the people " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suppose using the US legal system for patent extortion is especially cost effective since msft uses offshore labor for the legal workMore to the point, the US legal system is designed to make exploiting the law for profit easy -- for the elite who have the priveledge and resources to do it.The more complex and ambiguous the law, the more lucrative and exploitable the law is for those who design the law.
Not only does complexifying the law justify insane amounts of power and revenue just to manage it all, but it ensures that there is always a winning move for the legal elite.In case anyone hasn't noticed, the US legal system is the most complex and ambiguous legal system in the entire world.
That's no accident, and it's obviously not "by the people, for the people".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244964</id>
	<title>Where's Apple in this Deal?</title>
	<author>flahwho</author>
	<datestamp>1266943140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"A Microsoft representative declined to say which of its products are covered by the deal."
<br> <br>
It must be Microsoft Linux!
<br> <br>
--<br>
<i>stupid robots...</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>" A Microsoft representative declined to say which of its products are covered by the deal .
" It must be Microsoft Linux !
-- stupid robots.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"A Microsoft representative declined to say which of its products are covered by the deal.
"
 
It must be Microsoft Linux!
--
stupid robots...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245826</id>
	<title>Re:You Know What Else This Means ...</title>
	<author>zippthorne</author>
	<datestamp>1266947220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This could be solved with a LaTeX to ePub utility.  In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if there was one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This could be solved with a LaTeX to ePub utility .
In fact , I would n't be surprised if there was one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This could be solved with a LaTeX to ePub utility.
In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if there was one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31253618</id>
	<title>Cancelled Amazon account</title>
	<author>FreeBooteR01</author>
	<datestamp>1266933360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not going to support the enemies of GNU/Linux. Better to shop local anyway.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not going to support the enemies of GNU/Linux .
Better to shop local anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not going to support the enemies of GNU/Linux.
Better to shop local anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31266074</id>
	<title>Re:Erm</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1265111760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Imagine the same deal, with something else that could legally be &ldquo;IP&rdquo;:</p><p>MS: Hey you can use the word &ldquo;soft&rdquo; and the number 7, if we get the word &ldquo;click&rdquo; and the number 1.<br>Amazon: Done.<br>MS: New! Microsoft Windows 7.1 &mdash; Now with a clickable mouse!<br>Amazon: The new Kindle 7 softpack!</p><p>This is <em>exactly</em> the same as this deal. Just with other &ldquo;IP&rdquo;. Which shows you how fucked up that mentality to own ideas/information is. And this is the world we are heading for.<br>Companies have quite literally already won lawsuits about &ldquo;ownership&rdquo; of everyday words, or even colors. (In Germany, the Deutsche Telekom offically owns the color magenta and the word &ldquo;Telekom&rdquo;, as was proven many times in court.)</p><p>Luckily, on the Internet we couldn&rsquo;t care less. They would have to stop all EM communication to ever be able to control it all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Imagine the same deal , with something else that could legally be    IP    : MS : Hey you can use the word    soft    and the number 7 , if we get the word    click    and the number 1.Amazon : Done.MS : New !
Microsoft Windows 7.1    Now with a clickable mouse ! Amazon : The new Kindle 7 softpack ! This is exactly the same as this deal .
Just with other    IP    .
Which shows you how fucked up that mentality to own ideas/information is .
And this is the world we are heading for.Companies have quite literally already won lawsuits about    ownership    of everyday words , or even colors .
( In Germany , the Deutsche Telekom offically owns the color magenta and the word    Telekom    , as was proven many times in court .
) Luckily , on the Internet we couldn    t care less .
They would have to stop all EM communication to ever be able to control it all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Imagine the same deal, with something else that could legally be “IP”:MS: Hey you can use the word “soft” and the number 7, if we get the word “click” and the number 1.Amazon: Done.MS: New!
Microsoft Windows 7.1 — Now with a clickable mouse!Amazon: The new Kindle 7 softpack!This is exactly the same as this deal.
Just with other “IP”.
Which shows you how fucked up that mentality to own ideas/information is.
And this is the world we are heading for.Companies have quite literally already won lawsuits about “ownership” of everyday words, or even colors.
(In Germany, the Deutsche Telekom offically owns the color magenta and the word “Telekom”, as was proven many times in court.
)Luckily, on the Internet we couldn’t care less.
They would have to stop all EM communication to ever be able to control it all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243742</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31246978</id>
	<title>Re:"Largest and Strongest" overcompensating?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266951120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Kill their cash cow Office and Microsoft is done. Jee-ha!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Kill their cash cow Office and Microsoft is done .
Jee-ha !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Kill their cash cow Office and Microsoft is done.
Jee-ha!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243958</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244230</id>
	<title>Re:You Know What Else This Means ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266939240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Will we see the death of Microsoft's<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.lit format [microsoft.com] in favor of Kindle's<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.azw?</p></div></blockquote><p>Oh, I hope not. Both formats suck compared to epub, and azw (i.e. mobipocket) is an extremely stripped-down version of html. Lit at least has more html functionality. But I hope both formats die.

</p><p>My own take is that Microsoft wants to put out an ebook reader which will probably use Amazon's patents, so Microsoft probably told Amazon "Nice patent portfolio you got here. Be a shame if it burned down. You should have insurance!"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Will we see the death of Microsoft 's .lit format [ microsoft.com ] in favor of Kindle 's .azw ? Oh , I hope not .
Both formats suck compared to epub , and azw ( i.e .
mobipocket ) is an extremely stripped-down version of html .
Lit at least has more html functionality .
But I hope both formats die .
My own take is that Microsoft wants to put out an ebook reader which will probably use Amazon 's patents , so Microsoft probably told Amazon " Nice patent portfolio you got here .
Be a shame if it burned down .
You should have insurance !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Will we see the death of Microsoft's .lit format [microsoft.com] in favor of Kindle's .azw?Oh, I hope not.
Both formats suck compared to epub, and azw (i.e.
mobipocket) is an extremely stripped-down version of html.
Lit at least has more html functionality.
But I hope both formats die.
My own take is that Microsoft wants to put out an ebook reader which will probably use Amazon's patents, so Microsoft probably told Amazon "Nice patent portfolio you got here.
Be a shame if it burned down.
You should have insurance!
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243906</id>
	<title>Embrace, Extend, yada yada</title>
	<author>FartKnockerz</author>
	<datestamp>1266937740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft's traditional play of &quot;Extend, Embrace, Extinguish&quot;..</p><p>This most likely has something to do with a Microsoft play towards Windows 7 Mobile and a slate device  as an answer to Apple's iPad . Pundits are spewing about Windows 7 Mobile and the fact that  it sucked less in comparison to Windows Mobile 6 (in the vein that Windows 7 sucks less than Vista). Said device would be hooked into Amazon's range of eBooks for the Kindle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft 's traditional play of " Extend , Embrace , Extinguish " ..This most likely has something to do with a Microsoft play towards Windows 7 Mobile and a slate device as an answer to Apple 's iPad .
Pundits are spewing about Windows 7 Mobile and the fact that it sucked less in comparison to Windows Mobile 6 ( in the vein that Windows 7 sucks less than Vista ) .
Said device would be hooked into Amazon 's range of eBooks for the Kindle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft's traditional play of "Extend, Embrace, Extinguish"..This most likely has something to do with a Microsoft play towards Windows 7 Mobile and a slate device  as an answer to Apple's iPad .
Pundits are spewing about Windows 7 Mobile and the fact that  it sucked less in comparison to Windows Mobile 6 (in the vein that Windows 7 sucks less than Vista).
Said device would be hooked into Amazon's range of eBooks for the Kindle.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243988</id>
	<title>Microsoft licenses Linux to Amazon</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266938160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is this even legal, MS is making some sort of property claims , else they are engaged in an extortion racket. What does the <a href="http://www.fsf.org/" title="fsf.org" rel="nofollow">FSF</a> [fsf.org] have to say on all this ? I think a definitive statement from them would help clear the air. a statement to the effect that such secret deals are bogus and have no standing in law.<br> <br>

<a href="http://www.zdnetasia.com/news/software/0,39044164,62061350,00.htm?scid=rss\_z\_nw" title="zdnetasia.com" rel="nofollow">Amazon, Microsoft sign patent deal</a> [zdnetasia.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this even legal , MS is making some sort of property claims , else they are engaged in an extortion racket .
What does the FSF [ fsf.org ] have to say on all this ?
I think a definitive statement from them would help clear the air .
a statement to the effect that such secret deals are bogus and have no standing in law .
Amazon , Microsoft sign patent deal [ zdnetasia.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this even legal, MS is making some sort of property claims , else they are engaged in an extortion racket.
What does the FSF [fsf.org] have to say on all this ?
I think a definitive statement from them would help clear the air.
a statement to the effect that such secret deals are bogus and have no standing in law.
Amazon, Microsoft sign patent deal [zdnetasia.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243956</id>
	<title>Lie down with the dog, wake up with the fleas</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266937920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So long Amazon, it was nice knowing you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So long Amazon , it was nice knowing you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So long Amazon, it was nice knowing you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31256082</id>
	<title>Re:Anti-trust anyone?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266952140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt;I heart that<br>
Your spellchecker is the reason you can't spell.  Buy a dictionary.</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; I heart that Your spellchecker is the reason you ca n't spell .
Buy a dictionary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;I heart that
Your spellchecker is the reason you can't spell.
Buy a dictionary.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244448</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31248742
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243956
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243956
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244290
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31253674
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31246978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243958
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245618
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243886
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31247932
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31246518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31336366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31247536
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243958
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244414
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31246854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31254378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31247608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31266074
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243886
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31246142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243886
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244780
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243958
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31256244
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31246366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243988
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31254700
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244072
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31256082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244448
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245840
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_1231255_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31253560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243956
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_1231255.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243956
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31253560
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244412
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31248742
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_1231255.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244780
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243934
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243916
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_1231255.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244318
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31247536
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244290
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_1231255.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31246806
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_1231255.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243730
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244230
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244990
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245826
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31253674
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244168
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245710
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245840
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244340
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31256244
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245362
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31254378
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31246142
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31247608
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243990
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244294
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31246854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245880
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_1231255.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31246518
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31247932
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_1231255.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244388
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_1231255.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244792
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_1231255.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243890
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244220
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245768
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245444
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244072
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31254700
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_1231255.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243958
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31246978
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244672
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244570
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_1231255.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243780
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244448
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31256082
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_1231255.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243886
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244486
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245154
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31245618
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_1231255.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243742
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31266074
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_1231255.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244058
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_1231255.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243986
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31336366
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_1231255.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243908
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_1231255.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243906
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_1231255.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31243988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31244890
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_1231255.31246366
</commentlist>
</conversation>
