<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_23_2334259</id>
	<title>Magicjack Loses Legal Attack Against Boing Boing</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1266942300000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader sends word that USB VOIP company <a href="http://www.boingboing.net/2010/02/23/magicjack-dials-wron.html">Magicjack lost a lawsuit against Boing Boing</a> when the judge declared the legal action a SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation). Magicjack must pay more than $50,000 in legal costs. Boing Boing has posted a page linking and summarizing <a href="http://www.boingboing.net/2010/02/23/magicjack-legal-docu.html">all the legal documents</a> relating to the lawsuit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader sends word that USB VOIP company Magicjack lost a lawsuit against Boing Boing when the judge declared the legal action a SLAPP ( strategic lawsuit against public participation ) .
Magicjack must pay more than $ 50,000 in legal costs .
Boing Boing has posted a page linking and summarizing all the legal documents relating to the lawsuit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader sends word that USB VOIP company Magicjack lost a lawsuit against Boing Boing when the judge declared the legal action a SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation).
Magicjack must pay more than $50,000 in legal costs.
Boing Boing has posted a page linking and summarizing all the legal documents relating to the lawsuit.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31258240</id>
	<title>Re:I lo;ve MagicJack</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265119920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just the name in general makes me laugh.  It sounds like some sort of personal lubrication or pocket pussy product.</p><p>They will eventually go under though.  Unsustainable business model.  Right now they are relying on the hardware sales.  Eventually those will dry up and they will have a huge user base with not enough income to support the infrastructure of all those people.  Even now, good luck trying to get decent support from them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just the name in general makes me laugh .
It sounds like some sort of personal lubrication or pocket pussy product.They will eventually go under though .
Unsustainable business model .
Right now they are relying on the hardware sales .
Eventually those will dry up and they will have a huge user base with not enough income to support the infrastructure of all those people .
Even now , good luck trying to get decent support from them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just the name in general makes me laugh.
It sounds like some sort of personal lubrication or pocket pussy product.They will eventually go under though.
Unsustainable business model.
Right now they are relying on the hardware sales.
Eventually those will dry up and they will have a huge user base with not enough income to support the infrastructure of all those people.
Even now, good luck trying to get decent support from them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31263276</id>
	<title>Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in</title>
	<author>J Story</author>
	<datestamp>1265142780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I try not to support companies run by litigious pricks with no sense of humor.</p></div><p>I think this covers a fair chunk of successful  companies, public and private. When you're on the hook for millions of dollars in revenue, and competitors are looking for any weakness to bring you down, a sense of humour can be a liability. As for pricks, Microsoft didn't muscle its way into preeminence by Gates being a nice guy. Even allowing that Google isn't evil, it hasn't gotten to its position today by allowing itself to be pushed around.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I try not to support companies run by litigious pricks with no sense of humor.I think this covers a fair chunk of successful companies , public and private .
When you 're on the hook for millions of dollars in revenue , and competitors are looking for any weakness to bring you down , a sense of humour can be a liability .
As for pricks , Microsoft did n't muscle its way into preeminence by Gates being a nice guy .
Even allowing that Google is n't evil , it has n't gotten to its position today by allowing itself to be pushed around .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I try not to support companies run by litigious pricks with no sense of humor.I think this covers a fair chunk of successful  companies, public and private.
When you're on the hook for millions of dollars in revenue, and competitors are looking for any weakness to bring you down, a sense of humour can be a liability.
As for pricks, Microsoft didn't muscle its way into preeminence by Gates being a nice guy.
Even allowing that Google isn't evil, it hasn't gotten to its position today by allowing itself to be pushed around.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31258254</id>
	<title>Re:This company is horrible</title>
	<author>Lumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1265120040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, your boss is pretty dumb.  Why the hell would he buy those for the office?  is he that clueless or cheap?</p><p>Let me guess, none of you have laptops, everyone  is using the cheapest netbooks he can find, you all have card tables for desks, and the pens and paper you have all have different hotel names on them.</p><p>only a complete idiot would use magicjacks for business.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , your boss is pretty dumb .
Why the hell would he buy those for the office ?
is he that clueless or cheap ? Let me guess , none of you have laptops , everyone is using the cheapest netbooks he can find , you all have card tables for desks , and the pens and paper you have all have different hotel names on them.only a complete idiot would use magicjacks for business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, your boss is pretty dumb.
Why the hell would he buy those for the office?
is he that clueless or cheap?Let me guess, none of you have laptops, everyone  is using the cheapest netbooks he can find, you all have card tables for desks, and the pens and paper you have all have different hotel names on them.only a complete idiot would use magicjacks for business.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256334</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31281854</id>
	<title>Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in</title>
	<author>cordiaprince16</author>
	<datestamp>1267123560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>i guess much better you try CORDIA,you can check their website at www.cordiaip.ph  if you are interested to the plans they offer just email at wizkaz16@yahoo.com or call to any contact numbers posted on their website and look for Mr.Andrew de Guzman to assist you,believe me its way better than Magicjack..thanks!</htmltext>
<tokenext>i guess much better you try CORDIA,you can check their website at www.cordiaip.ph if you are interested to the plans they offer just email at wizkaz16 @ yahoo.com or call to any contact numbers posted on their website and look for Mr.Andrew de Guzman to assist you,believe me its way better than Magicjack..thanks !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i guess much better you try CORDIA,you can check their website at www.cordiaip.ph  if you are interested to the plans they offer just email at wizkaz16@yahoo.com or call to any contact numbers posted on their website and look for Mr.Andrew de Guzman to assist you,believe me its way better than Magicjack..thanks!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31280436</id>
	<title>Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267107960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i guess you should try CORDIA... visit their website at www.cordiaip.ph</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i guess you should try CORDIA... visit their website at www.cordiaip.ph</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i guess you should try CORDIA... visit their website at www.cordiaip.ph</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31335444</id>
	<title>viable alternative?</title>
	<author>mikegarcia</author>
	<datestamp>1267523760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would forget mj and go with a good company like ooma or nettalk. They are newer but play nice with their customers. www.nettalk.com</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would forget mj and go with a good company like ooma or nettalk .
They are newer but play nice with their customers .
www.nettalk.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would forget mj and go with a good company like ooma or nettalk.
They are newer but play nice with their customers.
www.nettalk.com</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255596</id>
	<title>TorJack - instant Tor everywhere</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266947460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>someone should advertise a TorJack solution, for perpetual Tor use. Once we get all devices using Tor, we win.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>someone should advertise a TorJack solution , for perpetual Tor use .
Once we get all devices using Tor , we win .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>someone should advertise a TorJack solution, for perpetual Tor use.
Once we get all devices using Tor, we win.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255708</id>
	<title>Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266948480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No Ubuntu client.  Jerking us around ad infinitum.  Convinced me not to touch them a loonnnnng time ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No Ubuntu client .
Jerking us around ad infinitum .
Convinced me not to touch them a loonnnnng time ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No Ubuntu client.
Jerking us around ad infinitum.
Convinced me not to touch them a loonnnnng time ago.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31258646</id>
	<title>MagicJack a Product of ... "Ymax" .. ?</title>
	<author>rhadc</author>
	<datestamp>1265122860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What really turned me away from the MagicJack was that the company that produced it was called "Ymax."  The use of "Ymax", which looks to me like a deliberate attempt to hijack the term "WiMax."  Those familiar with WiMax, the 802.16-based wireless access technology, would not likely confuse the WiMax and MagicJack's proprietor.  But those on the periphery conversations around WiMax might.  The attempt to siphon off good will toward WiMax shared by the ill-informed seems like a deceitful salesman's scam.  Not that I know the owner.  I'm not getting one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What really turned me away from the MagicJack was that the company that produced it was called " Ymax .
" The use of " Ymax " , which looks to me like a deliberate attempt to hijack the term " WiMax .
" Those familiar with WiMax , the 802.16-based wireless access technology , would not likely confuse the WiMax and MagicJack 's proprietor .
But those on the periphery conversations around WiMax might .
The attempt to siphon off good will toward WiMax shared by the ill-informed seems like a deceitful salesman 's scam .
Not that I know the owner .
I 'm not getting one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What really turned me away from the MagicJack was that the company that produced it was called "Ymax.
"  The use of "Ymax", which looks to me like a deliberate attempt to hijack the term "WiMax.
"  Those familiar with WiMax, the 802.16-based wireless access technology, would not likely confuse the WiMax and MagicJack's proprietor.
But those on the periphery conversations around WiMax might.
The attempt to siphon off good will toward WiMax shared by the ill-informed seems like a deceitful salesman's scam.
Not that I know the owner.
I'm not getting one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255544</id>
	<title>Soooo....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266946980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>MagicJack SLAPPed a Boing Boing?

Sounds dirty to me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>MagicJack SLAPPed a Boing Boing ?
Sounds dirty to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MagicJack SLAPPed a Boing Boing?
Sounds dirty to me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256248</id>
	<title>Re:Alternatives?</title>
	<author>h4rr4r</author>
	<datestamp>1266954180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>SIP, lots of providers lots of software options</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>SIP , lots of providers lots of software options</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SIP, lots of providers lots of software options</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31257964</id>
	<title>Can you use them with Asterisk?</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1265116800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's all I care about, not their shitty SIP service, or their shitty customer service, but using them with Asterisk as an interface.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's all I care about , not their shitty SIP service , or their shitty customer service , but using them with Asterisk as an interface .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's all I care about, not their shitty SIP service, or their shitty customer service, but using them with Asterisk as an interface.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255454</id>
	<title>Well, MagicJack succeeded in</title>
	<author>ScrewMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1266945900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>convincing me to not buy their product. Too bad, I was considering getting hold of one to play around with it. But I try not to support companies run by litigious pricks with no sense of humor.</htmltext>
<tokenext>convincing me to not buy their product .
Too bad , I was considering getting hold of one to play around with it .
But I try not to support companies run by litigious pricks with no sense of humor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>convincing me to not buy their product.
Too bad, I was considering getting hold of one to play around with it.
But I try not to support companies run by litigious pricks with no sense of humor.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31258528</id>
	<title>I wouldn't touch the product until</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265122080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>they include an actual uninstaller. As it stands, you need to manually remove files/registry keys to get rid of it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>they include an actual uninstaller .
As it stands , you need to manually remove files/registry keys to get rid of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they include an actual uninstaller.
As it stands, you need to manually remove files/registry keys to get rid of it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255566</id>
	<title>Why the black ops stuff?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266947160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I read somewhere that they are selling the crap out of these.  Sounds like a bunch of greedy bags to me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I read somewhere that they are selling the crap out of these .
Sounds like a bunch of greedy bags to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read somewhere that they are selling the crap out of these.
Sounds like a bunch of greedy bags to me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31261870</id>
	<title>Re:Can you use them with Asterisk?</title>
	<author>TheTyrannyOfForcedRe</author>
	<datestamp>1265136960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What you want is a <a href="http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps10029/" title="cisco.com" rel="nofollow">Linksys / Cisco PAP2T.</a> [cisco.com]
<ol>
<li> It costs about $40 about the same as MagicJack.</li>
<li> It a real SIP box.</li>
<li> It's able to handle two different accounts and serve two different phone lines.</li>
<li> It's very popular so there's lots of online help available.</li>
<li> Once configured it "just works" for years on end.</li>
<li> When combined with a Gizmo5 account and a Google Voice account you get free calls.</li>
</ol></htmltext>
<tokenext>What you want is a Linksys / Cisco PAP2T .
[ cisco.com ] It costs about $ 40 about the same as MagicJack .
It a real SIP box .
It 's able to handle two different accounts and serve two different phone lines .
It 's very popular so there 's lots of online help available .
Once configured it " just works " for years on end .
When combined with a Gizmo5 account and a Google Voice account you get free calls .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What you want is a Linksys / Cisco PAP2T.
[cisco.com]

 It costs about $40 about the same as MagicJack.
It a real SIP box.
It's able to handle two different accounts and serve two different phone lines.
It's very popular so there's lots of online help available.
Once configured it "just works" for years on end.
When combined with a Gizmo5 account and a Google Voice account you get free calls.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31257964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31258890</id>
	<title>Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1265124060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>But I try not to support companies run by litigious pricks with no sense of humor.<br></i><br>And if we weren't nerds we probably wouldn't have even known about this. My thanks to slashdot! But why aren't these sorts of things reported in the mainstream press?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But I try not to support companies run by litigious pricks with no sense of humor.And if we were n't nerds we probably would n't have even known about this .
My thanks to slashdot !
But why are n't these sorts of things reported in the mainstream press ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But I try not to support companies run by litigious pricks with no sense of humor.And if we weren't nerds we probably wouldn't have even known about this.
My thanks to slashdot!
But why aren't these sorts of things reported in the mainstream press?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255672</id>
	<title>Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266948120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>convincing me to not buy their product. Too bad, I was considering getting hold of one to play around with it. But I try not to support companies run by litigious pricks with no sense of humor.</p></div><p>I ordered two of them but when I tried to activate the service it dropped the web link midway through. I wound up stuck in a limbo of not being able to activate them. I tried to contact tech support but all they offered is that bloody chat support. Every time I do that I end up typing for a half hour to an hour to solve a five minute problem. They said that was the only option so I canceled the service and warned others. Crappy service cost them a customer. Add $20 to the price and high actual support people! Nice idea bad execution.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>convincing me to not buy their product .
Too bad , I was considering getting hold of one to play around with it .
But I try not to support companies run by litigious pricks with no sense of humor.I ordered two of them but when I tried to activate the service it dropped the web link midway through .
I wound up stuck in a limbo of not being able to activate them .
I tried to contact tech support but all they offered is that bloody chat support .
Every time I do that I end up typing for a half hour to an hour to solve a five minute problem .
They said that was the only option so I canceled the service and warned others .
Crappy service cost them a customer .
Add $ 20 to the price and high actual support people !
Nice idea bad execution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>convincing me to not buy their product.
Too bad, I was considering getting hold of one to play around with it.
But I try not to support companies run by litigious pricks with no sense of humor.I ordered two of them but when I tried to activate the service it dropped the web link midway through.
I wound up stuck in a limbo of not being able to activate them.
I tried to contact tech support but all they offered is that bloody chat support.
Every time I do that I end up typing for a half hour to an hour to solve a five minute problem.
They said that was the only option so I canceled the service and warned others.
Crappy service cost them a customer.
Add $20 to the price and high actual support people!
Nice idea bad execution.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31269004</id>
	<title>Re:Parallel with Google AdSense</title>
	<author>caitsith01</author>
	<datestamp>1265137200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It just struck me that the main bone BoingBoing had to pick with MagicJack's EULA is that its users' calls are monitored, and are played targeted ads (obtained from said monitoring). How is this really much different from Google's adsense inside of gmail, where ads containing keywords found in your email's body are displayed next to your emails?</p><p>Not that I am supporting MagicJack or Google in anyway, but what really was the difference? Did it boil down to Google's better wording or selling of its adsense, or are we just more sensitive when it is done to audio/ voice as opposed to when it is done in text/ email?</p></div><p>The difference is that, as with Apple, people are wilfully blind to the serious privacy problems with using Google products.  Arguably Gmail is worse because Google actually trawls and stores the content of your emails, not just the address of the recipient and sender.  I <a href="http://www.intelligentdesign.com.au/blog/2009/04/05/why-you-shouldnt-use-google-chrome/" title="intelligentdesign.com.au">had a look at the EULA</a> [intelligentdesign.com.au] a while ago - it's pretty bad.</p><p>Disclaimer - it may have changed since then.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It just struck me that the main bone BoingBoing had to pick with MagicJack 's EULA is that its users ' calls are monitored , and are played targeted ads ( obtained from said monitoring ) .
How is this really much different from Google 's adsense inside of gmail , where ads containing keywords found in your email 's body are displayed next to your emails ? Not that I am supporting MagicJack or Google in anyway , but what really was the difference ?
Did it boil down to Google 's better wording or selling of its adsense , or are we just more sensitive when it is done to audio/ voice as opposed to when it is done in text/ email ? The difference is that , as with Apple , people are wilfully blind to the serious privacy problems with using Google products .
Arguably Gmail is worse because Google actually trawls and stores the content of your emails , not just the address of the recipient and sender .
I had a look at the EULA [ intelligentdesign.com.au ] a while ago - it 's pretty bad.Disclaimer - it may have changed since then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It just struck me that the main bone BoingBoing had to pick with MagicJack's EULA is that its users' calls are monitored, and are played targeted ads (obtained from said monitoring).
How is this really much different from Google's adsense inside of gmail, where ads containing keywords found in your email's body are displayed next to your emails?Not that I am supporting MagicJack or Google in anyway, but what really was the difference?
Did it boil down to Google's better wording or selling of its adsense, or are we just more sensitive when it is done to audio/ voice as opposed to when it is done in text/ email?The difference is that, as with Apple, people are wilfully blind to the serious privacy problems with using Google products.
Arguably Gmail is worse because Google actually trawls and stores the content of your emails, not just the address of the recipient and sender.
I had a look at the EULA [intelligentdesign.com.au] a while ago - it's pretty bad.Disclaimer - it may have changed since then.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255686</id>
	<title>FUD about Blogging</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266948300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the article; </p><p><div class="quote"><p>In the lawsuit... It also alleged that I am a professional blogger.</p></div><p>I knew that bloggers were disreputable sources for Wikipedia, but I had no idea that being a blogger could be used against you in a court of law.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the article ; In the lawsuit... It also alleged that I am a professional blogger.I knew that bloggers were disreputable sources for Wikipedia , but I had no idea that being a blogger could be used against you in a court of law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the article; In the lawsuit... It also alleged that I am a professional blogger.I knew that bloggers were disreputable sources for Wikipedia, but I had no idea that being a blogger could be used against you in a court of law.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31257088</id>
	<title>Ran their EULA through EULAlyzer...</title>
	<author>WidgetGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1265106540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>...and it concluded:

"The license agreement above has a high calculated interest ID.  It's extremely long, and there were a high number of detected 'interesting' words or phrases."  That means Eulalyzer thinks its a <i>bad</i> EULA.  The interesting words or phrases are listed and can be viewed in context:  (1)  Advertising, (2) Emergency Calls or Services, (3) Third Party, (4) Web Site Address, and (5) Without Notice.  I've never seen a EULA with that many "'interesting' words or phrases" called out by the program.
<br> <br>
EULAlyzer is a free (download: <a href="http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/downloads.html" title="javacoolsoftware.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/downloads.html</a> [javacoolsoftware.com]).  If, like me, you don't have the time to read through the EULA's for software you're thinking of purchasing, this is just the program for you.  At the very least, it will give you a "heads up" and point you to the 'interesting' parts of the EULA where you can, then, read as much "legalese" as you can stomach..</htmltext>
<tokenext>...and it concluded : " The license agreement above has a high calculated interest ID .
It 's extremely long , and there were a high number of detected 'interesting ' words or phrases .
" That means Eulalyzer thinks its a bad EULA .
The interesting words or phrases are listed and can be viewed in context : ( 1 ) Advertising , ( 2 ) Emergency Calls or Services , ( 3 ) Third Party , ( 4 ) Web Site Address , and ( 5 ) Without Notice .
I 've never seen a EULA with that many " 'interesting ' words or phrases " called out by the program .
EULAlyzer is a free ( download : http : //www.javacoolsoftware.com/downloads.html [ javacoolsoftware.com ] ) .
If , like me , you do n't have the time to read through the EULA 's for software you 're thinking of purchasing , this is just the program for you .
At the very least , it will give you a " heads up " and point you to the 'interesting ' parts of the EULA where you can , then , read as much " legalese " as you can stomach. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and it concluded:

"The license agreement above has a high calculated interest ID.
It's extremely long, and there were a high number of detected 'interesting' words or phrases.
"  That means Eulalyzer thinks its a bad EULA.
The interesting words or phrases are listed and can be viewed in context:  (1)  Advertising, (2) Emergency Calls or Services, (3) Third Party, (4) Web Site Address, and (5) Without Notice.
I've never seen a EULA with that many "'interesting' words or phrases" called out by the program.
EULAlyzer is a free (download: http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/downloads.html [javacoolsoftware.com]).
If, like me, you don't have the time to read through the EULA's for software you're thinking of purchasing, this is just the program for you.
At the very least, it will give you a "heads up" and point you to the 'interesting' parts of the EULA where you can, then, read as much "legalese" as you can stomach..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255884</id>
	<title>Alternatives?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266950220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So whats the best cheap alternative to magicjack for folks with hi speed net who want a home phone #?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So whats the best cheap alternative to magicjack for folks with hi speed net who want a home phone # ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So whats the best cheap alternative to magicjack for folks with hi speed net who want a home phone #?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256016</id>
	<title>I lo;ve MagicJack</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266951540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I continue to be amused by the power switch on the MagicJack:  MagicJack On. MagicJack Off.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I continue to be amused by the power switch on the MagicJack : MagicJack On .
MagicJack Off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I continue to be amused by the power switch on the MagicJack:  MagicJack On.
MagicJack Off.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31260920</id>
	<title>Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265133180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>for my $100 a MONTH to at&amp;t for the iphone... I get 20-45 minutes of wait time for the smallest tech or customer service issues... and don't even get them resolved sometimes. I tried magic jack's  chat, I was at least in contact with someone in a few minutes - I understand the cost that phone support adds to any company and I have no complaints. i also agree with someone earlier who said that at least magicjack states that in their EULA while other companies just do it, and don't state it. I'm pretty sure it's only so they can server relevant ads.... sound familiar Google?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>for my $ 100 a MONTH to at&amp;t for the iphone... I get 20-45 minutes of wait time for the smallest tech or customer service issues... and do n't even get them resolved sometimes .
I tried magic jack 's chat , I was at least in contact with someone in a few minutes - I understand the cost that phone support adds to any company and I have no complaints .
i also agree with someone earlier who said that at least magicjack states that in their EULA while other companies just do it , and do n't state it .
I 'm pretty sure it 's only so they can server relevant ads.... sound familiar Google ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for my $100 a MONTH to at&amp;t for the iphone... I get 20-45 minutes of wait time for the smallest tech or customer service issues... and don't even get them resolved sometimes.
I tried magic jack's  chat, I was at least in contact with someone in a few minutes - I understand the cost that phone support adds to any company and I have no complaints.
i also agree with someone earlier who said that at least magicjack states that in their EULA while other companies just do it, and don't state it.
I'm pretty sure it's only so they can server relevant ads.... sound familiar Google?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255672</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255864</id>
	<title>Must support Boing Boing</title>
	<author>Snaller</author>
	<datestamp>1266949920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The last best hope for Amiga peace!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The last best hope for Amiga peace !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The last best hope for Amiga peace!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31289456</id>
	<title>Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in</title>
	<author>Deliveranc3</author>
	<datestamp>1267216380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So you'll stop using telephony or you'll support the telecoms? An even worse bunch of litigious bastards? <br> <br> VOIP threatens a trillion dollar industry and you assume there won't be battles to get it put in place?<br> <br> You are very, very, foolish. Communications are valuable, and so people will extract costs from them regardless of how little they cost to provide, those high costs will go into preventing low cost options from becoming workable... All you're really doing is ensuring that your children end up paying into the telecom monopolies instead of restructuring telecommunications...</htmltext>
<tokenext>So you 'll stop using telephony or you 'll support the telecoms ?
An even worse bunch of litigious bastards ?
VOIP threatens a trillion dollar industry and you assume there wo n't be battles to get it put in place ?
You are very , very , foolish .
Communications are valuable , and so people will extract costs from them regardless of how little they cost to provide , those high costs will go into preventing low cost options from becoming workable... All you 're really doing is ensuring that your children end up paying into the telecom monopolies instead of restructuring telecommunications.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you'll stop using telephony or you'll support the telecoms?
An even worse bunch of litigious bastards?
VOIP threatens a trillion dollar industry and you assume there won't be battles to get it put in place?
You are very, very, foolish.
Communications are valuable, and so people will extract costs from them regardless of how little they cost to provide, those high costs will go into preventing low cost options from becoming workable... All you're really doing is ensuring that your children end up paying into the telecom monopolies instead of restructuring telecommunications...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256544</id>
	<title>15 years Ago</title>
	<author>Your Anus</author>
	<datestamp>1265143020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>25 years ago, that headline would have made no sense.</htmltext>
<tokenext>25 years ago , that headline would have made no sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>25 years ago, that headline would have made no sense.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256334</id>
	<title>This company is horrible</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265140800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>So my boss bought these for our office, and as the tech guy I had to actually deal with them. The device itself is actually quite good, but their company is an abomination of a decent business. One of the jacks stopped working, and so I figured that it should be replaced with the option of transferring our old number to the new jack. Their customer service jerked me around for hours until one of them finally sent me a link to their terms and hung up on me. Basically, once they have your money they will jump through hoops to not help you at all. It is such a sleazy company and I hope nobody here gets fooled by them and actually buys it. Pay more for your service just to deal with a reputable company.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So my boss bought these for our office , and as the tech guy I had to actually deal with them .
The device itself is actually quite good , but their company is an abomination of a decent business .
One of the jacks stopped working , and so I figured that it should be replaced with the option of transferring our old number to the new jack .
Their customer service jerked me around for hours until one of them finally sent me a link to their terms and hung up on me .
Basically , once they have your money they will jump through hoops to not help you at all .
It is such a sleazy company and I hope nobody here gets fooled by them and actually buys it .
Pay more for your service just to deal with a reputable company .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So my boss bought these for our office, and as the tech guy I had to actually deal with them.
The device itself is actually quite good, but their company is an abomination of a decent business.
One of the jacks stopped working, and so I figured that it should be replaced with the option of transferring our old number to the new jack.
Their customer service jerked me around for hours until one of them finally sent me a link to their terms and hung up on me.
Basically, once they have your money they will jump through hoops to not help you at all.
It is such a sleazy company and I hope nobody here gets fooled by them and actually buys it.
Pay more for your service just to deal with a reputable company.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255554</id>
	<title>A little background please?</title>
	<author>dido</author>
	<datestamp>1266947040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The summary could have put in a word about how MagicJack sued for defamation after Boing Boing made a <a href="http://gadgets.boingboing.net/2008/04/14/magicjacks-eula-says.html" title="boingboing.net">post</a> [boingboing.net] highly critical of their EULA, before explaining how the judge shot their suit down as a SLAPP...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The summary could have put in a word about how MagicJack sued for defamation after Boing Boing made a post [ boingboing.net ] highly critical of their EULA , before explaining how the judge shot their suit down as a SLAPP.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The summary could have put in a word about how MagicJack sued for defamation after Boing Boing made a post [boingboing.net] highly critical of their EULA, before explaining how the judge shot their suit down as a SLAPP...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256324</id>
	<title>Parallel with Google AdSense</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266955080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It just struck me that the main bone BoingBoing had to pick with MagicJack's EULA is that its users' calls are monitored, and are played targeted ads (obtained from said monitoring). How is this really much different from Google's adsense inside of gmail, where ads containing keywords found in your email's body are displayed next to your emails?
</p><p>Not that I am supporting MagicJack or Google in anyway, but what really was the difference? Did it boil down to Google's better wording or selling of its adsense, or are we just more sensitive when it is done to audio/ voice as opposed to when it is done in text/ email?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It just struck me that the main bone BoingBoing had to pick with MagicJack 's EULA is that its users ' calls are monitored , and are played targeted ads ( obtained from said monitoring ) .
How is this really much different from Google 's adsense inside of gmail , where ads containing keywords found in your email 's body are displayed next to your emails ?
Not that I am supporting MagicJack or Google in anyway , but what really was the difference ?
Did it boil down to Google 's better wording or selling of its adsense , or are we just more sensitive when it is done to audio/ voice as opposed to when it is done in text/ email ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It just struck me that the main bone BoingBoing had to pick with MagicJack's EULA is that its users' calls are monitored, and are played targeted ads (obtained from said monitoring).
How is this really much different from Google's adsense inside of gmail, where ads containing keywords found in your email's body are displayed next to your emails?
Not that I am supporting MagicJack or Google in anyway, but what really was the difference?
Did it boil down to Google's better wording or selling of its adsense, or are we just more sensitive when it is done to audio/ voice as opposed to when it is done in text/ email?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31262426</id>
	<title>great headline to /. summary!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265139120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...yea.</p><p>30 years ago, we'd have thought that it was referring to a comic book fight between two superheroes.</p><p>Well, at least there's nothing wrong with mentioning magicja</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...yea.30 years ago , we 'd have thought that it was referring to a comic book fight between two superheroes.Well , at least there 's nothing wrong with mentioning magicja</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...yea.30 years ago, we'd have thought that it was referring to a comic book fight between two superheroes.Well, at least there's nothing wrong with mentioning magicja</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31261058</id>
	<title>Re:Parallel with Google AdSense</title>
	<author>groslyunderpaid</author>
	<datestamp>1265133780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>OMG!! Look at these targeted ads! Judging by the ad, it would seem that they have determined by my calling habits that I like to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..... make phone calls?
<br> <br>
<a href="http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=30815488&amp;l=2320d23ff6&amp;id=1222367613" title="facebook.com" rel="nofollow">My Remote Desktop</a> [facebook.com] <br> <br>PS No jokes about my cluttered and edited desktop, or choice of OS.</htmltext>
<tokenext>OMG ! !
Look at these targeted ads !
Judging by the ad , it would seem that they have determined by my calling habits that I like to ..... make phone calls ?
My Remote Desktop [ facebook.com ] PS No jokes about my cluttered and edited desktop , or choice of OS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OMG!!
Look at these targeted ads!
Judging by the ad, it would seem that they have determined by my calling habits that I like to ..... make phone calls?
My Remote Desktop [facebook.com]  PS No jokes about my cluttered and edited desktop, or choice of OS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31260094</id>
	<title>And the Winner is...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265129640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the lawyer.  Regardless of the outcome, lawyers still get paid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the lawyer .
Regardless of the outcome , lawyers still get paid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the lawyer.
Regardless of the outcome, lawyers still get paid.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31259230</id>
	<title>Typical Corporation.</title>
	<author>DarthVain</author>
	<datestamp>1265125860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This had nothing to do with MagicJack as a product, nor was anyone saying that it was inherently bad, a ripoff, or a scam.</p><p>This was simply BOING BOING pointing out, that like MANY corporations, their EULA is ridiculous. Like so many others, it is A) almost impossible to find, and B) absolutely ridiculous in its content. You have to promise your first born son for sacrifice to the telecommunication gods by buying their product, and you don't really find this out, until you have already bought their product. Move along, nothing to see here. The demands corporations TYPICALLY put in EULA's are above and beyond reasonable and are pretty much crazy. IANAL however I would bet MOST of these EULA's would not stand up in court as binding (though they may give weight for intent or something of that nature).</p><p>Having said all that, MagicJack could have easily amended their stupid EULA to something a bit nicer, or tried to appease their POTENTIAL CUSTOMERS another way. However in true corporate form they would rather hire a bunch of lawyers and duke it out in court to avoid giving consumers what they want. Re-read that statement. Crazy. Not only that, I bet if you pulled the stats as to how many times a EULA like this would even be USED, particularly for a 50$ product with a 3$ subscription fee, it would be minute to the point of non-existence. As we all know while some people may put up a big stink about this sort of thing (and they should) most if faced with the actual situation either are too lazy or don't care enough about it to make any kind of stand anyway.</p><p>In all a stupid move by MagicJack, but one that seems about par for the course for any corporate identity.</p><p>I applaud BOING BOING for its work however, as the basic principle is if you don't like it, or agree with it, simply don't buy it. However in this case and many like it, you would never have found out about it until after you bought the product (if then) so it is already too late, they already got your money.</p><p>This is why it is important what BOING BOING did (particulary when they didn't really have to, other than feeling slighted for being pushed around by lawyers), and why the SLAPP is a good idea, as it keeps the public informed. It isn't saying that MagicJack must change what it does, or fining them for bad behavior. It is just a decision that says, BOING BOING has a legitimate right to inform people about this information, and that MagicJack doesn't have the right to try and use the courts as its thugs to try and prevent it, thus they can pay for most of BOING BOING's legal fees. Thats all.</p><p>Anyway good for BOING BOING, and shame on MagicJack.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This had nothing to do with MagicJack as a product , nor was anyone saying that it was inherently bad , a ripoff , or a scam.This was simply BOING BOING pointing out , that like MANY corporations , their EULA is ridiculous .
Like so many others , it is A ) almost impossible to find , and B ) absolutely ridiculous in its content .
You have to promise your first born son for sacrifice to the telecommunication gods by buying their product , and you do n't really find this out , until you have already bought their product .
Move along , nothing to see here .
The demands corporations TYPICALLY put in EULA 's are above and beyond reasonable and are pretty much crazy .
IANAL however I would bet MOST of these EULA 's would not stand up in court as binding ( though they may give weight for intent or something of that nature ) .Having said all that , MagicJack could have easily amended their stupid EULA to something a bit nicer , or tried to appease their POTENTIAL CUSTOMERS another way .
However in true corporate form they would rather hire a bunch of lawyers and duke it out in court to avoid giving consumers what they want .
Re-read that statement .
Crazy. Not only that , I bet if you pulled the stats as to how many times a EULA like this would even be USED , particularly for a 50 $ product with a 3 $ subscription fee , it would be minute to the point of non-existence .
As we all know while some people may put up a big stink about this sort of thing ( and they should ) most if faced with the actual situation either are too lazy or do n't care enough about it to make any kind of stand anyway.In all a stupid move by MagicJack , but one that seems about par for the course for any corporate identity.I applaud BOING BOING for its work however , as the basic principle is if you do n't like it , or agree with it , simply do n't buy it .
However in this case and many like it , you would never have found out about it until after you bought the product ( if then ) so it is already too late , they already got your money.This is why it is important what BOING BOING did ( particulary when they did n't really have to , other than feeling slighted for being pushed around by lawyers ) , and why the SLAPP is a good idea , as it keeps the public informed .
It is n't saying that MagicJack must change what it does , or fining them for bad behavior .
It is just a decision that says , BOING BOING has a legitimate right to inform people about this information , and that MagicJack does n't have the right to try and use the courts as its thugs to try and prevent it , thus they can pay for most of BOING BOING 's legal fees .
Thats all.Anyway good for BOING BOING , and shame on MagicJack .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This had nothing to do with MagicJack as a product, nor was anyone saying that it was inherently bad, a ripoff, or a scam.This was simply BOING BOING pointing out, that like MANY corporations, their EULA is ridiculous.
Like so many others, it is A) almost impossible to find, and B) absolutely ridiculous in its content.
You have to promise your first born son for sacrifice to the telecommunication gods by buying their product, and you don't really find this out, until you have already bought their product.
Move along, nothing to see here.
The demands corporations TYPICALLY put in EULA's are above and beyond reasonable and are pretty much crazy.
IANAL however I would bet MOST of these EULA's would not stand up in court as binding (though they may give weight for intent or something of that nature).Having said all that, MagicJack could have easily amended their stupid EULA to something a bit nicer, or tried to appease their POTENTIAL CUSTOMERS another way.
However in true corporate form they would rather hire a bunch of lawyers and duke it out in court to avoid giving consumers what they want.
Re-read that statement.
Crazy. Not only that, I bet if you pulled the stats as to how many times a EULA like this would even be USED, particularly for a 50$ product with a 3$ subscription fee, it would be minute to the point of non-existence.
As we all know while some people may put up a big stink about this sort of thing (and they should) most if faced with the actual situation either are too lazy or don't care enough about it to make any kind of stand anyway.In all a stupid move by MagicJack, but one that seems about par for the course for any corporate identity.I applaud BOING BOING for its work however, as the basic principle is if you don't like it, or agree with it, simply don't buy it.
However in this case and many like it, you would never have found out about it until after you bought the product (if then) so it is already too late, they already got your money.This is why it is important what BOING BOING did (particulary when they didn't really have to, other than feeling slighted for being pushed around by lawyers), and why the SLAPP is a good idea, as it keeps the public informed.
It isn't saying that MagicJack must change what it does, or fining them for bad behavior.
It is just a decision that says, BOING BOING has a legitimate right to inform people about this information, and that MagicJack doesn't have the right to try and use the courts as its thugs to try and prevent it, thus they can pay for most of BOING BOING's legal fees.
Thats all.Anyway good for BOING BOING, and shame on MagicJack.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256256</id>
	<title>Stuff that matters ?</title>
	<author>Antiocheian</author>
	<datestamp>1266954240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why is that important ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is that important ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is that important ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255968</id>
	<title>STREISSAND EFFECT tag is obligatory..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266951120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>yes yes.. streissand effect -- i had no idea until now. now i will tell everyone about magicjack's evils when people mention it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>yes yes.. streissand effect -- i had no idea until now .
now i will tell everyone about magicjack 's evils when people mention it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yes yes.. streissand effect -- i had no idea until now.
now i will tell everyone about magicjack's evils when people mention it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31257810</id>
	<title>Re:I lo;ve MagicJack</title>
	<author>oodaloop</author>
	<datestamp>1265115180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bender!  Are you jacking on in there?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bender !
Are you jacking on in there ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bender!
Are you jacking on in there?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31280498</id>
	<title>Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267108440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i guess much better if you try CORDIA..check our website at www.cordiaip.ph..if you are interested you can email me at wizkaz16@yahoo.com or call to the numbers posted on our website and look for Mr.Andrew de Guzman..thanks!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i guess much better if you try CORDIA..check our website at www.cordiaip.ph..if you are interested you can email me at wizkaz16 @ yahoo.com or call to the numbers posted on our website and look for Mr.Andrew de Guzman..thanks !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i guess much better if you try CORDIA..check our website at www.cordiaip.ph..if you are interested you can email me at wizkaz16@yahoo.com or call to the numbers posted on our website and look for Mr.Andrew de Guzman..thanks!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255672</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31260526</id>
	<title>Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in</title>
	<author>LuxMaker</author>
	<datestamp>1265131680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have activated 4 MagicJacks without issue.  I suspect the problem here may be a PEBCAK error here but I am not sure unless I have more info on what you did to include the spec of your machine and connection.  I am not sure how your post was rated +5 "informative" because it is anything but.  I don't doubt that you had an issue with two of them but from the looks of it you didn't even try to download the update which I suspect would of fixed your issue.  Just a guess without knowing more.  FYI I do not in any way work for MagicJack.<br> <br> <br>

<a href="http://upgrades.talk4free.com/tools/magicJackUpdate.exe" title="talk4free.com" rel="nofollow">Update for users with Windows 7</a> [talk4free.com] <br>
<a href="http://service.liveperson.net/hc/s-61732089/cmd/kbresource/kb-5535918888839314836/view\_question!PAGETYPE?sq=download\%2Bupdate&amp;sf=101113&amp;sg=0&amp;st=912852&amp;documentid=345536&amp;action=view" title="liveperson.net" rel="nofollow">Taken from FAQ here</a> [liveperson.net]
<br> <br>


<a href="http://upgrades.magicjack.com/upgrade/upgrade.exe" title="magicjack.com" rel="nofollow">or WinXP</a> [magicjack.com] <br>

<a href="http://service.liveperson.net/hc/s-61732089/cmd/kbresource/kb-5535918888839314836/view\_question!PAGETYPE?sq=download\%2Bupdate&amp;sf=101113&amp;sg=0&amp;st=912852&amp;documentid=345545&amp;action=view" title="liveperson.net" rel="nofollow">Taken from FAQ here</a> [liveperson.net]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have activated 4 MagicJacks without issue .
I suspect the problem here may be a PEBCAK error here but I am not sure unless I have more info on what you did to include the spec of your machine and connection .
I am not sure how your post was rated + 5 " informative " because it is anything but .
I do n't doubt that you had an issue with two of them but from the looks of it you did n't even try to download the update which I suspect would of fixed your issue .
Just a guess without knowing more .
FYI I do not in any way work for MagicJack .
Update for users with Windows 7 [ talk4free.com ] Taken from FAQ here [ liveperson.net ] or WinXP [ magicjack.com ] Taken from FAQ here [ liveperson.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have activated 4 MagicJacks without issue.
I suspect the problem here may be a PEBCAK error here but I am not sure unless I have more info on what you did to include the spec of your machine and connection.
I am not sure how your post was rated +5 "informative" because it is anything but.
I don't doubt that you had an issue with two of them but from the looks of it you didn't even try to download the update which I suspect would of fixed your issue.
Just a guess without knowing more.
FYI I do not in any way work for MagicJack.
Update for users with Windows 7 [talk4free.com] 
Taken from FAQ here [liveperson.net]
 


or WinXP [magicjack.com] 

Taken from FAQ here [liveperson.net]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255672</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256844</id>
	<title>Re:Parallel with Google AdSense</title>
	<author>cerberusss</author>
	<datestamp>1265103600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google doesn't make it a secret. MagicJack does.</p><p>Thus, they're creeps.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google does n't make it a secret .
MagicJack does.Thus , they 're creeps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google doesn't make it a secret.
MagicJack does.Thus, they're creeps.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31258962</id>
	<title>Re:Parallel with Google AdSense</title>
	<author>Alrescha</author>
	<datestamp>1265124420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"It just struck me that the main bone BoingBoing had to pick with MagicJack's EULA is that its users' calls are monitored, and are played targeted ads (obtained from said monitoring)."</p><p>The EULA does not say that 'calls are monitored', it says that 'Our computers may analyze the phone numbers you call'.  I think that's a big difference.  BoingBoing did a Slashdot-like editorial move and phrased their headline for maximum outrage and minimum accuracy.</p><p>A.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" It just struck me that the main bone BoingBoing had to pick with MagicJack 's EULA is that its users ' calls are monitored , and are played targeted ads ( obtained from said monitoring ) .
" The EULA does not say that 'calls are monitored ' , it says that 'Our computers may analyze the phone numbers you call' .
I think that 's a big difference .
BoingBoing did a Slashdot-like editorial move and phrased their headline for maximum outrage and minimum accuracy.A .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"It just struck me that the main bone BoingBoing had to pick with MagicJack's EULA is that its users' calls are monitored, and are played targeted ads (obtained from said monitoring).
"The EULA does not say that 'calls are monitored', it says that 'Our computers may analyze the phone numbers you call'.
I think that's a big difference.
BoingBoing did a Slashdot-like editorial move and phrased their headline for maximum outrage and minimum accuracy.A.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255812</id>
	<title>So!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266949500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
So the effigies are of:
</p><p>
Outfit by the name <b>MagicJack</b> <br>
CEO <b>Dan Borislow</b> <br>
Their <b>law firm Arnold and Porter</b></p><p>
Open-and-shut case, according to BoingBoing's side of story, but they are an annoying outfit, too, so slide the barbecue dial accordingly.
</p><p>
Light'em up.  <b>BURN, BABY, BURN!!!</b></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So the effigies are of : Outfit by the name MagicJack CEO Dan Borislow Their law firm Arnold and Porter Open-and-shut case , according to BoingBoing 's side of story , but they are an annoying outfit , too , so slide the barbecue dial accordingly .
Light'em up .
BURN , BABY , BURN ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
So the effigies are of:

Outfit by the name MagicJack 
CEO Dan Borislow 
Their law firm Arnold and Porter
Open-and-shut case, according to BoingBoing's side of story, but they are an annoying outfit, too, so slide the barbecue dial accordingly.
Light'em up.
BURN, BABY, BURN!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256054</id>
	<title>Re:A little background please?</title>
	<author>value\_added</author>
	<datestamp>1266951900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sued for defamation?  That's not the half of it!</p><blockquote><div><p>In the lawsuit<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... MagicJack alleged that these statements were false, misleading, and had irreparably harmed MagicJack's reputation by exposing it to "hate, ridicule and obloquy".</p></div></blockquote><p>Someone's got to say it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><blockquote><div><p>Our three weapons are<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... hate, ridicule and obloquoy!</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sued for defamation ?
That 's not the half of it ! In the lawsuit ... MagicJack alleged that these statements were false , misleading , and had irreparably harmed MagicJack 's reputation by exposing it to " hate , ridicule and obloquy " .Someone 's got to say it ...Our three weapons are ... hate , ridicule and obloquoy !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sued for defamation?
That's not the half of it!In the lawsuit ... MagicJack alleged that these statements were false, misleading, and had irreparably harmed MagicJack's reputation by exposing it to "hate, ridicule and obloquy".Someone's got to say it ...Our three weapons are ... hate, ridicule and obloquoy!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31259296</id>
	<title>Re:A little background please?</title>
	<author>TJamieson</author>
	<datestamp>1265126280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What, no puffery?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What , no puffery ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What, no puffery?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31258232</id>
	<title>Re:Great tech, shitty business</title>
	<author>Lumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1265119860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The hardware is NOT great stuff.   It's a cheap china usb soundcard -&gt; Phone interface.  Granted you cant screw that up too badly, but it's not cisco enterprise quality Voip hardware..  it's very low cost consumer hardware.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The hardware is NOT great stuff .
It 's a cheap china usb soundcard - &gt; Phone interface .
Granted you cant screw that up too badly , but it 's not cisco enterprise quality Voip hardware.. it 's very low cost consumer hardware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The hardware is NOT great stuff.
It's a cheap china usb soundcard -&gt; Phone interface.
Granted you cant screw that up too badly, but it's not cisco enterprise quality Voip hardware..  it's very low cost consumer hardware.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31258764</id>
	<title>Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in</title>
	<author>EvilBudMan</author>
	<datestamp>1265123340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The real problem is what if I want to be a blogger in Virginia where the protections are not the same as California. I guess it was and still is a real threat to free speech. There should be a federal law against SLAPP lawsuits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The real problem is what if I want to be a blogger in Virginia where the protections are not the same as California .
I guess it was and still is a real threat to free speech .
There should be a federal law against SLAPP lawsuits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The real problem is what if I want to be a blogger in Virginia where the protections are not the same as California.
I guess it was and still is a real threat to free speech.
There should be a federal law against SLAPP lawsuits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255602</id>
	<title>"Magicjack Loses Legal Attack Against Boing Boing"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266947520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow. See how seriously I'm gonna take <em>this</em> story.</p><p>And you guys wonder why jocks like to beat us up...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow .
See how seriously I 'm gon na take this story.And you guys wonder why jocks like to beat us up.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow.
See how seriously I'm gonna take this story.And you guys wonder why jocks like to beat us up...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31259066</id>
	<title>Re:Parallel with Google AdSense</title>
	<author>EvilBudMan</author>
	<datestamp>1265124960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you don't know the difference, really I can't tell you at this point. MagicJack is Eviiiiil and Google is gooood. Now do you see, no? I didn't think so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you do n't know the difference , really I ca n't tell you at this point .
MagicJack is Eviiiiil and Google is gooood .
Now do you see , no ?
I did n't think so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you don't know the difference, really I can't tell you at this point.
MagicJack is Eviiiiil and Google is gooood.
Now do you see, no?
I didn't think so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31260398</id>
	<title>Re:I lo;ve MagicJack</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265131080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>there is no power switch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>there is no power switch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>there is no power switch.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255614</id>
	<title>Great tech, shitty business</title>
	<author>bguiz</author>
	<datestamp>1266947640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Even BoingBoing agrees that MagicJack's hardware is great stuff... Too bad their marketing/management/legal department seems to think it can get away with shady practices like their crappy EULA.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even BoingBoing agrees that MagicJack 's hardware is great stuff... Too bad their marketing/management/legal department seems to think it can get away with shady practices like their crappy EULA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even BoingBoing agrees that MagicJack's hardware is great stuff... Too bad their marketing/management/legal department seems to think it can get away with shady practices like their crappy EULA.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31259296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256054
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31260920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31261870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31257964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31261058
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31260526
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31258254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256334
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31289456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31259066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31260398
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31258232
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255614
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256248
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255884
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31263276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31258890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31258962
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31269004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31280498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31257810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31258240
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31258764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31281854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_2334259_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31280436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_2334259.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256544
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_2334259.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31257964
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31261870
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_2334259.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256324
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31258962
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256844
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31269004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31259066
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31261058
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_2334259.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255544
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_2334259.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255884
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256248
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_2334259.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255566
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_2334259.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256016
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31258240
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31257810
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31260398
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_2334259.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255454
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255672
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31280498
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31260920
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31260526
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255708
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31280436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31258890
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31263276
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31281854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31289456
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31258764
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_2334259.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255614
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31258232
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_2334259.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255686
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_2334259.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256334
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31258254
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_2334259.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31256054
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31259296
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_2334259.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_2334259.31255602
</commentlist>
</conversation>
