<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_01_0546238</id>
	<title>8-Year Fan-Made Game Project Shut Down By Activision</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1267466940000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"Activision, after acquiring Vivendi, became the new copyright holder of the classic <em>King's Quest</em> series of adventure game. They have now <a href="http://www.tsl-game.com/">issued a cease and desist order</a> to a team which has worked for eight years on a fan-made project initially dubbed a sequel to the last official installment, <em>King's Quest 8</em>. This stands against the fact that Vivendi granted a non-commercial license to the team, subject to Vivendi's approval of the game after submission. After the acquisition, key team members had indicated on the game's forums (now stripped of their original content by order of Activision) that Activision had given the indication that it intended to keep its current fan-game licenses, but was not interested in issuing new ones."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " Activision , after acquiring Vivendi , became the new copyright holder of the classic King 's Quest series of adventure game .
They have now issued a cease and desist order to a team which has worked for eight years on a fan-made project initially dubbed a sequel to the last official installment , King 's Quest 8 .
This stands against the fact that Vivendi granted a non-commercial license to the team , subject to Vivendi 's approval of the game after submission .
After the acquisition , key team members had indicated on the game 's forums ( now stripped of their original content by order of Activision ) that Activision had given the indication that it intended to keep its current fan-game licenses , but was not interested in issuing new ones .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "Activision, after acquiring Vivendi, became the new copyright holder of the classic King's Quest series of adventure game.
They have now issued a cease and desist order to a team which has worked for eight years on a fan-made project initially dubbed a sequel to the last official installment, King's Quest 8.
This stands against the fact that Vivendi granted a non-commercial license to the team, subject to Vivendi's approval of the game after submission.
After the acquisition, key team members had indicated on the game's forums (now stripped of their original content by order of Activision) that Activision had given the indication that it intended to keep its current fan-game licenses, but was not interested in issuing new ones.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312620</id>
	<title>Re:Was it in writing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267387020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Obviously ownership of a company changing hands does not nullify the contracts made by the company. This seems very weird. Might be a case of poor developers not having the cash to defend their case in court, so Activision can dictate anything they like.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Obviously ownership of a company changing hands does not nullify the contracts made by the company .
This seems very weird .
Might be a case of poor developers not having the cash to defend their case in court , so Activision can dictate anything they like .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Obviously ownership of a company changing hands does not nullify the contracts made by the company.
This seems very weird.
Might be a case of poor developers not having the cash to defend their case in court, so Activision can dictate anything they like.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312414</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314186</id>
	<title>Re:Boo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267448820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Activision has always been concerned primarily about money from the beginning, and creativity and quality products second.
<br>
It's pretty apparent they could give less of a shit about any of their customers.
<br>
In fact, Activision is only CALLED Activision because they wanted to supercede ATARI on all of the alphabetical listings to drive up sales.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Activision has always been concerned primarily about money from the beginning , and creativity and quality products second .
It 's pretty apparent they could give less of a shit about any of their customers .
In fact , Activision is only CALLED Activision because they wanted to supercede ATARI on all of the alphabetical listings to drive up sales .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Activision has always been concerned primarily about money from the beginning, and creativity and quality products second.
It's pretty apparent they could give less of a shit about any of their customers.
In fact, Activision is only CALLED Activision because they wanted to supercede ATARI on all of the alphabetical listings to drive up sales.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312584</id>
	<title>Bad press for Activision</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267386720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is going to generate a lot of bad press for Activision. More than just gamers deciding not to buy their games, Game developers aren't going to want to do business with a company that pulls the rug out from under people. It's a small world out there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is going to generate a lot of bad press for Activision .
More than just gamers deciding not to buy their games , Game developers are n't going to want to do business with a company that pulls the rug out from under people .
It 's a small world out there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is going to generate a lot of bad press for Activision.
More than just gamers deciding not to buy their games, Game developers aren't going to want to do business with a company that pulls the rug out from under people.
It's a small world out there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31368384</id>
	<title>Give a shit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267822440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Be sure to like the games. Just don't like them too much. If you become a fan you'll be screwed.</p><p>Life sucks if you give a shit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Be sure to like the games .
Just do n't like them too much .
If you become a fan you 'll be screwed.Life sucks if you give a shit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Be sure to like the games.
Just don't like them too much.
If you become a fan you'll be screwed.Life sucks if you give a shit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312424</id>
	<title>if Activision isn't actively using the IP...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267384740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...they should lose it. Are they still actively marketing this game? Do they still sell it? Is there a new version in the works? IP really needs to have a "use-it-or-lose-it" clause.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...they should lose it .
Are they still actively marketing this game ?
Do they still sell it ?
Is there a new version in the works ?
IP really needs to have a " use-it-or-lose-it " clause .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...they should lose it.
Are they still actively marketing this game?
Do they still sell it?
Is there a new version in the works?
IP really needs to have a "use-it-or-lose-it" clause.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31315740</id>
	<title>How about satire</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267457880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Assuming the game sucks, as fan fiction tends to, they might be able to continue development as a satire of the KQ series?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Assuming the game sucks , as fan fiction tends to , they might be able to continue development as a satire of the KQ series ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Assuming the game sucks, as fan fiction tends to, they might be able to continue development as a satire of the KQ series?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31324820</id>
	<title>Re:Vaporware</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267451040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Clearly you know nothing about fan-created games.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Clearly you know nothing about fan-created games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Clearly you know nothing about fan-created games.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314346</id>
	<title>Sad but somewhat expected</title>
	<author>sproketboy</author>
	<datestamp>1267450200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The issue here I think is where small game developers "clone" old games.  Instead of cloning them - re-image them instead.   I started a new <a href="http://goldchest.sourceforge.net/" title="sourceforge.net" rel="nofollow">gold box game engine</a> [sourceforge.net] (web site ugly right now) which uses a similar look and feel but I'm redesigning it from scratch (and implementing new features).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The issue here I think is where small game developers " clone " old games .
Instead of cloning them - re-image them instead .
I started a new gold box game engine [ sourceforge.net ] ( web site ugly right now ) which uses a similar look and feel but I 'm redesigning it from scratch ( and implementing new features ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The issue here I think is where small game developers "clone" old games.
Instead of cloning them - re-image them instead.
I started a new gold box game engine [sourceforge.net] (web site ugly right now) which uses a similar look and feel but I'm redesigning it from scratch (and implementing new features).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31328388</id>
	<title>Umm</title>
	<author>raind</author>
	<datestamp>1267535220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who cares?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who cares ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who cares?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312404</id>
	<title>fourth</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267384500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who gives a shit about this article?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who gives a shit about this article ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who gives a shit about this article?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314480</id>
	<title>Re:WTF</title>
	<author>Haxzaw</author>
	<datestamp>1267451280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They are fans, I'm sure they don't have a lot of money to fight it.  Perhaps they don't have a lot of time either, since they've been working on it for 8 years.  Seems a bit excessive.  Of course, they could still work on it, finish it, and distribute it secretly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They are fans , I 'm sure they do n't have a lot of money to fight it .
Perhaps they do n't have a lot of time either , since they 've been working on it for 8 years .
Seems a bit excessive .
Of course , they could still work on it , finish it , and distribute it secretly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are fans, I'm sure they don't have a lot of money to fight it.
Perhaps they don't have a lot of time either, since they've been working on it for 8 years.
Seems a bit excessive.
Of course, they could still work on it, finish it, and distribute it secretly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312386</id>
	<title>first</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267384260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>first</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>first</tokentext>
<sentencetext>first</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31328490</id>
	<title>Never donate your time to someone else's IP!</title>
	<author>Gel214th</author>
	<datestamp>1267536720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How many times have we heard of this happening, why do groups of talented people persist?</p><p>NEVER donate your time, especially not 8 years, to someone else's IP.</p><p>Had they put 8 years into making adventure stories for say Neverwinter Nights 2 or something they probably would have been able to strike a deal for paid expansions (Like Mysteries of Westgate).</p><p>Or had they put 8 years into their own IP. All it would have taken was to change the names, places...move the story around a bit. They could even have said that it was Inspired by Kings Quest etc. etc. (Torchlight inspired by Diablo).</p><p>This is really very sad.But the corporate beast has no feelings and no loyalty.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How many times have we heard of this happening , why do groups of talented people persist ? NEVER donate your time , especially not 8 years , to someone else 's IP.Had they put 8 years into making adventure stories for say Neverwinter Nights 2 or something they probably would have been able to strike a deal for paid expansions ( Like Mysteries of Westgate ) .Or had they put 8 years into their own IP .
All it would have taken was to change the names , places...move the story around a bit .
They could even have said that it was Inspired by Kings Quest etc .
etc. ( Torchlight inspired by Diablo ) .This is really very sad.But the corporate beast has no feelings and no loyalty .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many times have we heard of this happening, why do groups of talented people persist?NEVER donate your time, especially not 8 years, to someone else's IP.Had they put 8 years into making adventure stories for say Neverwinter Nights 2 or something they probably would have been able to strike a deal for paid expansions (Like Mysteries of Westgate).Or had they put 8 years into their own IP.
All it would have taken was to change the names, places...move the story around a bit.
They could even have said that it was Inspired by Kings Quest etc.
etc. (Torchlight inspired by Diablo).This is really very sad.But the corporate beast has no feelings and no loyalty.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31318558</id>
	<title>Re:Vaporware</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267467900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let's see you devote all your time for free. I'm sure these people had day jobs, families, lives.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's see you devote all your time for free .
I 'm sure these people had day jobs , families , lives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's see you devote all your time for free.
I'm sure these people had day jobs, families, lives.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313966</id>
	<title>Just change the name so it doesn't violate the IP</title>
	<author>elblanco</author>
	<datestamp>1267446420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Would that really be that much work? Call it's "Royal Adventure" or some such....change the character names, and be done with it. There's nothing that prevents them from making a Sierra "like" adventure game. I've always been mystified when some fan group works for years to build a game and gives up over a C&amp;D because they are obviously violating the IP of the holder. Don't drop the project! Just change the particulars!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Would that really be that much work ?
Call it 's " Royal Adventure " or some such....change the character names , and be done with it .
There 's nothing that prevents them from making a Sierra " like " adventure game .
I 've always been mystified when some fan group works for years to build a game and gives up over a C&amp;D because they are obviously violating the IP of the holder .
Do n't drop the project !
Just change the particulars !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would that really be that much work?
Call it's "Royal Adventure" or some such....change the character names, and be done with it.
There's nothing that prevents them from making a Sierra "like" adventure game.
I've always been mystified when some fan group works for years to build a game and gives up over a C&amp;D because they are obviously violating the IP of the holder.
Don't drop the project!
Just change the particulars!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312582</id>
	<title>Easy</title>
	<author>Spit</author>
	<datestamp>1267386720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just call it "DERP QUEST" and change the names.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just call it " DERP QUEST " and change the names .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just call it "DERP QUEST" and change the names.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31316888</id>
	<title>Re:if Activision isn't actively using the IP...</title>
	<author>thetagger</author>
	<datestamp>1267461840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...they should lose it. Are they still actively marketing this game? Do they still sell it?</p> </div><p>
They are still marketing and selling the game, actually:
</p><p>
<a href="http://store.steampowered.com/app/10100/" title="steampowered.com" rel="nofollow">King's Quest Collection on Steam</a> [steampowered.com] <br>
<a href="http://www.gog.com/en/gamecard/king\%E2\%80\%99s\_quest\_4\_5\_6" title="gog.com" rel="nofollow">King's Quest 4+5+6 on GOG.com</a> [gog.com]
</p><p>
Activision released a bunch of old Sierra games through GOG.com, cheaply and DRM-free: so far, they have three King's Quests, three Space Quests, Phantasmagoria and two Gabriel Knight games, with probably more to come.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...they should lose it .
Are they still actively marketing this game ?
Do they still sell it ?
They are still marketing and selling the game , actually : King 's Quest Collection on Steam [ steampowered.com ] King 's Quest 4 + 5 + 6 on GOG.com [ gog.com ] Activision released a bunch of old Sierra games through GOG.com , cheaply and DRM-free : so far , they have three King 's Quests , three Space Quests , Phantasmagoria and two Gabriel Knight games , with probably more to come .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...they should lose it.
Are they still actively marketing this game?
Do they still sell it?
They are still marketing and selling the game, actually:

King's Quest Collection on Steam [steampowered.com] 
King's Quest 4+5+6 on GOG.com [gog.com]

Activision released a bunch of old Sierra games through GOG.com, cheaply and DRM-free: so far, they have three King's Quests, three Space Quests, Phantasmagoria and two Gabriel Knight games, with probably more to come.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314928</id>
	<title>Re:if Activision isn't actively using the IP...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267454040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>IP really needs to have a "use-it-or-lose-it" clause.</i></p><p>Oh no! We get enough awful sequels as it is without forcing companies to make them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IP really needs to have a " use-it-or-lose-it " clause.Oh no !
We get enough awful sequels as it is without forcing companies to make them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IP really needs to have a "use-it-or-lose-it" clause.Oh no!
We get enough awful sequels as it is without forcing companies to make them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314844</id>
	<title>A list of trustworthy game publishers</title>
	<author>ElusiveJoe</author>
	<datestamp>1267453620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would like to see one.</p><p>With EA, Ubisoft and Activision Blizzard out, who is left?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would like to see one.With EA , Ubisoft and Activision Blizzard out , who is left ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would like to see one.With EA, Ubisoft and Activision Blizzard out, who is left?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314540</id>
	<title>What about Duke Nukem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267451760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hope this not effect the development of Duke Nukem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope this not effect the development of Duke Nukem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope this not effect the development of Duke Nukem.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313430</id>
	<title>Re:How fuckin stupid can one be??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267439160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This.</p><p>I can't believe the number of times company X has killed off a fan project because they started it up without their permission.<br>They could support them and request at least some of the money that comes from the project, help them with distribution, everyone is happy.</p><p>I'm hoping that the Metal Gear fan films don't get killed off prematurely, i really want to see the sequel.<br>I wonder what Hideo thinks about them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This.I ca n't believe the number of times company X has killed off a fan project because they started it up without their permission.They could support them and request at least some of the money that comes from the project , help them with distribution , everyone is happy.I 'm hoping that the Metal Gear fan films do n't get killed off prematurely , i really want to see the sequel.I wonder what Hideo thinks about them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This.I can't believe the number of times company X has killed off a fan project because they started it up without their permission.They could support them and request at least some of the money that comes from the project, help them with distribution, everyone is happy.I'm hoping that the Metal Gear fan films don't get killed off prematurely, i really want to see the sequel.I wonder what Hideo thinks about them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312686</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312958</id>
	<title>Re:Never build a house on another man's land...</title>
	<author>LordLucless</author>
	<datestamp>1267476660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Which would be amusing, since Quest for Glory had to be renamed (it was originally Hero Quest, in keeping with the other *Quest series) due to trademark infringement against Milton Bradley's Hero Quest boardgame. At least it'll be a thorough re-creation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Which would be amusing , since Quest for Glory had to be renamed ( it was originally Hero Quest , in keeping with the other * Quest series ) due to trademark infringement against Milton Bradley 's Hero Quest boardgame .
At least it 'll be a thorough re-creation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which would be amusing, since Quest for Glory had to be renamed (it was originally Hero Quest, in keeping with the other *Quest series) due to trademark infringement against Milton Bradley's Hero Quest boardgame.
At least it'll be a thorough re-creation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312426</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312426</id>
	<title>Re:Never build a house on another man's land...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267384800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>They're not building on it, they had a license.  Activision reneged.  This is terrible news, AGD is sure to be next on the chopping block, with their fully licensed remake of Quest for Glory 2.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're not building on it , they had a license .
Activision reneged .
This is terrible news , AGD is sure to be next on the chopping block , with their fully licensed remake of Quest for Glory 2 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're not building on it, they had a license.
Activision reneged.
This is terrible news, AGD is sure to be next on the chopping block, with their fully licensed remake of Quest for Glory 2.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31328156</id>
	<title>Re:Just change the name so it doesn't violate the</title>
	<author>Joelfabulous</author>
	<datestamp>1267531860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>this is exactly what these guys did when they got hassled by Games Workshop (who are notorious wankers when it comes to this stuff, I hear). They made a tribute / fan game recreating the Space Hulk board game, maybe a decade plus after the last Space Hulk game IP had been released...</p><p>They changed the name to Alien Assault, tweaked some art assets and any specific universe references, and now they're completely in the clear. It's the EXACT same game, just minus the free promotion for Games Workshop.</p><p>Epic fail, facepalm, and slow clap all around...</p><p><a href="http://www.teardown.se/" title="teardown.se">http://www.teardown.se/</a> [teardown.se]</p><p>stick it to 'em</p><p>(only games workshop thing I have is the deluxe edition 20th anniversary edition of Space Hulk which I got myself for Christmas, largely on word of mouth merits via boardgamegeek.com and playing this little gem of a game. and yet they hit the geek with a cease and desist awhile back too -- it was on slashdot...)</p><p>just...</p><p>wow. they don't just look a gift horse in the mouth, they actually pull out the shotgun and put one between its eyes for good measure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>this is exactly what these guys did when they got hassled by Games Workshop ( who are notorious wankers when it comes to this stuff , I hear ) .
They made a tribute / fan game recreating the Space Hulk board game , maybe a decade plus after the last Space Hulk game IP had been released...They changed the name to Alien Assault , tweaked some art assets and any specific universe references , and now they 're completely in the clear .
It 's the EXACT same game , just minus the free promotion for Games Workshop.Epic fail , facepalm , and slow clap all around...http : //www.teardown.se/ [ teardown.se ] stick it to 'em ( only games workshop thing I have is the deluxe edition 20th anniversary edition of Space Hulk which I got myself for Christmas , largely on word of mouth merits via boardgamegeek.com and playing this little gem of a game .
and yet they hit the geek with a cease and desist awhile back too -- it was on slashdot... ) just...wow .
they do n't just look a gift horse in the mouth , they actually pull out the shotgun and put one between its eyes for good measure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this is exactly what these guys did when they got hassled by Games Workshop (who are notorious wankers when it comes to this stuff, I hear).
They made a tribute / fan game recreating the Space Hulk board game, maybe a decade plus after the last Space Hulk game IP had been released...They changed the name to Alien Assault, tweaked some art assets and any specific universe references, and now they're completely in the clear.
It's the EXACT same game, just minus the free promotion for Games Workshop.Epic fail, facepalm, and slow clap all around...http://www.teardown.se/ [teardown.se]stick it to 'em(only games workshop thing I have is the deluxe edition 20th anniversary edition of Space Hulk which I got myself for Christmas, largely on word of mouth merits via boardgamegeek.com and playing this little gem of a game.
and yet they hit the geek with a cease and desist awhile back too -- it was on slashdot...)just...wow.
they don't just look a gift horse in the mouth, they actually pull out the shotgun and put one between its eyes for good measure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313966</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31316018</id>
	<title>Sign the petitioin to save TSL!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267458720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/savetsl" title="petitionspot.com" rel="nofollow">Sign the petition to save The Silver Lining!</a> [petitionspot.com]</p><p>In case you haven't seen this game, search around the Internet for some screenshots (or see the original website tsl-game.com on the Internet Archive). It was in full 3D and very nicely done, recreating very elegantly many environments from the original King's Quest games (from what I could see in the publicly released demo which you might still be able to find somewhere?).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sign the petition to save The Silver Lining !
[ petitionspot.com ] In case you have n't seen this game , search around the Internet for some screenshots ( or see the original website tsl-game.com on the Internet Archive ) .
It was in full 3D and very nicely done , recreating very elegantly many environments from the original King 's Quest games ( from what I could see in the publicly released demo which you might still be able to find somewhere ?
) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sign the petition to save The Silver Lining!
[petitionspot.com]In case you haven't seen this game, search around the Internet for some screenshots (or see the original website tsl-game.com on the Internet Archive).
It was in full 3D and very nicely done, recreating very elegantly many environments from the original King's Quest games (from what I could see in the publicly released demo which you might still be able to find somewhere?
).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313038</id>
	<title>Thinking fast on your feet</title>
	<author>WinstonWolfIT</author>
	<datestamp>1267434420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>In unrelated news, "Queen's Journey, the Saga of Gwendolyn's Adventures and Tribulations", should be ready soon.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In unrelated news , " Queen 's Journey , the Saga of Gwendolyn 's Adventures and Tribulations " , should be ready soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In unrelated news, "Queen's Journey, the Saga of Gwendolyn's Adventures and Tribulations", should be ready soon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312416</id>
	<title>One can only hope</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267384680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These sad wankers will emerge from their Moms' basements after all these long years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These sad wankers will emerge from their Moms ' basements after all these long years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These sad wankers will emerge from their Moms' basements after all these long years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312728</id>
	<title>The ugly warts of free software</title>
	<author>HellYeahAutomaton</author>
	<datestamp>1267474260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IANAL, but everyone has to be on their toes these days.</p><p>Phoenix Online Studios appears to be a hobbyist collective, and as such is not afforded legal protections of a corporation  (Inc., LLC, S-Corp etc) -- an entity protected by the law to pursue profit-making ventures. It's not surprising that they caved to the cease-and-desist because the individuals in the collective could be named and pursued vigorously in a lawsuit.</p><p>If they were a for-profit company and entered into an agreement with Vivendi and Activision failed to honor it, they could be sued for breach of contract. Yes, yes, there was a fan license granted by Vivendi whose terms remain unpublished. Chances are there is a <b>severability</b> clause that they signed to and forgot about. Oops.</p><p>People who give freely into free and open source projects have to really understand that they are giving away their labors as charity -- but more importantly they have little recourse and <b> motivation </b> to dig their heels in without having the protections of a corporation trying to make a profit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IANAL , but everyone has to be on their toes these days.Phoenix Online Studios appears to be a hobbyist collective , and as such is not afforded legal protections of a corporation ( Inc. , LLC , S-Corp etc ) -- an entity protected by the law to pursue profit-making ventures .
It 's not surprising that they caved to the cease-and-desist because the individuals in the collective could be named and pursued vigorously in a lawsuit.If they were a for-profit company and entered into an agreement with Vivendi and Activision failed to honor it , they could be sued for breach of contract .
Yes , yes , there was a fan license granted by Vivendi whose terms remain unpublished .
Chances are there is a severability clause that they signed to and forgot about .
Oops.People who give freely into free and open source projects have to really understand that they are giving away their labors as charity -- but more importantly they have little recourse and motivation to dig their heels in without having the protections of a corporation trying to make a profit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IANAL, but everyone has to be on their toes these days.Phoenix Online Studios appears to be a hobbyist collective, and as such is not afforded legal protections of a corporation  (Inc., LLC, S-Corp etc) -- an entity protected by the law to pursue profit-making ventures.
It's not surprising that they caved to the cease-and-desist because the individuals in the collective could be named and pursued vigorously in a lawsuit.If they were a for-profit company and entered into an agreement with Vivendi and Activision failed to honor it, they could be sued for breach of contract.
Yes, yes, there was a fan license granted by Vivendi whose terms remain unpublished.
Chances are there is a severability clause that they signed to and forgot about.
Oops.People who give freely into free and open source projects have to really understand that they are giving away their labors as charity -- but more importantly they have little recourse and  motivation  to dig their heels in without having the protections of a corporation trying to make a profit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31327420</id>
	<title>Re:Boo</title>
	<author>shnull</author>
	<datestamp>1267521360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>its Activision/Blizzard, right ? that is indeed good to know<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</htmltext>
<tokenext>its Activision/Blizzard , right ?
that is indeed good to know .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>its Activision/Blizzard, right ?
that is indeed good to know ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313686</id>
	<title>Re:WTF</title>
	<author>kirill.s</author>
	<datestamp>1267442580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They could still try to work on it anonymously. They are not trying to make money of it, I assume.<br>
Hosting it in some pro-free-speech country could be a good idea too.<br>
Just make it hard for the lawyers to try to close it down, and the company would have to change their position and become pro-tweaker to save face and save money at the same time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They could still try to work on it anonymously .
They are not trying to make money of it , I assume .
Hosting it in some pro-free-speech country could be a good idea too .
Just make it hard for the lawyers to try to close it down , and the company would have to change their position and become pro-tweaker to save face and save money at the same time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They could still try to work on it anonymously.
They are not trying to make money of it, I assume.
Hosting it in some pro-free-speech country could be a good idea too.
Just make it hard for the lawyers to try to close it down, and the company would have to change their position and become pro-tweaker to save face and save money at the same time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31321438</id>
	<title>Re:Easy</title>
	<author>pclminion</author>
	<datestamp>1267435860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What does it mean that when I read "DERP QUEST" the first thing I imagined was some sort of SQL injection attack?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What does it mean that when I read " DERP QUEST " the first thing I imagined was some sort of SQL injection attack ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What does it mean that when I read "DERP QUEST" the first thing I imagined was some sort of SQL injection attack?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312582</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314024</id>
	<title>Re:if Activision isn't actively using the IP...</title>
	<author>Deanalator</author>
	<datestamp>1267447260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Further reason why I think companies should have to pay property tax on their IP.  When someone tries to buy the IP, companies should either be forced to sell, or increase the value, and 10\% of that value should be going to the USPTO every year on tax day.  I think this would work if IP was not allowed to decline in value, and if the upkeep was not paid, then the IP becomes unregulated by the US government.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Further reason why I think companies should have to pay property tax on their IP .
When someone tries to buy the IP , companies should either be forced to sell , or increase the value , and 10 \ % of that value should be going to the USPTO every year on tax day .
I think this would work if IP was not allowed to decline in value , and if the upkeep was not paid , then the IP becomes unregulated by the US government .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Further reason why I think companies should have to pay property tax on their IP.
When someone tries to buy the IP, companies should either be forced to sell, or increase the value, and 10\% of that value should be going to the USPTO every year on tax day.
I think this would work if IP was not allowed to decline in value, and if the upkeep was not paid, then the IP becomes unregulated by the US government.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31315588</id>
	<title>Re:Boo</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1267457280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It doesn't look like any of the big gaming companies are any better friends to gamers than the record companies are friends to music lovers.</p><p>This does make sense -- they're in it for the money, not your friendship or love of the game.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It does n't look like any of the big gaming companies are any better friends to gamers than the record companies are friends to music lovers.This does make sense -- they 're in it for the money , not your friendship or love of the game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It doesn't look like any of the big gaming companies are any better friends to gamers than the record companies are friends to music lovers.This does make sense -- they're in it for the money, not your friendship or love of the game.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31317126</id>
	<title>Re:if Activision isn't actively using the IP...</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1267462740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>...they should lose it. Are they still actively marketing this game? Do they still sell it? Is there a new version in the works?</i></p><p>Yes, yes, no. (As far as I'm aware-- if there's a new version in the works, it's still unannounced.)</p><p><a href="http://store.steampowered.com/app/10100/" title="steampowered.com">http://store.steampowered.com/app/10100/</a> [steampowered.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...they should lose it .
Are they still actively marketing this game ?
Do they still sell it ?
Is there a new version in the works ? Yes , yes , no .
( As far as I 'm aware-- if there 's a new version in the works , it 's still unannounced .
) http : //store.steampowered.com/app/10100/ [ steampowered.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...they should lose it.
Are they still actively marketing this game?
Do they still sell it?
Is there a new version in the works?Yes, yes, no.
(As far as I'm aware-- if there's a new version in the works, it's still unannounced.
)http://store.steampowered.com/app/10100/ [steampowered.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314650</id>
	<title>More of Bob Kotick scorched Earth policies</title>
	<author>Anti Cheat</author>
	<datestamp>1267452480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is anyone surprised?<br>Bob (call me Rob) Kotick is exactly as portrayed. He is maniacal in his belief that the gaming community is an impediment to profit and uses the console players as the poster children for his proof. He has no understanding of how core gamer communities influence sales over the long run. He would rather spend 10's of millions on hype to carry the day, than spend a penny back to the customer base to secure some brand loyalty. He believes that customers as are the actual game franchises and are meant to be wrung out, for every single dime. He has said as much publicly several times. Why complicate things by having to aid or listen to what he considers a small radical segment. He considers free content as competition that costs him profit and anything like a community, as a challenge to his total control to get those profits.</p><p>None should be surprised by this latest move of abject disgust for anything relating to free content by a community. In fact you can expect more to come. Bob Kotick will continue this scorched earth policy. Bobby is here and he is letting everyone know who is in charge. Dissent will be squashed.</p><p>As long as gamers let Bob Kotick go unchallenged, then they are the sheep he thinks they are. Until free content and free servers are systematically destroyed, then the future of pay to play and pay content can't be fully realized and exploited for profit. Bob Kotick is betting you he is right.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is anyone surprised ? Bob ( call me Rob ) Kotick is exactly as portrayed .
He is maniacal in his belief that the gaming community is an impediment to profit and uses the console players as the poster children for his proof .
He has no understanding of how core gamer communities influence sales over the long run .
He would rather spend 10 's of millions on hype to carry the day , than spend a penny back to the customer base to secure some brand loyalty .
He believes that customers as are the actual game franchises and are meant to be wrung out , for every single dime .
He has said as much publicly several times .
Why complicate things by having to aid or listen to what he considers a small radical segment .
He considers free content as competition that costs him profit and anything like a community , as a challenge to his total control to get those profits.None should be surprised by this latest move of abject disgust for anything relating to free content by a community .
In fact you can expect more to come .
Bob Kotick will continue this scorched earth policy .
Bobby is here and he is letting everyone know who is in charge .
Dissent will be squashed.As long as gamers let Bob Kotick go unchallenged , then they are the sheep he thinks they are .
Until free content and free servers are systematically destroyed , then the future of pay to play and pay content ca n't be fully realized and exploited for profit .
Bob Kotick is betting you he is right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is anyone surprised?Bob (call me Rob) Kotick is exactly as portrayed.
He is maniacal in his belief that the gaming community is an impediment to profit and uses the console players as the poster children for his proof.
He has no understanding of how core gamer communities influence sales over the long run.
He would rather spend 10's of millions on hype to carry the day, than spend a penny back to the customer base to secure some brand loyalty.
He believes that customers as are the actual game franchises and are meant to be wrung out, for every single dime.
He has said as much publicly several times.
Why complicate things by having to aid or listen to what he considers a small radical segment.
He considers free content as competition that costs him profit and anything like a community, as a challenge to his total control to get those profits.None should be surprised by this latest move of abject disgust for anything relating to free content by a community.
In fact you can expect more to come.
Bob Kotick will continue this scorched earth policy.
Bobby is here and he is letting everyone know who is in charge.
Dissent will be squashed.As long as gamers let Bob Kotick go unchallenged, then they are the sheep he thinks they are.
Until free content and free servers are systematically destroyed, then the future of pay to play and pay content can't be fully realized and exploited for profit.
Bob Kotick is betting you he is right.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313970</id>
	<title>I'm disappointed in you, Internet!</title>
	<author>vrmlguy</author>
	<datestamp>1267446480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A quick search for a torrent (<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=King's+Quest+Silver+Lining+filetype:torrent" title="google.com">http://www.google.com/search?q=King's+Quest+Silver+Lining+filetype:torrent</a> [google.com]) yields nothing!  All of the official KQ games are out there, but not this one.  How can I independently evaluate the quality of the game, and thus the depth of Activision's transgression, if I can't find a torrent?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A quick search for a torrent ( http : //www.google.com/search ? q = King 's + Quest + Silver + Lining + filetype : torrent [ google.com ] ) yields nothing !
All of the official KQ games are out there , but not this one .
How can I independently evaluate the quality of the game , and thus the depth of Activision 's transgression , if I ca n't find a torrent ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A quick search for a torrent (http://www.google.com/search?q=King's+Quest+Silver+Lining+filetype:torrent [google.com]) yields nothing!
All of the official KQ games are out there, but not this one.
How can I independently evaluate the quality of the game, and thus the depth of Activision's transgression, if I can't find a torrent?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31324266</id>
	<title>buy out</title>
	<author>neghvar1</author>
	<datestamp>1267447500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh I wish I could invest a cool $10 billion into ATVI in one direct transaction.  With my new 909 million shares (more than all other investors combined), I could take full control.  Ban the use of DRM, reinstate the fan-based licensing, allow copyright law to be used instead of EULA's.

So for any of you who have recently won a massive lotto jackpot, consider putting your voice into the anti-consumer rights choices that some of the smaller software publishers make.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh I wish I could invest a cool $ 10 billion into ATVI in one direct transaction .
With my new 909 million shares ( more than all other investors combined ) , I could take full control .
Ban the use of DRM , reinstate the fan-based licensing , allow copyright law to be used instead of EULA 's .
So for any of you who have recently won a massive lotto jackpot , consider putting your voice into the anti-consumer rights choices that some of the smaller software publishers make .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh I wish I could invest a cool $10 billion into ATVI in one direct transaction.
With my new 909 million shares (more than all other investors combined), I could take full control.
Ban the use of DRM, reinstate the fan-based licensing, allow copyright law to be used instead of EULA's.
So for any of you who have recently won a massive lotto jackpot, consider putting your voice into the anti-consumer rights choices that some of the smaller software publishers make.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31315158</id>
	<title>Been pissed at Activision for years.</title>
	<author>Zaphod-AVA</author>
	<datestamp>1267455600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll never forgive them for what they did to the Interstate '76 franchise.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll never forgive them for what they did to the Interstate '76 franchise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll never forgive them for what they did to the Interstate '76 franchise.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312614</id>
	<title>what a modder thinks</title>
	<author>GarretSidzaka</author>
	<datestamp>1267386960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>this is serious bullshit.  ive been a modder for years now and i know about fair use. the companies that hold the rights of the games i work on LOVE modding as it increases sales and replay value.  Activision you are showing your corporate decay.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>this is serious bullshit .
ive been a modder for years now and i know about fair use .
the companies that hold the rights of the games i work on LOVE modding as it increases sales and replay value .
Activision you are showing your corporate decay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this is serious bullshit.
ive been a modder for years now and i know about fair use.
the companies that hold the rights of the games i work on LOVE modding as it increases sales and replay value.
Activision you are showing your corporate decay.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31318216</id>
	<title>Re:Boo</title>
	<author>morari</author>
	<datestamp>1267466700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All this team needs to do is continue on with the project, strip their names from it, and let it "leak" out onto the internet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All this team needs to do is continue on with the project , strip their names from it , and let it " leak " out onto the internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All this team needs to do is continue on with the project, strip their names from it, and let it "leak" out onto the internet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313814</id>
	<title>Re:Never build a house on another man's land...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267444620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The central problem is that under the negotiated terms Activision has an unconditional termination right. There's a lesson here: don't put serious amounts of time and effort in something when a third party can simply nix it at will, no matter how friendly that third party appears today.<br>Either get your paperwork sorted out in advance, so that you have a contract that clearly states the terms of publication and doesn't contain termination clauses like this, or don't make a fan game, but come up with something original instead so that you cannot be bound by third-party copyrights and trademarks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The central problem is that under the negotiated terms Activision has an unconditional termination right .
There 's a lesson here : do n't put serious amounts of time and effort in something when a third party can simply nix it at will , no matter how friendly that third party appears today.Either get your paperwork sorted out in advance , so that you have a contract that clearly states the terms of publication and does n't contain termination clauses like this , or do n't make a fan game , but come up with something original instead so that you can not be bound by third-party copyrights and trademarks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The central problem is that under the negotiated terms Activision has an unconditional termination right.
There's a lesson here: don't put serious amounts of time and effort in something when a third party can simply nix it at will, no matter how friendly that third party appears today.Either get your paperwork sorted out in advance, so that you have a contract that clearly states the terms of publication and doesn't contain termination clauses like this, or don't make a fan game, but come up with something original instead so that you cannot be bound by third-party copyrights and trademarks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312426</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313404</id>
	<title>Re:if Activision isn't actively using the IP...</title>
	<author>SharpFang</author>
	<datestamp>1267438860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait... Isn't there a clause of "loss due to lack of use" on trademarks?<br>Same as "loss due to lack of protection", I'm pretty sure a trademark can be lost due to lack of release of any actual product covered under it.<br>(of course if Activision still sells original Kings' Quest, as some collector's edition or such, this is no-case, but if the product line is shut down for more than a few years, I'm pretty sure the trademark is lost... there is no such thing as "domain-squatting" for trademarks. I'm just not sure about the period...)</p><p>see Palm suing over the Netbook(tm) and all the likehood of failing to win.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait... Is n't there a clause of " loss due to lack of use " on trademarks ? Same as " loss due to lack of protection " , I 'm pretty sure a trademark can be lost due to lack of release of any actual product covered under it .
( of course if Activision still sells original Kings ' Quest , as some collector 's edition or such , this is no-case , but if the product line is shut down for more than a few years , I 'm pretty sure the trademark is lost... there is no such thing as " domain-squatting " for trademarks .
I 'm just not sure about the period... ) see Palm suing over the Netbook ( tm ) and all the likehood of failing to win .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait... Isn't there a clause of "loss due to lack of use" on trademarks?Same as "loss due to lack of protection", I'm pretty sure a trademark can be lost due to lack of release of any actual product covered under it.
(of course if Activision still sells original Kings' Quest, as some collector's edition or such, this is no-case, but if the product line is shut down for more than a few years, I'm pretty sure the trademark is lost... there is no such thing as "domain-squatting" for trademarks.
I'm just not sure about the period...)see Palm suing over the Netbook(tm) and all the likehood of failing to win.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31316664</id>
	<title>Open source == piracy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267461060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everyone knows open source <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2010/feb/23/opensource-intellectual-property" title="guardian.co.uk" rel="nofollow">is the equivalent to piracy</a> [guardian.co.uk].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone knows open source is the equivalent to piracy [ guardian.co.uk ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone knows open source is the equivalent to piracy [guardian.co.uk].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312798</id>
	<title>Activision did not acquire Vivendi.</title>
	<author>Shandalar</author>
	<datestamp>1267474980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Activision did not acquire Vivendi.  The merged company retained the ATVI stock listing, and Bobby Kotick is running the company, true; but VU got more board seats than Activision.  If anything, VU bought Activision.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Activision did not acquire Vivendi .
The merged company retained the ATVI stock listing , and Bobby Kotick is running the company , true ; but VU got more board seats than Activision .
If anything , VU bought Activision .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Activision did not acquire Vivendi.
The merged company retained the ATVI stock listing, and Bobby Kotick is running the company, true; but VU got more board seats than Activision.
If anything, VU bought Activision.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312414</id>
	<title>Was it in writing?</title>
	<author>zalas</author>
	<datestamp>1267384680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This stands against the fact that Vivendi granted a non-commercial license to the team, subject to Vivendi's approval of the game after submission.</p> </div><p>So, did they actually get this in writing, with a contract signed by both sides?  Would such a contract survive an acquisition?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This stands against the fact that Vivendi granted a non-commercial license to the team , subject to Vivendi 's approval of the game after submission .
So , did they actually get this in writing , with a contract signed by both sides ?
Would such a contract survive an acquisition ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This stands against the fact that Vivendi granted a non-commercial license to the team, subject to Vivendi's approval of the game after submission.
So, did they actually get this in writing, with a contract signed by both sides?
Would such a contract survive an acquisition?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314308</id>
	<title>Re:if Activision isn't actively using the IP...</title>
	<author>mxs</author>
	<datestamp>1267449960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>King's Quest got released on gog.com recently, so it is still being sold (or rather, again being sold).</p><p><a href="http://www.gog.com/en/gamecard/king" title="gog.com">http://www.gog.com/en/gamecard/king</a> [gog.com]'s\_quest\_4\_5\_6</p><p>IMHO this is good news, even though it kills the "if they don't use it" argument dead. I have left quite a bit of money at gog.com (no DRM on any of their games, compatibility fixes, decent support, etc.) and was quite surprised that Activision would open their back catalogue to them at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>King 's Quest got released on gog.com recently , so it is still being sold ( or rather , again being sold ) .http : //www.gog.com/en/gamecard/king [ gog.com ] 's \ _quest \ _4 \ _5 \ _6IMHO this is good news , even though it kills the " if they do n't use it " argument dead .
I have left quite a bit of money at gog.com ( no DRM on any of their games , compatibility fixes , decent support , etc .
) and was quite surprised that Activision would open their back catalogue to them at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>King's Quest got released on gog.com recently, so it is still being sold (or rather, again being sold).http://www.gog.com/en/gamecard/king [gog.com]'s\_quest\_4\_5\_6IMHO this is good news, even though it kills the "if they don't use it" argument dead.
I have left quite a bit of money at gog.com (no DRM on any of their games, compatibility fixes, decent support, etc.
) and was quite surprised that Activision would open their back catalogue to them at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31315100</id>
	<title>IAAL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267455300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>BTW... For all of you talking about "Trademarks", you've got the wrong intellectual property there.</p><p>Software is protected by COPYRIGHT, as is the creative content within it.</p><p>Trademarks only protect PRODUCT BRANDING insofar as it is "USED" to sell a product to the public.  These guys were not selling anything to anyone, and most of the content of the King's Quest game could not be fairly considered a "mark" as it wouldn't have appeared on the packaging of the game .</p><p>So in the end, their development project was pulled out of fear of COPYRIGHT infringement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>BTW... For all of you talking about " Trademarks " , you 've got the wrong intellectual property there.Software is protected by COPYRIGHT , as is the creative content within it.Trademarks only protect PRODUCT BRANDING insofar as it is " USED " to sell a product to the public .
These guys were not selling anything to anyone , and most of the content of the King 's Quest game could not be fairly considered a " mark " as it would n't have appeared on the packaging of the game .So in the end , their development project was pulled out of fear of COPYRIGHT infringement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BTW... For all of you talking about "Trademarks", you've got the wrong intellectual property there.Software is protected by COPYRIGHT, as is the creative content within it.Trademarks only protect PRODUCT BRANDING insofar as it is "USED" to sell a product to the public.
These guys were not selling anything to anyone, and most of the content of the King's Quest game could not be fairly considered a "mark" as it wouldn't have appeared on the packaging of the game .So in the end, their development project was pulled out of fear of COPYRIGHT infringement.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31318408</id>
	<title>Re:Boo</title>
	<author>TheLink</author>
	<datestamp>1267467420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>But when you take over a company, aren't you still bound by some of those obligations?<br><br>Couldn't the permission given by the previous bunch be taken as a verbal contract?<br><br>If archive.org has copies of evidence and Activision censored it, then that seems like bad faith to me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>But when you take over a company , are n't you still bound by some of those obligations ? Could n't the permission given by the previous bunch be taken as a verbal contract ? If archive.org has copies of evidence and Activision censored it , then that seems like bad faith to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But when you take over a company, aren't you still bound by some of those obligations?Couldn't the permission given by the previous bunch be taken as a verbal contract?If archive.org has copies of evidence and Activision censored it, then that seems like bad faith to me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313134</id>
	<title>WTF</title>
	<author>Meneth</author>
	<datestamp>1267435980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>They worked at it for 8 years, and now they just lay down and quit? Have these people NO self-respect?</htmltext>
<tokenext>They worked at it for 8 years , and now they just lay down and quit ?
Have these people NO self-respect ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They worked at it for 8 years, and now they just lay down and quit?
Have these people NO self-respect?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313232</id>
	<title>Falling down on the job /.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267436820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"Set a limit of 10 years or similar, after which if there are no new games (and even films) then the universe/characters enter into the public domain like is done for copyright.</i></p><p><i>This gives enough time for a company to continue a series, and allows fans of franchises that have not seen activity by a company free reign."</i></p><p>Come on, somebody make a Duke Nukem joke.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Set a limit of 10 years or similar , after which if there are no new games ( and even films ) then the universe/characters enter into the public domain like is done for copyright.This gives enough time for a company to continue a series , and allows fans of franchises that have not seen activity by a company free reign .
" Come on , somebody make a Duke Nukem joke .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Set a limit of 10 years or similar, after which if there are no new games (and even films) then the universe/characters enter into the public domain like is done for copyright.This gives enough time for a company to continue a series, and allows fans of franchises that have not seen activity by a company free reign.
"Come on, somebody make a Duke Nukem joke.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31317522</id>
	<title>Re:Boo</title>
	<author>lastchance\_000</author>
	<datestamp>1267464180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>From TFS:<p><div class="quote"><p>This stands against the fact that Vivendi granted a non-commercial license to the team, subject to Vivendi's approval of the game after submission.</p> </div><p>They had permission from the original owners of the IP. Then the IP changed hands, and the new owners said, "Fuck off."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFS : This stands against the fact that Vivendi granted a non-commercial license to the team , subject to Vivendi 's approval of the game after submission .
They had permission from the original owners of the IP .
Then the IP changed hands , and the new owners said , " Fuck off .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFS:This stands against the fact that Vivendi granted a non-commercial license to the team, subject to Vivendi's approval of the game after submission.
They had permission from the original owners of the IP.
Then the IP changed hands, and the new owners said, "Fuck off.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31316942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312922</id>
	<title>Re:Was it in writing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267476240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A contract would imply some tangible benefit for both sides.  If Vivendi was just letting them use it but taking nothing in return, legally they could renege at any time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A contract would imply some tangible benefit for both sides .
If Vivendi was just letting them use it but taking nothing in return , legally they could renege at any time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A contract would imply some tangible benefit for both sides.
If Vivendi was just letting them use it but taking nothing in return, legally they could renege at any time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312414</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31317138</id>
	<title>Re:Easy</title>
	<author>killmenow</author>
	<datestamp>1267462800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Peasant's Quest (Oh, wait, <a href="http://www.homestarrunner.com/disk4of12.html" title="homestarrunner.com" rel="nofollow">that one's been done</a> [homestarrunner.com])</htmltext>
<tokenext>Peasant 's Quest ( Oh , wait , that one 's been done [ homestarrunner.com ] )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Peasant's Quest (Oh, wait, that one's been done [homestarrunner.com])</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312582</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312390</id>
	<title>second</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267384320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>second</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>second</tokentext>
<sentencetext>second</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31315968</id>
	<title>ximian</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267458600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I personally think the only way to get this back on track is to start a BAN on activision.. $$ talks and a ban of their products will hurt them and make them reflect. TSL should start flooding the game forums left and right<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>Bet you it won't take long that Activision will see the light of day<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>You can count me in, i will no longer buy an Activision product<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I personally think the only way to get this back on track is to start a BAN on activision.. $ $ talks and a ban of their products will hurt them and make them reflect .
TSL should start flooding the game forums left and right ...Bet you it wo n't take long that Activision will see the light of day ...You can count me in , i will no longer buy an Activision product .. !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I personally think the only way to get this back on track is to start a BAN on activision.. $$ talks and a ban of their products will hurt them and make them reflect.
TSL should start flooding the game forums left and right ...Bet you it won't take long that Activision will see the light of day ...You can count me in, i will no longer buy an Activision product ..!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314584</id>
	<title>Vaporware</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267452000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>8 Years without a final product?? Sounds like Vaporware to me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>8 Years without a final product ? ?
Sounds like Vaporware to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>8 Years without a final product??
Sounds like Vaporware to me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312686</id>
	<title>How fuckin stupid can one be??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267473840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They could have simply paid the team a bit of money to get it finished, and then offer them to do the distribution. Something like that.<br>Which would basically resulted in free money from the work of others (for the service of distribution).</p><p>But nooo...<br>Idiots.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They could have simply paid the team a bit of money to get it finished , and then offer them to do the distribution .
Something like that.Which would basically resulted in free money from the work of others ( for the service of distribution ) .But nooo...Idiots .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They could have simply paid the team a bit of money to get it finished, and then offer them to do the distribution.
Something like that.Which would basically resulted in free money from the work of others (for the service of distribution).But nooo...Idiots.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312400</id>
	<title>Boo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267384440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's good to know who are friends of gamers. Activision clearly isn't among them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's good to know who are friends of gamers .
Activision clearly is n't among them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's good to know who are friends of gamers.
Activision clearly isn't among them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31317142</id>
	<title>Re:Bad press for Activision</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1267462800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think in the larger scheme of things, people really don't give a shit what happens with some guys hobby sequel to a 20 year old game.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think in the larger scheme of things , people really do n't give a shit what happens with some guys hobby sequel to a 20 year old game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think in the larger scheme of things, people really don't give a shit what happens with some guys hobby sequel to a 20 year old game.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31317520</id>
	<title>Re:if Activision isn't actively using the IP...</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1267464180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>IP really needs to have a "use-it-or-lose-it" </i></p><p>The only intellectual property the content creator owns is trademark. Copyright and patented work ore owned by we, the people. A copyright or patent holder only holds a limited time monopoly to copy the work, not the work itself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IP really needs to have a " use-it-or-lose-it " The only intellectual property the content creator owns is trademark .
Copyright and patented work ore owned by we , the people .
A copyright or patent holder only holds a limited time monopoly to copy the work , not the work itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IP really needs to have a "use-it-or-lose-it" The only intellectual property the content creator owns is trademark.
Copyright and patented work ore owned by we, the people.
A copyright or patent holder only holds a limited time monopoly to copy the work, not the work itself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31318588</id>
	<title>Re:WTF</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267468020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, if there only was a way that you could  download copyrighted material off the internet...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , if there only was a way that you could download copyrighted material off the internet.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, if there only was a way that you could  download copyrighted material off the internet...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31316942</id>
	<title>Re:Boo</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1267462080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This keeps happening over and over and over again.</p><p>I have to wonder why nobody ASKS PERMISSION BEFORE THE START MAKING THE DAMNED GAME! Seriously, are all these games made by morons? They *know* it's going to be shut down sooner or later, so either they need to get permission or make an original game. It's not hard.</p><p>I have no sympathy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This keeps happening over and over and over again.I have to wonder why nobody ASKS PERMISSION BEFORE THE START MAKING THE DAMNED GAME !
Seriously , are all these games made by morons ?
They * know * it 's going to be shut down sooner or later , so either they need to get permission or make an original game .
It 's not hard.I have no sympathy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This keeps happening over and over and over again.I have to wonder why nobody ASKS PERMISSION BEFORE THE START MAKING THE DAMNED GAME!
Seriously, are all these games made by morons?
They *know* it's going to be shut down sooner or later, so either they need to get permission or make an original game.
It's not hard.I have no sympathy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312408</id>
	<title>Never build a house on another man's land...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267384560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>...unless you're willing to use it.
<br> <br>
I'm not really familiar with this project, but couldn't they just call Princess Rosella like "Princess Rosetta" and so on? It's not like Activision can lay claim to the entire swords and sorcery genre.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...unless you 're willing to use it .
I 'm not really familiar with this project , but could n't they just call Princess Rosella like " Princess Rosetta " and so on ?
It 's not like Activision can lay claim to the entire swords and sorcery genre .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...unless you're willing to use it.
I'm not really familiar with this project, but couldn't they just call Princess Rosella like "Princess Rosetta" and so on?
It's not like Activision can lay claim to the entire swords and sorcery genre.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31315178</id>
	<title>Non-commercial work</title>
	<author>Enderandrew</author>
	<datestamp>1267455660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At the end of the day, can you really be sued for non-commercial work?</p><p>If this fan project is released for free, how is that any different that someone writing fan-fic and releasing it for free?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At the end of the day , can you really be sued for non-commercial work ? If this fan project is released for free , how is that any different that someone writing fan-fic and releasing it for free ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At the end of the day, can you really be sued for non-commercial work?If this fan project is released for free, how is that any different that someone writing fan-fic and releasing it for free?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312756</id>
	<title>Silver lining?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267474620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only silver lining I could see to this if it means that Activision wanted to develop the game itself. Unless that is the case, I am greatly saddened by this article.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only silver lining I could see to this if it means that Activision wanted to develop the game itself .
Unless that is the case , I am greatly saddened by this article .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only silver lining I could see to this if it means that Activision wanted to develop the game itself.
Unless that is the case, I am greatly saddened by this article.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312634</id>
	<title>Re:if Activision isn't actively using the IP...</title>
	<author>Fallen Kell</author>
	<datestamp>1267387080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>You know what, I actually agree... There should be a limit. This was why the original copyright was for only a few years in the USA. While that original limit might be a little short, for some things I believe that there should be additional limits, especially for things like video games. Unless you are actively selling or have documented intentions (with writers, designers, and coders) actively working on the game, it should be opened up to allow the public to continue. I would say 10 years without being able to purchase or use the game on active consoles/hardware would be sufficient. Just look back on video game history and you would see that is probably a very legitimate timeframe which gives plenty of opportunity for the owners of the IP to keep their IP. The wording might have to be worked on and rules ironed out, because we would not want, say ID releasing "DOOM! Sudoku" to count for the FPS DOOM! franchise.

Games that still have a large followings would definitely stay active. You would also see more old games get updated ports to new consoles and systems if/when it makes economic sense. There would be lots more Retro Remixes like "Bionic Commando Rearmed". We would see game franchises like Tie Fighter, Wingcommander, and even Mechwarrior continue (well, in the case of Mechwarrior, looks like its 7 year exile (and more of bastardization) under the hands of Microsoft is near its end).</htmltext>
<tokenext>You know what , I actually agree... There should be a limit .
This was why the original copyright was for only a few years in the USA .
While that original limit might be a little short , for some things I believe that there should be additional limits , especially for things like video games .
Unless you are actively selling or have documented intentions ( with writers , designers , and coders ) actively working on the game , it should be opened up to allow the public to continue .
I would say 10 years without being able to purchase or use the game on active consoles/hardware would be sufficient .
Just look back on video game history and you would see that is probably a very legitimate timeframe which gives plenty of opportunity for the owners of the IP to keep their IP .
The wording might have to be worked on and rules ironed out , because we would not want , say ID releasing " DOOM !
Sudoku " to count for the FPS DOOM !
franchise . Games that still have a large followings would definitely stay active .
You would also see more old games get updated ports to new consoles and systems if/when it makes economic sense .
There would be lots more Retro Remixes like " Bionic Commando Rearmed " .
We would see game franchises like Tie Fighter , Wingcommander , and even Mechwarrior continue ( well , in the case of Mechwarrior , looks like its 7 year exile ( and more of bastardization ) under the hands of Microsoft is near its end ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know what, I actually agree... There should be a limit.
This was why the original copyright was for only a few years in the USA.
While that original limit might be a little short, for some things I believe that there should be additional limits, especially for things like video games.
Unless you are actively selling or have documented intentions (with writers, designers, and coders) actively working on the game, it should be opened up to allow the public to continue.
I would say 10 years without being able to purchase or use the game on active consoles/hardware would be sufficient.
Just look back on video game history and you would see that is probably a very legitimate timeframe which gives plenty of opportunity for the owners of the IP to keep their IP.
The wording might have to be worked on and rules ironed out, because we would not want, say ID releasing "DOOM!
Sudoku" to count for the FPS DOOM!
franchise.

Games that still have a large followings would definitely stay active.
You would also see more old games get updated ports to new consoles and systems if/when it makes economic sense.
There would be lots more Retro Remixes like "Bionic Commando Rearmed".
We would see game franchises like Tie Fighter, Wingcommander, and even Mechwarrior continue (well, in the case of Mechwarrior, looks like its 7 year exile (and more of bastardization) under the hands of Microsoft is near its end).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31315140</id>
	<title>Lucas wanting to shut down Star Wars fan pages</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267455420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I recall mid 90's when Fox was trying to shut down every X-Files fan page, and Lucas wanted to shut down every Star Wars fan page. They felt they were copyright infringement. What they didn't realize is that fan hype is free marketing. It only increases the value of your intellectual property.</p><p>An IP owner needs to protect their trademark, but they can issue a fan license to cover that.</p><p>This isn't just mean, it is bad business sense.</p><p>And while we're talking about old game properties that should be resurrected with a fan game, Commander Keen anyone?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I recall mid 90 's when Fox was trying to shut down every X-Files fan page , and Lucas wanted to shut down every Star Wars fan page .
They felt they were copyright infringement .
What they did n't realize is that fan hype is free marketing .
It only increases the value of your intellectual property.An IP owner needs to protect their trademark , but they can issue a fan license to cover that.This is n't just mean , it is bad business sense.And while we 're talking about old game properties that should be resurrected with a fan game , Commander Keen anyone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I recall mid 90's when Fox was trying to shut down every X-Files fan page, and Lucas wanted to shut down every Star Wars fan page.
They felt they were copyright infringement.
What they didn't realize is that fan hype is free marketing.
It only increases the value of your intellectual property.An IP owner needs to protect their trademark, but they can issue a fan license to cover that.This isn't just mean, it is bad business sense.And while we're talking about old game properties that should be resurrected with a fan game, Commander Keen anyone?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313566</id>
	<title>The other way around</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267440720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't it the other way around, Vivendi bought Activision. Vivendi holds the majority share of Activision-Blizzard and they just kept those two names because of the value attached to them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't it the other way around , Vivendi bought Activision .
Vivendi holds the majority share of Activision-Blizzard and they just kept those two names because of the value attached to them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't it the other way around, Vivendi bought Activision.
Vivendi holds the majority share of Activision-Blizzard and they just kept those two names because of the value attached to them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31316044</id>
	<title>Re:if Activision isn't actively using the IP...</title>
	<author>jonadab</author>
	<datestamp>1267458840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt; While that original limit might be a little short, for<br>&gt; some things I believe that there should be additional<br>&gt; limits, especially for things like video games<br><br>Software in general, I would say.  Ten-year-old software is of purely historical interest.<br><br>I should clarify that by "ten-year-old software", I don't mean software that started being developed more than ten years ago.  I mean software that was released ten years ago or more.  New versions should still be protected, since they contain new work.  Only the old version should fall into the public domain.<br><br>With a span of ten years, this means Windows Me, for example, would fall into the public domain this fall.  I'm sure that would generate a lot of excitement.  Woo, free Windows!  Only caveat is, it would be Windows Me.<br><br>Windows XP will be ten years old in 2011, but ONLY the original release of Windows XP, which absolutely nobody is still using, for very good reasons.  If you wanted to use SP1, with the ten-year rule, you'd still need a license from Microsoft until 2012.  For SP2, the oldest version that ANYONE is still using at this point, you'd need a license until 2014; for 2b until 2016; for 2c until 2017.  For Windows XP SP3, the oldest version I would recommend under any circumstances at this point, you'd need a license until 2018, and more recent updates would be protected for even longer.<br><br>So like I said, ten-year-old software is of purely historical interest.  Nobody uses it in the real world.  If it were public domain and therefore totally free...  still nobody would use it in the real world.  Ten-year-old software has no significant commercial potential left in it.<br><br>So for software, I would like to see the copyright term be ten years.  That would be long enough.<br><br>For music and books, however, it should be longer.  At least twenty years, IMO, and I can see arguments for forty or fifty.  That should be from date of publication, though, or date of copyright registration, or the date on the copyright notice on the work, whichever is soonest.  The "death of the author" thing, quite aside from belying the ostensible purpose of copyright, also places an unreasonable research burden on people trying to figure out whether a given work is public domain yet or not.  The date of the author's death is not always readily ascertainable.  Date of publication is much easier to determine.</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; While that original limit might be a little short , for &gt; some things I believe that there should be additional &gt; limits , especially for things like video gamesSoftware in general , I would say .
Ten-year-old software is of purely historical interest.I should clarify that by " ten-year-old software " , I do n't mean software that started being developed more than ten years ago .
I mean software that was released ten years ago or more .
New versions should still be protected , since they contain new work .
Only the old version should fall into the public domain.With a span of ten years , this means Windows Me , for example , would fall into the public domain this fall .
I 'm sure that would generate a lot of excitement .
Woo , free Windows !
Only caveat is , it would be Windows Me.Windows XP will be ten years old in 2011 , but ONLY the original release of Windows XP , which absolutely nobody is still using , for very good reasons .
If you wanted to use SP1 , with the ten-year rule , you 'd still need a license from Microsoft until 2012 .
For SP2 , the oldest version that ANYONE is still using at this point , you 'd need a license until 2014 ; for 2b until 2016 ; for 2c until 2017 .
For Windows XP SP3 , the oldest version I would recommend under any circumstances at this point , you 'd need a license until 2018 , and more recent updates would be protected for even longer.So like I said , ten-year-old software is of purely historical interest .
Nobody uses it in the real world .
If it were public domain and therefore totally free... still nobody would use it in the real world .
Ten-year-old software has no significant commercial potential left in it.So for software , I would like to see the copyright term be ten years .
That would be long enough.For music and books , however , it should be longer .
At least twenty years , IMO , and I can see arguments for forty or fifty .
That should be from date of publication , though , or date of copyright registration , or the date on the copyright notice on the work , whichever is soonest .
The " death of the author " thing , quite aside from belying the ostensible purpose of copyright , also places an unreasonable research burden on people trying to figure out whether a given work is public domain yet or not .
The date of the author 's death is not always readily ascertainable .
Date of publication is much easier to determine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; While that original limit might be a little short, for&gt; some things I believe that there should be additional&gt; limits, especially for things like video gamesSoftware in general, I would say.
Ten-year-old software is of purely historical interest.I should clarify that by "ten-year-old software", I don't mean software that started being developed more than ten years ago.
I mean software that was released ten years ago or more.
New versions should still be protected, since they contain new work.
Only the old version should fall into the public domain.With a span of ten years, this means Windows Me, for example, would fall into the public domain this fall.
I'm sure that would generate a lot of excitement.
Woo, free Windows!
Only caveat is, it would be Windows Me.Windows XP will be ten years old in 2011, but ONLY the original release of Windows XP, which absolutely nobody is still using, for very good reasons.
If you wanted to use SP1, with the ten-year rule, you'd still need a license from Microsoft until 2012.
For SP2, the oldest version that ANYONE is still using at this point, you'd need a license until 2014; for 2b until 2016; for 2c until 2017.
For Windows XP SP3, the oldest version I would recommend under any circumstances at this point, you'd need a license until 2018, and more recent updates would be protected for even longer.So like I said, ten-year-old software is of purely historical interest.
Nobody uses it in the real world.
If it were public domain and therefore totally free...  still nobody would use it in the real world.
Ten-year-old software has no significant commercial potential left in it.So for software, I would like to see the copyright term be ten years.
That would be long enough.For music and books, however, it should be longer.
At least twenty years, IMO, and I can see arguments for forty or fifty.
That should be from date of publication, though, or date of copyright registration, or the date on the copyright notice on the work, whichever is soonest.
The "death of the author" thing, quite aside from belying the ostensible purpose of copyright, also places an unreasonable research burden on people trying to figure out whether a given work is public domain yet or not.
The date of the author's death is not always readily ascertainable.
Date of publication is much easier to determine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312634</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31316538</id>
	<title>Ah well...</title>
	<author>darkvizier</author>
	<datestamp>1267460580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You know what they say.  Heir today, gone tomorrow...</htmltext>
<tokenext>You know what they say .
Heir today , gone tomorrow.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know what they say.
Heir today, gone tomorrow...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31317188</id>
	<title>Re:Activision did not acquire Vivendi.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267462920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Activision did not acquire Vivendi.  The merged company retained the ATVI stock listing, and Bobby Kotick is running the company, true; but VU got more board seats than Activision.  If anything, VU bought Activision.</p></div><p>I could've <i>sworn</i> that you said ruining instead of running...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Activision did not acquire Vivendi .
The merged company retained the ATVI stock listing , and Bobby Kotick is running the company , true ; but VU got more board seats than Activision .
If anything , VU bought Activision.I could 've sworn that you said ruining instead of running.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Activision did not acquire Vivendi.
The merged company retained the ATVI stock listing, and Bobby Kotick is running the company, true; but VU got more board seats than Activision.
If anything, VU bought Activision.I could've sworn that you said ruining instead of running...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312798</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312586</id>
	<title>Vivendi and Activision...</title>
	<author>JAlexoi</author>
	<datestamp>1267386720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>A) Fix the summary. Because it's Vivendi that acquired Activision, not the other way around.The first sentence should say: "Activision, after being acquired Vivendi,..."(or something similar)<br>
B) With KQ in mind, what the summary should say, is "Activision, having become a parent company of Sierra,..."<br>
C) Since Vivendi is still the owner of Activision (Vivendi owns ActivisionBizzard and ActivisionBlizzard owns Activision) there should not be any talks about changes of ownership. They may shuffle around their IP, but it's still owned by Vivendi.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A ) Fix the summary .
Because it 's Vivendi that acquired Activision , not the other way around.The first sentence should say : " Activision , after being acquired Vivendi,... " ( or something similar ) B ) With KQ in mind , what the summary should say , is " Activision , having become a parent company of Sierra,... " C ) Since Vivendi is still the owner of Activision ( Vivendi owns ActivisionBizzard and ActivisionBlizzard owns Activision ) there should not be any talks about changes of ownership .
They may shuffle around their IP , but it 's still owned by Vivendi .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A) Fix the summary.
Because it's Vivendi that acquired Activision, not the other way around.The first sentence should say: "Activision, after being acquired Vivendi,..."(or something similar)
B) With KQ in mind, what the summary should say, is "Activision, having become a parent company of Sierra,..."
C) Since Vivendi is still the owner of Activision (Vivendi owns ActivisionBizzard and ActivisionBlizzard owns Activision) there should not be any talks about changes of ownership.
They may shuffle around their IP, but it's still owned by Vivendi.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313348</id>
	<title>Re:if Activision isn't actively using the IP...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267438260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually they just started selling it on gog.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually they just started selling it on gog.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually they just started selling it on gog.com</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31333058</id>
	<title>Vivendi bought Activision</title>
	<author>reallyjoel</author>
	<datestamp>1267558260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Activision acquired Vivendi" - it was the other way around, the board of Activision Blizzard consists of the former Vivendi board. Vivendi wanted a better brand name..</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Activision acquired Vivendi " - it was the other way around , the board of Activision Blizzard consists of the former Vivendi board .
Vivendi wanted a better brand name. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Activision acquired Vivendi" - it was the other way around, the board of Activision Blizzard consists of the former Vivendi board.
Vivendi wanted a better brand name..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31322822</id>
	<title>Re:WTF</title>
	<author>jandrese</author>
	<datestamp>1267441020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't think they want multi-million dollar fines over something that is, in the end, just a hobby.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think they want multi-million dollar fines over something that is , in the end , just a hobby .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think they want multi-million dollar fines over something that is, in the end, just a hobby.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31323768</id>
	<title>Re:Easy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267444980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Still not as fun as "Peasant Quest" though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Still not as fun as " Peasant Quest " though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Still not as fun as "Peasant Quest" though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312582</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312606</id>
	<title>So...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267386900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... who is surprised by this? Lots of fan projects have been shut down in recent years. Chrono Resurrection, Crimson Echoes, Halogen, etc. Anyone working on a fangame at this point and not taking drastic measures to ensure that they are not infringing on trademarks or copyright gets zero sympathy from me when they get their eventual C&amp;D.<br> <br>It's a sad catch-22 that to drum up interest in your game project you need to base it on an existing franchise. As long as people are willing to latch onto any small glimmer of hope that their favorite nostalgic game will be remade in modern times, there will be fangames. And they will be shut down.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... who is surprised by this ?
Lots of fan projects have been shut down in recent years .
Chrono Resurrection , Crimson Echoes , Halogen , etc .
Anyone working on a fangame at this point and not taking drastic measures to ensure that they are not infringing on trademarks or copyright gets zero sympathy from me when they get their eventual C&amp;D .
It 's a sad catch-22 that to drum up interest in your game project you need to base it on an existing franchise .
As long as people are willing to latch onto any small glimmer of hope that their favorite nostalgic game will be remade in modern times , there will be fangames .
And they will be shut down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... who is surprised by this?
Lots of fan projects have been shut down in recent years.
Chrono Resurrection, Crimson Echoes, Halogen, etc.
Anyone working on a fangame at this point and not taking drastic measures to ensure that they are not infringing on trademarks or copyright gets zero sympathy from me when they get their eventual C&amp;D.
It's a sad catch-22 that to drum up interest in your game project you need to base it on an existing franchise.
As long as people are willing to latch onto any small glimmer of hope that their favorite nostalgic game will be remade in modern times, there will be fangames.
And they will be shut down.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313214</id>
	<title>Re:Boo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267436640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you think that you have "friends" in the corporate world, you are quite naive.  The only friends that corporate executives have, go by names like "Dollar", "Yen", and "Euro".</p><p>The previous owners thought that their "generous" licensing to fan groups might net some money in the long run, the current owners feel that locking things up will make more money.  There's the story in a single sentence.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you think that you have " friends " in the corporate world , you are quite naive .
The only friends that corporate executives have , go by names like " Dollar " , " Yen " , and " Euro " .The previous owners thought that their " generous " licensing to fan groups might net some money in the long run , the current owners feel that locking things up will make more money .
There 's the story in a single sentence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you think that you have "friends" in the corporate world, you are quite naive.
The only friends that corporate executives have, go by names like "Dollar", "Yen", and "Euro".The previous owners thought that their "generous" licensing to fan groups might net some money in the long run, the current owners feel that locking things up will make more money.
There's the story in a single sentence.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31319946</id>
	<title>The bean-counters have taken over....</title>
	<author>Hasai</author>
	<datestamp>1267473360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>....Time to short the stock.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>....Time to short the stock .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>....Time to short the stock.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313588</id>
	<title>Just change the name</title>
	<author>jlebrech</author>
	<datestamp>1267441140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Thy Quest of Kings" would be fitting!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Thy Quest of Kings " would be fitting !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Thy Quest of Kings" would be fitting!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312654</id>
	<title>Why?</title>
	<author>duncanbiscuits</author>
	<datestamp>1267387140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who at activision thought this was a good idea?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who at activision thought this was a good idea ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who at activision thought this was a good idea?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31315106</id>
	<title>Re:Easy</title>
	<author>gparent</author>
	<datestamp>1267455300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The King And The Holy Quest.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The King And The Holy Quest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The King And The Holy Quest.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312582</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31317420</id>
	<title>Re:WTF</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1267463820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they've worked 8 years without releasing a game, I'd say they don't really deserve a lot of self-respect.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p><p>I know, I know, it's a hobby project. But let me be a jerk just this once, ok? Thanks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they 've worked 8 years without releasing a game , I 'd say they do n't really deserve a lot of self-respect .
: PI know , I know , it 's a hobby project .
But let me be a jerk just this once , ok ?
Thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they've worked 8 years without releasing a game, I'd say they don't really deserve a lot of self-respect.
:PI know, I know, it's a hobby project.
But let me be a jerk just this once, ok?
Thanks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313134</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31317126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31317520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31324820
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313134
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312686
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31323768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312582
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312620
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31321438
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312582
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31317522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31316942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312400
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31318216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312400
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31316044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312634
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31317420
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313134
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31318588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313134
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31316888
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312400
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31318408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312400
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313686
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313134
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31317138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312582
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31315588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312400
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31317142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31317188
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312798
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31315106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312582
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31327420
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312400
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31322822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313134
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31318558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_0546238_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31328156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313966
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_0546238.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312686
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313430
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_0546238.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312424
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313348
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314024
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314928
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312634
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31316044
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314308
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31317520
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313404
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31316888
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31317126
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_0546238.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312586
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_0546238.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312408
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312426
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312958
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313814
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_0546238.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31324820
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31318558
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_0546238.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312582
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31317138
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31315106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31321438
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31323768
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_0546238.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314844
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_0546238.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312756
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_0546238.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31317142
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_0546238.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312400
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314186
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31316942
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31317522
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31327420
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31318216
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313214
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31318408
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31315588
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_0546238.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31315140
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_0546238.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313232
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_0546238.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312606
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_0546238.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313134
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313686
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31322822
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31318588
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31317420
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31314480
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_0546238.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312416
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_0546238.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312614
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_0546238.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312922
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312620
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_0546238.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31312798
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31317188
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_0546238.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31313966
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_0546238.31328156
</commentlist>
</conversation>
