<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_02_1254212</id>
	<title>German Data Retention Law Ruled Unconstitutional</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1267538160000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>mseeger writes <i>"The German Federal Constitutional Court has <a href="http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,681251,00.html">ruled the country's current data retention law unconstitutional</a>. All stored telephone and email communication data, previously kept for six months in case it was needed by law enforcement, now must be deleted as soon as possible. The court criticized the lack of data security and insufficient restrictions for access to the data. The president of the court said continuing to retain the data would 'cause a diffusely threatening feeling of being under observation that can diminish an unprejudiced perception of one's basic rights in many areas.' While it doesn't disallow data retention in general, the imposed restriction demands a complete reworking of the law."</i>
An anonymous reader contributes the Court's <a href="https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/pressemitteilungen/bvg10-011">press release</a> and <a href="https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/entscheidungen/rs20100302\_1bvr025608.html">more information on the ruling</a>, both in German.</htmltext>
<tokenext>mseeger writes " The German Federal Constitutional Court has ruled the country 's current data retention law unconstitutional .
All stored telephone and email communication data , previously kept for six months in case it was needed by law enforcement , now must be deleted as soon as possible .
The court criticized the lack of data security and insufficient restrictions for access to the data .
The president of the court said continuing to retain the data would 'cause a diffusely threatening feeling of being under observation that can diminish an unprejudiced perception of one 's basic rights in many areas .
' While it does n't disallow data retention in general , the imposed restriction demands a complete reworking of the law .
" An anonymous reader contributes the Court 's press release and more information on the ruling , both in German .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>mseeger writes "The German Federal Constitutional Court has ruled the country's current data retention law unconstitutional.
All stored telephone and email communication data, previously kept for six months in case it was needed by law enforcement, now must be deleted as soon as possible.
The court criticized the lack of data security and insufficient restrictions for access to the data.
The president of the court said continuing to retain the data would 'cause a diffusely threatening feeling of being under observation that can diminish an unprejudiced perception of one's basic rights in many areas.
' While it doesn't disallow data retention in general, the imposed restriction demands a complete reworking of the law.
"
An anonymous reader contributes the Court's press release and more information on the ruling, both in German.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330024</id>
	<title>Re:Pyrrhic victory?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267546260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>no central storage of the data under direct government control,</p></div><p>But then they let the providers pay for the storage and we all know that this will lead to central storage, either through outsourcing or simply by pushing smaller companies out of the market.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>no central storage of the data under direct government control,But then they let the providers pay for the storage and we all know that this will lead to central storage , either through outsourcing or simply by pushing smaller companies out of the market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no central storage of the data under direct government control,But then they let the providers pay for the storage and we all know that this will lead to central storage, either through outsourcing or simply by pushing smaller companies out of the market.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31342298</id>
	<title>Re:ACTA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267610760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzpolitik/0,1518,681142,00.html" title="spiegel.de" rel="nofollow">German Federal Minister of Justice objects ACTA at least partly</a> [spiegel.de]</p><p>(German article)</p><p>German Federal Minster of Justice, Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, (<a href="http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabine\_Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">German</a> [wikipedia.org], <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabine\_Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">English</a> [wikipedia.org]) today confirmed, that she at least objects blocking the internet access for people who are suspected to be involved in piracy. She refers to the once secret negotiations about ACTA. She had proofen to be open-source-friendly during several talks on german LinuxTag. Now it seems to turn out, that this could be honest instead of typical common politicans behaviour... or just common sense<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>As a sidenote, she now has to "defend" data rentention law, but she was one out of several members of the parliamant, who brought the doubt about the law to the Federal Court of Justice. It was noted several times, that she hadn't appeared at the court room very often, but send someone else.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>German Federal Minister of Justice objects ACTA at least partly [ spiegel.de ] ( German article ) German Federal Minster of Justice , Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger , ( German [ wikipedia.org ] , English [ wikipedia.org ] ) today confirmed , that she at least objects blocking the internet access for people who are suspected to be involved in piracy .
She refers to the once secret negotiations about ACTA .
She had proofen to be open-source-friendly during several talks on german LinuxTag .
Now it seems to turn out , that this could be honest instead of typical common politicans behaviour... or just common sense ; ) As a sidenote , she now has to " defend " data rentention law , but she was one out of several members of the parliamant , who brought the doubt about the law to the Federal Court of Justice .
It was noted several times , that she had n't appeared at the court room very often , but send someone else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>German Federal Minister of Justice objects ACTA at least partly [spiegel.de](German article)German Federal Minster of Justice, Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, (German [wikipedia.org], English [wikipedia.org]) today confirmed, that she at least objects blocking the internet access for people who are suspected to be involved in piracy.
She refers to the once secret negotiations about ACTA.
She had proofen to be open-source-friendly during several talks on german LinuxTag.
Now it seems to turn out, that this could be honest instead of typical common politicans behaviour... or just common sense ;)As a sidenote, she now has to "defend" data rentention law, but she was one out of several members of the parliamant, who brought the doubt about the law to the Federal Court of Justice.
It was noted several times, that she hadn't appeared at the court room very often, but send someone else.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31334000</id>
	<title>Re:Great Precedent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267561680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bulgarian Supreme Court ruled "Directive 40" unconstitutional. It was introduced by the (previous) government as a way to make the existing data collection and retention practices legal. It allowed unlimited access to the data via direct interface. After the court decision, the parliament created special law, but without the direct interface and with judicial oversight. Just weeks ago this law got new upgrade, and despite the first drafts and thanks to public pressure, the interface was not brought back. However monitoring was introduces (with explanation that it allows tracking of satellite phones, aka devices outside the mobile operator own network). The upgrade brought tougher procedure for control and broadened the number of courts that can allow fetching the data. The law is highly advertised as mandatory for EU member and as major (and sometimes only possible) tool for solving heavy crimes. Both are false. At least the current government managed to arrest some hi-profile criminals, so for now it have some credibility.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bulgarian Supreme Court ruled " Directive 40 " unconstitutional .
It was introduced by the ( previous ) government as a way to make the existing data collection and retention practices legal .
It allowed unlimited access to the data via direct interface .
After the court decision , the parliament created special law , but without the direct interface and with judicial oversight .
Just weeks ago this law got new upgrade , and despite the first drafts and thanks to public pressure , the interface was not brought back .
However monitoring was introduces ( with explanation that it allows tracking of satellite phones , aka devices outside the mobile operator own network ) .
The upgrade brought tougher procedure for control and broadened the number of courts that can allow fetching the data .
The law is highly advertised as mandatory for EU member and as major ( and sometimes only possible ) tool for solving heavy crimes .
Both are false .
At least the current government managed to arrest some hi-profile criminals , so for now it have some credibility .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bulgarian Supreme Court ruled "Directive 40" unconstitutional.
It was introduced by the (previous) government as a way to make the existing data collection and retention practices legal.
It allowed unlimited access to the data via direct interface.
After the court decision, the parliament created special law, but without the direct interface and with judicial oversight.
Just weeks ago this law got new upgrade, and despite the first drafts and thanks to public pressure, the interface was not brought back.
However monitoring was introduces (with explanation that it allows tracking of satellite phones, aka devices outside the mobile operator own network).
The upgrade brought tougher procedure for control and broadened the number of courts that can allow fetching the data.
The law is highly advertised as mandatory for EU member and as major (and sometimes only possible) tool for solving heavy crimes.
Both are false.
At least the current government managed to arrest some hi-profile criminals, so for now it have some credibility.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330710</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329476</id>
	<title>Re:All hail the Chaos Computer Club</title>
	<author>saibot834</author>
	<datestamp>1267543620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't say they know shit. They knew enough to know that their expertise didn't suffice and that's why they invited specialists (including the CCC which of course loved to help). They've carefully heard this case for two years and now they've come to an excellent decision.<br>The Federal Constitutional Court did exactly the right thing, that's what is important. It's not their job to know everything about computers and technical measures of data retention. Remember the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. story of a judge who didn't know what the Internet was and had it explained to him before he judged? You don't have to know everything, you just have to know when you should educate yourself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't say they know shit .
They knew enough to know that their expertise did n't suffice and that 's why they invited specialists ( including the CCC which of course loved to help ) .
They 've carefully heard this case for two years and now they 've come to an excellent decision.The Federal Constitutional Court did exactly the right thing , that 's what is important .
It 's not their job to know everything about computers and technical measures of data retention .
Remember the / .
story of a judge who did n't know what the Internet was and had it explained to him before he judged ?
You do n't have to know everything , you just have to know when you should educate yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't say they know shit.
They knew enough to know that their expertise didn't suffice and that's why they invited specialists (including the CCC which of course loved to help).
They've carefully heard this case for two years and now they've come to an excellent decision.The Federal Constitutional Court did exactly the right thing, that's what is important.
It's not their job to know everything about computers and technical measures of data retention.
Remember the /.
story of a judge who didn't know what the Internet was and had it explained to him before he judged?
You don't have to know everything, you just have to know when you should educate yourself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330542</id>
	<title>Re:Unenviable comparison</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1267548540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"How messed up is the US when we have to take cues on privacy laws from, of all people, the Germans?"</p></div><p>Yeah, because we are <em>exactly</em> like our great-grandparents.<br>And we did not completely flip to the other side of left extremism and shame for our nation in general, or started to care more about privacy.</p><p>&lt;/sarcasm&gt; (or is that cynism?)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" How messed up is the US when we have to take cues on privacy laws from , of all people , the Germans ?
" Yeah , because we are exactly like our great-grandparents.And we did not completely flip to the other side of left extremism and shame for our nation in general , or started to care more about privacy .
( or is that cynism ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"How messed up is the US when we have to take cues on privacy laws from, of all people, the Germans?
"Yeah, because we are exactly like our great-grandparents.And we did not completely flip to the other side of left extremism and shame for our nation in general, or started to care more about privacy.
(or is that cynism?
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329376</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31331724</id>
	<title>Re:Pyrrhic victory?</title>
	<author>NervousWreck</author>
	<datestamp>1267553640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Then the buying of politicians would be supplanted by the buying of judges for the purpose of getting rid of both laws and people they don't like.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Then the buying of politicians would be supplanted by the buying of judges for the purpose of getting rid of both laws and people they do n't like .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then the buying of politicians would be supplanted by the buying of judges for the purpose of getting rid of both laws and people they don't like.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329738</id>
	<title>Re:Unenviable comparison</title>
	<author>Asic Eng</author>
	<datestamp>1267544820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>US courts have to base their decisions on the US constitution, having different laws the German courts their decisions must necessarily be different. While the German constitution has weaknesses which the US' doesn't have, the reverse is also true.</htmltext>
<tokenext>US courts have to base their decisions on the US constitution , having different laws the German courts their decisions must necessarily be different .
While the German constitution has weaknesses which the US ' does n't have , the reverse is also true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>US courts have to base their decisions on the US constitution, having different laws the German courts their decisions must necessarily be different.
While the German constitution has weaknesses which the US' doesn't have, the reverse is also true.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329376</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31332652</id>
	<title>Re:Pyrrhic victory?</title>
	<author>Clandestine\_Blaze</author>
	<datestamp>1267556640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That aside, thank the FSM for our constitutional court.</p></div><p>The Flying Spaghetti Monster -- is there anything that he cannot do?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That aside , thank the FSM for our constitutional court.The Flying Spaghetti Monster -- is there anything that he can not do ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That aside, thank the FSM for our constitutional court.The Flying Spaghetti Monster -- is there anything that he cannot do?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330100</id>
	<title>Re:The Free World or the Corporate World</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267546560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not really. For example, the <a href="http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/304445,germany-party-under-fire-over-big-donation-from-hotel-industry.html" title="earthtimes.org">M&#246;venpick corporation owns the Free Democratic Party.</a> [earthtimes.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not really .
For example , the M   venpick corporation owns the Free Democratic Party .
[ earthtimes.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not really.
For example, the Mövenpick corporation owns the Free Democratic Party.
[earthtimes.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330794</id>
	<title>Re:Pyrrhic victory?</title>
	<author>V for Vendetta</author>
	<datestamp>1267549620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But than again I can't remember the last time that the BVerG (Bundesverfassungsgericht = Federal Consitutional Court) ruled a law straight as "unconstitutional" and demanded all records to be removed immediately. Most of the time it grants a grace period in which the parlament needs to come up with a revised version of the law. This isn't the case this time. The law was basically ruled as "null and void/has never existed". So they can't just "adjust" the current law to meet the court's requirements. They need to formulate and pass a complete new law.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But than again I ca n't remember the last time that the BVerG ( Bundesverfassungsgericht = Federal Consitutional Court ) ruled a law straight as " unconstitutional " and demanded all records to be removed immediately .
Most of the time it grants a grace period in which the parlament needs to come up with a revised version of the law .
This is n't the case this time .
The law was basically ruled as " null and void/has never existed " .
So they ca n't just " adjust " the current law to meet the court 's requirements .
They need to formulate and pass a complete new law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But than again I can't remember the last time that the BVerG (Bundesverfassungsgericht = Federal Consitutional Court) ruled a law straight as "unconstitutional" and demanded all records to be removed immediately.
Most of the time it grants a grace period in which the parlament needs to come up with a revised version of the law.
This isn't the case this time.
The law was basically ruled as "null and void/has never existed".
So they can't just "adjust" the current law to meet the court's requirements.
They need to formulate and pass a complete new law.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329872</id>
	<title>Re:ACTA</title>
	<author>Asic Eng</author>
	<datestamp>1267545480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well the German law was already an implementation of a EU directive. However while the constitutional court has rejected the implementation, it did not declare the EU directive illegal. So it's still possible (actually mandatory under EU law) to implement a revised data storage law.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well the German law was already an implementation of a EU directive .
However while the constitutional court has rejected the implementation , it did not declare the EU directive illegal .
So it 's still possible ( actually mandatory under EU law ) to implement a revised data storage law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well the German law was already an implementation of a EU directive.
However while the constitutional court has rejected the implementation, it did not declare the EU directive illegal.
So it's still possible (actually mandatory under EU law) to implement a revised data storage law.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330022</id>
	<title>The Free World or the Corporate World</title>
	<author>The Abused Developer</author>
	<datestamp>1267546260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>See, the difference is that in Germany the people own their society and their politicians are accountable to the people.
In North America, it is the opposite - the Corporate owns the politicians and the society, the people are just a mass of slaves.</htmltext>
<tokenext>See , the difference is that in Germany the people own their society and their politicians are accountable to the people .
In North America , it is the opposite - the Corporate owns the politicians and the society , the people are just a mass of slaves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>See, the difference is that in Germany the people own their society and their politicians are accountable to the people.
In North America, it is the opposite - the Corporate owns the politicians and the society, the people are just a mass of slaves.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329362</id>
	<title>Re:Pyrrhic victory?</title>
	<author>saibot834</author>
	<datestamp>1267543020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the restrictions the Federal Constitutional Court has imposed is that such data may only be saved decentralized. Additionally they have to be stored securely and must only be used for very severe crimes. The court is very careful: Technical possibilities change very quickly and they want the verdict to be still useful in 10 or 20 years. That's why they avoid saying "such data cannot be stored securely, therefore data retention is for all times unconstitutional".</p><p>In another verdict the court has ruled that e-voting is not principally unconstitutional. However, it imposed rules that no e-voting system in the near future is able to fulfill: Every citizen must be able to verify the correctness of the vote without specific technical knowledge. Not even open source e-voting systems meet this requirement.</p><p>I doubt that a new data retention law will be passed any time soon. Most parties have realized by now that data retention sucks and I don't think they can pull together a majority for this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the restrictions the Federal Constitutional Court has imposed is that such data may only be saved decentralized .
Additionally they have to be stored securely and must only be used for very severe crimes .
The court is very careful : Technical possibilities change very quickly and they want the verdict to be still useful in 10 or 20 years .
That 's why they avoid saying " such data can not be stored securely , therefore data retention is for all times unconstitutional " .In another verdict the court has ruled that e-voting is not principally unconstitutional .
However , it imposed rules that no e-voting system in the near future is able to fulfill : Every citizen must be able to verify the correctness of the vote without specific technical knowledge .
Not even open source e-voting systems meet this requirement.I doubt that a new data retention law will be passed any time soon .
Most parties have realized by now that data retention sucks and I do n't think they can pull together a majority for this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the restrictions the Federal Constitutional Court has imposed is that such data may only be saved decentralized.
Additionally they have to be stored securely and must only be used for very severe crimes.
The court is very careful: Technical possibilities change very quickly and they want the verdict to be still useful in 10 or 20 years.
That's why they avoid saying "such data cannot be stored securely, therefore data retention is for all times unconstitutional".In another verdict the court has ruled that e-voting is not principally unconstitutional.
However, it imposed rules that no e-voting system in the near future is able to fulfill: Every citizen must be able to verify the correctness of the vote without specific technical knowledge.
Not even open source e-voting systems meet this requirement.I doubt that a new data retention law will be passed any time soon.
Most parties have realized by now that data retention sucks and I don't think they can pull together a majority for this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330574</id>
	<title>Ahhhh...Germany...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267548660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where the government makes it easier to be a criminal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where the government makes it easier to be a criminal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where the government makes it easier to be a criminal.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329228</id>
	<title>Pandora's box is open</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267542420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Data retention without prior suspicion hasn't been ruled unconstitutional, so we've stepped onto the slippery slope and opened Pandora's box. From now on, we're only going to be haggling over how much data can be retained and what it can be used for. This is not a victory.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Data retention without prior suspicion has n't been ruled unconstitutional , so we 've stepped onto the slippery slope and opened Pandora 's box .
From now on , we 're only going to be haggling over how much data can be retained and what it can be used for .
This is not a victory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Data retention without prior suspicion hasn't been ruled unconstitutional, so we've stepped onto the slippery slope and opened Pandora's box.
From now on, we're only going to be haggling over how much data can be retained and what it can be used for.
This is not a victory.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31332530</id>
	<title>Re:The Free World or the Corporate World</title>
	<author>nomadic</author>
	<datestamp>1267556220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>the people are just a mass of slaves.</i>
<br>
<br>
Speak for yourself.</htmltext>
<tokenext>the people are just a mass of slaves .
Speak for yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the people are just a mass of slaves.
Speak for yourself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330506</id>
	<title>Re:The Free World or the Corporate World</title>
	<author>zeromorph</author>
	<datestamp>1267548420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Although I sympathize with your view on the role of corporations in politics. In this specific case it is all about <b>independent and reasonable judges</b>. Also something to cherish.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Although I sympathize with your view on the role of corporations in politics .
In this specific case it is all about independent and reasonable judges .
Also something to cherish .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although I sympathize with your view on the role of corporations in politics.
In this specific case it is all about independent and reasonable judges.
Also something to cherish.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329278</id>
	<title>of course they don't need retention</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267542660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Once your corpse has been put in the oven and burnt to ash who cares who were?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Once your corpse has been put in the oven and burnt to ash who cares who were ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once your corpse has been put in the oven and burnt to ash who cares who were?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329694</id>
	<title>I don't see what the big deal is</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267544640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So what if the German government had access to user data.</p><p>It's not as if the Germans are known resorting to Gestapo tactics or anything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So what if the German government had access to user data.It 's not as if the Germans are known resorting to Gestapo tactics or anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So what if the German government had access to user data.It's not as if the Germans are known resorting to Gestapo tactics or anything.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31335984</id>
	<title>Champagne, please!</title>
	<author>Timosch</author>
	<datestamp>1267525800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>While I would have preferred them to find long data retention unconstitutional in general, I can live with that. I'm opening a bottle of champagne.<br>
And a really huge thanks to Prof. Papier, the Chief Justice, who will retire soon. Thank you, man. That guy has been one of the few people in our republic who constantly held up civil liberties.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While I would have preferred them to find long data retention unconstitutional in general , I can live with that .
I 'm opening a bottle of champagne .
And a really huge thanks to Prof. Papier , the Chief Justice , who will retire soon .
Thank you , man .
That guy has been one of the few people in our republic who constantly held up civil liberties .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I would have preferred them to find long data retention unconstitutional in general, I can live with that.
I'm opening a bottle of champagne.
And a really huge thanks to Prof. Papier, the Chief Justice, who will retire soon.
Thank you, man.
That guy has been one of the few people in our republic who constantly held up civil liberties.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329204</id>
	<title>Great Precedent</title>
	<author>wintercolby</author>
	<datestamp>1267542240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Now only if the rest of The West would follow suit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now only if the rest of The West would follow suit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now only if the rest of The West would follow suit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329964</id>
	<title>Re:Great Precedent</title>
	<author>captainpanic</author>
	<datestamp>1267545840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Great news from our big neighbors.</p><p>If only our mainstream media would pick it up, then someone would actually know about this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Great news from our big neighbors.If only our mainstream media would pick it up , then someone would actually know about this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great news from our big neighbors.If only our mainstream media would pick it up, then someone would actually know about this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31336034</id>
	<title>Re:Great Precedent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267525980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is not true for Bulgaria. There was a regulation (not a law) that the court (not the Constitutinal) ruled agains at the end of 2008. The regulation was active almost an year. Last year there was an attempt to make a law out of it, but it didn't collected enough votes in the parliament. Since the end of 2009 the new governemnt was trying to pass it again to parliament. Because the government have a lot of support in parliament it was able to make it official. As of today (2nd of March) the law is in effect.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is not true for Bulgaria .
There was a regulation ( not a law ) that the court ( not the Constitutinal ) ruled agains at the end of 2008 .
The regulation was active almost an year .
Last year there was an attempt to make a law out of it , but it did n't collected enough votes in the parliament .
Since the end of 2009 the new governemnt was trying to pass it again to parliament .
Because the government have a lot of support in parliament it was able to make it official .
As of today ( 2nd of March ) the law is in effect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is not true for Bulgaria.
There was a regulation (not a law) that the court (not the Constitutinal) ruled agains at the end of 2008.
The regulation was active almost an year.
Last year there was an attempt to make a law out of it, but it didn't collected enough votes in the parliament.
Since the end of 2009 the new governemnt was trying to pass it again to parliament.
Because the government have a lot of support in parliament it was able to make it official.
As of today (2nd of March) the law is in effect.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330710</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329226</id>
	<title>A great victory</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267542360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In <a href="http://slashdot.org/submission/1184056/German-court-voids-telcos-data-retention-law" title="slashdot.org">my story submission</a> [slashdot.org], I included a few more details. 35,000 citizens filed a class-action against this law and now after two years we finally see this law voided.</p><p>The "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal\_Constitutional\_Court\_of\_Germany" title="wikipedia.org">Bundesverfassungsgericht</a> [wikipedia.org]" has once again proven that is the most significant institution in Germany that protects citizens' constitutional rights - in this case the right of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informational\_self-determination" title="wikipedia.org">informational self-determination</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In my story submission [ slashdot.org ] , I included a few more details .
35,000 citizens filed a class-action against this law and now after two years we finally see this law voided.The " Bundesverfassungsgericht [ wikipedia.org ] " has once again proven that is the most significant institution in Germany that protects citizens ' constitutional rights - in this case the right of informational self-determination [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my story submission [slashdot.org], I included a few more details.
35,000 citizens filed a class-action against this law and now after two years we finally see this law voided.The "Bundesverfassungsgericht [wikipedia.org]" has once again proven that is the most significant institution in Germany that protects citizens' constitutional rights - in this case the right of informational self-determination [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31354856</id>
	<title>Hmmm...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267641780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How long will it take our wonderful, freedom-loving United States government to pull a few strings and make this 'dangerous terrorist-supporting precedent' go away quietly?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How long will it take our wonderful , freedom-loving United States government to pull a few strings and make this 'dangerous terrorist-supporting precedent ' go away quietly ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How long will it take our wonderful, freedom-loving United States government to pull a few strings and make this 'dangerous terrorist-supporting precedent' go away quietly?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329724</id>
	<title>Re:All hail the Chaos Computer Club</title>
	<author>chrismeidinger</author>
	<datestamp>1267544760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You don't have to apply for membership in CCC. Just join. <br>

If you come to the Congress - <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos\_Communication\_Congress" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos\_Communication\_Congress</a> [wikipedia.org] - you can join right at the door, and get your ticket discounted immediately.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't have to apply for membership in CCC .
Just join .
If you come to the Congress - http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos \ _Communication \ _Congress [ wikipedia.org ] - you can join right at the door , and get your ticket discounted immediately .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't have to apply for membership in CCC.
Just join.
If you come to the Congress - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos\_Communication\_Congress [wikipedia.org] - you can join right at the door, and get your ticket discounted immediately.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329814</id>
	<title>Re:Unenviable comparison</title>
	<author>Hasai</author>
	<datestamp>1267545120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"How messed up is the US when we have to take cues on privacy laws from, of all people, the Germans?"</p></div><p>Actually, the Germans, "of all people," have the advantage of knowing <i>precisely </i>just how bad things can get.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" How messed up is the US when we have to take cues on privacy laws from , of all people , the Germans ?
" Actually , the Germans , " of all people , " have the advantage of knowing precisely just how bad things can get .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"How messed up is the US when we have to take cues on privacy laws from, of all people, the Germans?
"Actually, the Germans, "of all people," have the advantage of knowing precisely just how bad things can get.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329376</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329284</id>
	<title>All hail the Chaos Computer Club</title>
	<author>Denial93</author>
	<datestamp>1267542660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Although this ruling is what us IT guys would expect from any reasonable court, the fact of the matter is that judges know shit. The <a href="http://www.ccc.de/" title="www.ccc.de">Chaos Computer Club</a> [www.ccc.de] worked their asses off providing expertise to the court, while also mobilizing the German IT scene and putting out pressure on opposing (governmental) parties. This is their success and I salute them. Guess I should get around to finally apply for membership myself...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Although this ruling is what us IT guys would expect from any reasonable court , the fact of the matter is that judges know shit .
The Chaos Computer Club [ www.ccc.de ] worked their asses off providing expertise to the court , while also mobilizing the German IT scene and putting out pressure on opposing ( governmental ) parties .
This is their success and I salute them .
Guess I should get around to finally apply for membership myself.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although this ruling is what us IT guys would expect from any reasonable court, the fact of the matter is that judges know shit.
The Chaos Computer Club [www.ccc.de] worked their asses off providing expertise to the court, while also mobilizing the German IT scene and putting out pressure on opposing (governmental) parties.
This is their success and I salute them.
Guess I should get around to finally apply for membership myself...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329480</id>
	<title>Bonus!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267543620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Soon all social networking networks will be based in Germany providing new jobs and revenue.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Soon all social networking networks will be based in Germany providing new jobs and revenue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Soon all social networking networks will be based in Germany providing new jobs and revenue.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329260</id>
	<title>SETI</title>
	<author>elrous0</author>
	<datestamp>1267542540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hey, maybe SETI can use this to finally find those little green men they're after. "We made a guge breakthrough today when we partially reconstructed a piece of alien porn from some noise near Centauri!"</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , maybe SETI can use this to finally find those little green men they 're after .
" We made a guge breakthrough today when we partially reconstructed a piece of alien porn from some noise near Centauri !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, maybe SETI can use this to finally find those little green men they're after.
"We made a guge breakthrough today when we partially reconstructed a piece of alien porn from some noise near Centauri!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31345074</id>
	<title>Re:Unenviable comparison</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267629900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The difference, of course, being the US's total and utter inability to learn from the past, as it gleefully demonstrates at home as well as all over the world at every possible opportunity.</p><p>Meh.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The difference , of course , being the US 's total and utter inability to learn from the past , as it gleefully demonstrates at home as well as all over the world at every possible opportunity.Meh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The difference, of course, being the US's total and utter inability to learn from the past, as it gleefully demonstrates at home as well as all over the world at every possible opportunity.Meh.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329814</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329390</id>
	<title>Wish List</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267543140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Cool!  I wish the US could get a constitution like that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cool !
I wish the US could get a constitution like that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cool!
I wish the US could get a constitution like that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31355062</id>
	<title>Re:Pyrrhic victory?</title>
	<author>yuhong</author>
	<datestamp>1267644540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>However, it imposed rules that no e-voting system in the near future is able to fulfill: Every citizen must be able to verify the correctness of the vote without specific technical knowledge. Not even open source e-voting systems meet this requirement.</p></div><p>And IMO I would not go that far, but...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>However , it imposed rules that no e-voting system in the near future is able to fulfill : Every citizen must be able to verify the correctness of the vote without specific technical knowledge .
Not even open source e-voting systems meet this requirement.And IMO I would not go that far , but.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>However, it imposed rules that no e-voting system in the near future is able to fulfill: Every citizen must be able to verify the correctness of the vote without specific technical knowledge.
Not even open source e-voting systems meet this requirement.And IMO I would not go that far, but...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31331404</id>
	<title>Can we borrow that court</title>
	<author>richardkelleher</author>
	<datestamp>1267552320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ours sucks!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ours sucks !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ours sucks!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329444</id>
	<title>That's a terrific quote</title>
	<author>idontgno</author>
	<datestamp>1267543500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"...a diffusely threatening feeling of being under observation... can diminish an unprejudiced perception of one's basic rights in many areas."</p><p>^^ This.</p><p>Someone gets it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...a diffusely threatening feeling of being under observation... can diminish an unprejudiced perception of one 's basic rights in many areas .
" ^ ^ This.Someone gets it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...a diffusely threatening feeling of being under observation... can diminish an unprejudiced perception of one's basic rights in many areas.
"^^ This.Someone gets it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329162</id>
	<title>A Nigger Cock</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267541940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>in the mouths of everyone who ever voted in favor of this bad law.  Nigger cock in they mouth, nigger cock down they throat.</htmltext>
<tokenext>in the mouths of everyone who ever voted in favor of this bad law .
Nigger cock in they mouth , nigger cock down they throat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>in the mouths of everyone who ever voted in favor of this bad law.
Nigger cock in they mouth, nigger cock down they throat.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31340356</id>
	<title>German Tor Nodes Cry Out In Joy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267550160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>n/t</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>n/t</tokentext>
<sentencetext>n/t</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31336338</id>
	<title>Re:Great Precedent + a reason</title>
	<author>\_LMark</author>
	<datestamp>1267527120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe we could gain better traction when backing this success for personal liberties by talking also about how it makes us safer from organized crime, foreign governments, etc.  Not only can law enforcement use this data, but if there are any holes in security of such systems, so can the (evil) hackers and those that wish a nation harm.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe we could gain better traction when backing this success for personal liberties by talking also about how it makes us safer from organized crime , foreign governments , etc .
Not only can law enforcement use this data , but if there are any holes in security of such systems , so can the ( evil ) hackers and those that wish a nation harm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe we could gain better traction when backing this success for personal liberties by talking also about how it makes us safer from organized crime, foreign governments, etc.
Not only can law enforcement use this data, but if there are any holes in security of such systems, so can the (evil) hackers and those that wish a nation harm.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330710</id>
	<title>Re:Great Precedent</title>
	<author>V for Vendetta</author>
	<datestamp>1267549200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To be honest, we weren't the first ones. The Constitutinal Courts of Romania and Bulgaria (not sure of the second country) already ruled the EU data retention law unconstitutional.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To be honest , we were n't the first ones .
The Constitutinal Courts of Romania and Bulgaria ( not sure of the second country ) already ruled the EU data retention law unconstitutional .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To be honest, we weren't the first ones.
The Constitutinal Courts of Romania and Bulgaria (not sure of the second country) already ruled the EU data retention law unconstitutional.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329246</id>
	<title>ACTA</title>
	<author>BiggerIsBetter</author>
	<datestamp>1267542480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wonder if this could cause conflict with EU ACTA negotiations. I would expect data retention would be necessary for much of the copyright legislation (eg 3 strikes and similar)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if this could cause conflict with EU ACTA negotiations .
I would expect data retention would be necessary for much of the copyright legislation ( eg 3 strikes and similar )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if this could cause conflict with EU ACTA negotiations.
I would expect data retention would be necessary for much of the copyright legislation (eg 3 strikes and similar)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31332232</id>
	<title>Re:ACTA</title>
	<author>Elektroschock</author>
	<datestamp>1267555440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, but there are infringement proceedings against some member states because they don't apply the directive, there are other constitutional courts which rejected it, so a simple recast of the directive is required by the Commission anyway <a href="http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32006L0024:EN:NOT" title="europa.eu">because the directive is wrecked</a> [europa.eu].</p><p>ACTA certainly deserves more attention but there are other FTA with such provisions as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , but there are infringement proceedings against some member states because they do n't apply the directive , there are other constitutional courts which rejected it , so a simple recast of the directive is required by the Commission anyway because the directive is wrecked [ europa.eu ] .ACTA certainly deserves more attention but there are other FTA with such provisions as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, but there are infringement proceedings against some member states because they don't apply the directive, there are other constitutional courts which rejected it, so a simple recast of the directive is required by the Commission anyway because the directive is wrecked [europa.eu].ACTA certainly deserves more attention but there are other FTA with such provisions as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329376</id>
	<title>Unenviable comparison</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267543080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's dangerous to praise a decision with political ramifications - something good can be twisted into something bad on the next iteration.  Still and all, the language is encouraging, and poses the rhetorical question:</p><p>"How messed up is the US when we have to take cues on privacy laws from, of all people, the Germans?"</p><p>As another poster pointed out about informational self-determination, the Germans are discussing the implications of privacy.  US courts are still diddling over whether privacy expectation is even "constitutional".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's dangerous to praise a decision with political ramifications - something good can be twisted into something bad on the next iteration .
Still and all , the language is encouraging , and poses the rhetorical question : " How messed up is the US when we have to take cues on privacy laws from , of all people , the Germans ?
" As another poster pointed out about informational self-determination , the Germans are discussing the implications of privacy .
US courts are still diddling over whether privacy expectation is even " constitutional " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's dangerous to praise a decision with political ramifications - something good can be twisted into something bad on the next iteration.
Still and all, the language is encouraging, and poses the rhetorical question:"How messed up is the US when we have to take cues on privacy laws from, of all people, the Germans?
"As another poster pointed out about informational self-determination, the Germans are discussing the implications of privacy.
US courts are still diddling over whether privacy expectation is even "constitutional".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330018</id>
	<title>Lame.</title>
	<author>DarthVain</author>
	<datestamp>1267546200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All this means is that the standard for corporations and government are even farther apart.</p><p>Sure it protects personal privacy, but this protects corporations from lawsuits, and their bottom line even more.</p><p>I was having a conversation with a consultant on Risk/Threat assessment of an IMS project we are working on. The difference in retention is amazing. Because I work in government, we are expected to keep stuff around for YEARS, usually 5 to 7 locally, and then maybe decades in an archive. This is for transparency, and to keep records of exactly of what was done, when, by whom. We get sued, and this material gets dredged up and used against us in court. However in the private sector, the retention is measured in Days, usually 5 to 7, and then Deleted/Destroyed. This is for liability, so people cannot use this information against them in court.</p><p>So next time you are thinking of making fun about how much waste is in government, or how much more it costs, or how much longer it takes to develop in government, understand this is but ONE of many differences of extra things we HAVE to do by LAW for ALL of our systems, and the reason behind it is accountability. Government is accountable for their actions and people have a right to know about it. Corporations have to be accountable to their shareholders in that they must produce as much profit in the least time possible. The two are radically different enviroments and so it should be no surprise that the procedures used to do anything are vastly different also.</p><p>That said, there is waste in government, just like there is in corporations. Much of ours seems to be based on past actions being penalized. Basically some arm of the government many years ago, will have done something bad. Rather than punish directly those involved, they punish everyone else by subjecting them to policies that will supposedly "prevent this from happening in the future". Thus we end up with standards about how many foundation documents above and beyond reason, and when looking for vendors, you have to go through a long process, etc... And while it might prevent people from wasting money, it generally makes the project twice as long and twice as expensive, which essentially means you are sort of wasting money and time anyway, and limits the kinds of projects you can do, as some are just too expensive now.</p><p>Anyway that is my government/corporate rant including retention.... Vent!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All this means is that the standard for corporations and government are even farther apart.Sure it protects personal privacy , but this protects corporations from lawsuits , and their bottom line even more.I was having a conversation with a consultant on Risk/Threat assessment of an IMS project we are working on .
The difference in retention is amazing .
Because I work in government , we are expected to keep stuff around for YEARS , usually 5 to 7 locally , and then maybe decades in an archive .
This is for transparency , and to keep records of exactly of what was done , when , by whom .
We get sued , and this material gets dredged up and used against us in court .
However in the private sector , the retention is measured in Days , usually 5 to 7 , and then Deleted/Destroyed .
This is for liability , so people can not use this information against them in court.So next time you are thinking of making fun about how much waste is in government , or how much more it costs , or how much longer it takes to develop in government , understand this is but ONE of many differences of extra things we HAVE to do by LAW for ALL of our systems , and the reason behind it is accountability .
Government is accountable for their actions and people have a right to know about it .
Corporations have to be accountable to their shareholders in that they must produce as much profit in the least time possible .
The two are radically different enviroments and so it should be no surprise that the procedures used to do anything are vastly different also.That said , there is waste in government , just like there is in corporations .
Much of ours seems to be based on past actions being penalized .
Basically some arm of the government many years ago , will have done something bad .
Rather than punish directly those involved , they punish everyone else by subjecting them to policies that will supposedly " prevent this from happening in the future " .
Thus we end up with standards about how many foundation documents above and beyond reason , and when looking for vendors , you have to go through a long process , etc... And while it might prevent people from wasting money , it generally makes the project twice as long and twice as expensive , which essentially means you are sort of wasting money and time anyway , and limits the kinds of projects you can do , as some are just too expensive now.Anyway that is my government/corporate rant including retention.... Vent !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All this means is that the standard for corporations and government are even farther apart.Sure it protects personal privacy, but this protects corporations from lawsuits, and their bottom line even more.I was having a conversation with a consultant on Risk/Threat assessment of an IMS project we are working on.
The difference in retention is amazing.
Because I work in government, we are expected to keep stuff around for YEARS, usually 5 to 7 locally, and then maybe decades in an archive.
This is for transparency, and to keep records of exactly of what was done, when, by whom.
We get sued, and this material gets dredged up and used against us in court.
However in the private sector, the retention is measured in Days, usually 5 to 7, and then Deleted/Destroyed.
This is for liability, so people cannot use this information against them in court.So next time you are thinking of making fun about how much waste is in government, or how much more it costs, or how much longer it takes to develop in government, understand this is but ONE of many differences of extra things we HAVE to do by LAW for ALL of our systems, and the reason behind it is accountability.
Government is accountable for their actions and people have a right to know about it.
Corporations have to be accountable to their shareholders in that they must produce as much profit in the least time possible.
The two are radically different enviroments and so it should be no surprise that the procedures used to do anything are vastly different also.That said, there is waste in government, just like there is in corporations.
Much of ours seems to be based on past actions being penalized.
Basically some arm of the government many years ago, will have done something bad.
Rather than punish directly those involved, they punish everyone else by subjecting them to policies that will supposedly "prevent this from happening in the future".
Thus we end up with standards about how many foundation documents above and beyond reason, and when looking for vendors, you have to go through a long process, etc... And while it might prevent people from wasting money, it generally makes the project twice as long and twice as expensive, which essentially means you are sort of wasting money and time anyway, and limits the kinds of projects you can do, as some are just too expensive now.Anyway that is my government/corporate rant including retention.... Vent!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329352</id>
	<title>Re:Pyrrhic victory?</title>
	<author>Mindcontrolled</author>
	<datestamp>1267542960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, at least they demand some serious restrictions - asymmetric encryption with separately stored keys, no central storage of the data under direct government control, no access without a judge's order, no access without a well-founded and substantiated suspicion, access only for prosecution of serious crimes (exceptions for simple lookup of dynamic IPs), severe penalties for illegitime access. This is way better than what we had before.<br> <br>That aside, thank the FSM for our constitutional court. They basically struck down every security-theatre related law in the last couple of years. I am starting to think about a three-strikes law for politicians - vote for three unconstitutional laws and you are out. Loss of eligibility for any political office for 4 years at last. Ahh, well, a man can dream...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , at least they demand some serious restrictions - asymmetric encryption with separately stored keys , no central storage of the data under direct government control , no access without a judge 's order , no access without a well-founded and substantiated suspicion , access only for prosecution of serious crimes ( exceptions for simple lookup of dynamic IPs ) , severe penalties for illegitime access .
This is way better than what we had before .
That aside , thank the FSM for our constitutional court .
They basically struck down every security-theatre related law in the last couple of years .
I am starting to think about a three-strikes law for politicians - vote for three unconstitutional laws and you are out .
Loss of eligibility for any political office for 4 years at last .
Ahh , well , a man can dream.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, at least they demand some serious restrictions - asymmetric encryption with separately stored keys, no central storage of the data under direct government control, no access without a judge's order, no access without a well-founded and substantiated suspicion, access only for prosecution of serious crimes (exceptions for simple lookup of dynamic IPs), severe penalties for illegitime access.
This is way better than what we had before.
That aside, thank the FSM for our constitutional court.
They basically struck down every security-theatre related law in the last couple of years.
I am starting to think about a three-strikes law for politicians - vote for three unconstitutional laws and you are out.
Loss of eligibility for any political office for 4 years at last.
Ahh, well, a man can dream...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329220</id>
	<title>Pyrrhic victory?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267542360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unfortunately, the explanations given by the Federal Constitutional Court can be read as an instruction manual on how to create a data retention law 2.0 that will pass the courts muster. Shouldn't take those politicians too long to come up with the new version.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , the explanations given by the Federal Constitutional Court can be read as an instruction manual on how to create a data retention law 2.0 that will pass the courts muster .
Should n't take those politicians too long to come up with the new version .
: /</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately, the explanations given by the Federal Constitutional Court can be read as an instruction manual on how to create a data retention law 2.0 that will pass the courts muster.
Shouldn't take those politicians too long to come up with the new version.
:/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329234</id>
	<title>A smart ruling</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267542420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If only the US court system was this intelligent!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If only the US court system was this intelligent !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If only the US court system was this intelligent!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330126</id>
	<title>Re:Pyrrhic victory?</title>
	<author>oreaq</author>
	<datestamp>1267546680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Better yet: Introduce fines and prison sentences for violating the constitution and indict politicians that vote for laws that break the constitution. Wehrhafte Demokratie FTW!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Better yet : Introduce fines and prison sentences for violating the constitution and indict politicians that vote for laws that break the constitution .
Wehrhafte Demokratie FTW !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Better yet: Introduce fines and prison sentences for violating the constitution and indict politicians that vote for laws that break the constitution.
Wehrhafte Demokratie FTW!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329374</id>
	<title>Domestic spying unconstitutional?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267543080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There can be only logical solution: Change the constitution.</p><p>Anyone taking bets that this will be the solution rather than to throw the unconstitutional domestic spying out the door?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There can be only logical solution : Change the constitution.Anyone taking bets that this will be the solution rather than to throw the unconstitutional domestic spying out the door ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There can be only logical solution: Change the constitution.Anyone taking bets that this will be the solution rather than to throw the unconstitutional domestic spying out the door?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329806</id>
	<title>yomaty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267545120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The court is not supposed to know shit. The judges are supposed to listen to experts and form their opinion based upon that - and from reading the decision, I would say they indeed did. Everything working as intended. That aside, all hail the CCC!</p><p>i think this good opinion in my seen</p><p>http://www.yomaty.co.cc</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The court is not supposed to know shit .
The judges are supposed to listen to experts and form their opinion based upon that - and from reading the decision , I would say they indeed did .
Everything working as intended .
That aside , all hail the CCC ! i think this good opinion in my seenhttp : //www.yomaty.co.cc</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The court is not supposed to know shit.
The judges are supposed to listen to experts and form their opinion based upon that - and from reading the decision, I would say they indeed did.
Everything working as intended.
That aside, all hail the CCC!i think this good opinion in my seenhttp://www.yomaty.co.cc</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330084</id>
	<title>Re:Unenviable comparison</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267546560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Germany is moving forward. The US political system has the democrats wanting to move forward and the republicans block EVERYTHING on principle. So, to answer the question, the US is very messed up and has been that way for a long time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Germany is moving forward .
The US political system has the democrats wanting to move forward and the republicans block EVERYTHING on principle .
So , to answer the question , the US is very messed up and has been that way for a long time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Germany is moving forward.
The US political system has the democrats wanting to move forward and the republicans block EVERYTHING on principle.
So, to answer the question, the US is very messed up and has been that way for a long time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329376</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_1254212_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31336034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_1254212_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31332530
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_1254212_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_1254212_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31334000
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_1254212_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31332232
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_1254212_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31332652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329220
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_1254212_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31336338
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_1254212_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_1254212_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329376
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_1254212_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_1254212_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329220
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_1254212_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329220
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_1254212_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31331724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329220
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_1254212_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330100
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_1254212_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329220
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_1254212_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_1254212_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329738
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329376
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_1254212_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329376
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_1254212_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31355062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329220
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_1254212_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31342298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_1254212_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31345074
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329376
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_1254212.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329376
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330542
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329814
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31345074
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329738
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330084
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_1254212.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329204
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31336338
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329964
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330022
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31332530
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330506
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330100
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330710
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31334000
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31336034
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_1254212.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329374
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_1254212.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329226
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_1254212.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329444
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_1254212.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329220
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330794
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329362
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31355062
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329352
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31332652
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330126
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31331724
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330024
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_1254212.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329390
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_1254212.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329260
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_1254212.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329246
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329872
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31332232
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31342298
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_1254212.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329480
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_1254212.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329284
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329476
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31329724
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_1254212.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_1254212.31330018
</commentlist>
</conversation>
