<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_18_1158248</id>
	<title>MP3 Player Tax Proposed In Canada</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1268921580000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Interoperable writes <i>"The status of sharing music in Canada is, to some extent, ambiguous. This is partly due to a levy imposed on blank media, CD-Rs and cassette tapes, that compensates artists and the recording studios for a loss of revenue due to copying. Legislation proposed by the NDP and supported by the Bloc Quebecois would <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/03/17/ndp-bill017.html">extend that levy to cover MP3 players</a> with the intent of decriminalizing audio file sharing for Canadian citizens. The proposed legislation, however, faces opposition from the governing Conservative party; the Liberal party has agreed to discuss the proposed bill."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interoperable writes " The status of sharing music in Canada is , to some extent , ambiguous .
This is partly due to a levy imposed on blank media , CD-Rs and cassette tapes , that compensates artists and the recording studios for a loss of revenue due to copying .
Legislation proposed by the NDP and supported by the Bloc Quebecois would extend that levy to cover MP3 players with the intent of decriminalizing audio file sharing for Canadian citizens .
The proposed legislation , however , faces opposition from the governing Conservative party ; the Liberal party has agreed to discuss the proposed bill .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interoperable writes "The status of sharing music in Canada is, to some extent, ambiguous.
This is partly due to a levy imposed on blank media, CD-Rs and cassette tapes, that compensates artists and the recording studios for a loss of revenue due to copying.
Legislation proposed by the NDP and supported by the Bloc Quebecois would extend that levy to cover MP3 players with the intent of decriminalizing audio file sharing for Canadian citizens.
The proposed legislation, however, faces opposition from the governing Conservative party; the Liberal party has agreed to discuss the proposed bill.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522494</id>
	<title>Punk Kids</title>
	<author>Trivial Solutions</author>
	<datestamp>1268925660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Damn, I burn a CD or two a day when I'm coding as back-ups.  Kinda sucks.  Freeloader punk kids ruining everything.  Tell God it's not stealing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Damn , I burn a CD or two a day when I 'm coding as back-ups .
Kinda sucks .
Freeloader punk kids ruining everything .
Tell God it 's not stealing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Damn, I burn a CD or two a day when I'm coding as back-ups.
Kinda sucks.
Freeloader punk kids ruining everything.
Tell God it's not stealing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523038</id>
	<title>In Spain we have it "better"</title>
	<author>iampiti</author>
	<datestamp>1268928120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>In Spain we have this levy for blank media but not only CD and DVD but also USB flash sticks, memory cards, hard disks and doesn't end there: It also applies to Optical media recorders and MP3 players. If you can read Spanish it's explained here <a href="http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon\_por\_copia\_privada\_(Espa\%C3\%B1a)" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon\_por\_copia\_privada\_(Espa\%C3\%B1a)</a> [wikipedia.org].
And after all of this you'd think this would legalize filesharing<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....it doesn't. This is supposedly a compensation for "private copy" which is something like making a copy from the original media for your personal use (for example copying an audio cd you bought to use it in the car and prevent the original one to get damaged).
Of course the politicians are in bed with the intellectual rights societies (SGAE is the most important here) so this is unlikely to get better in the coming years.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In Spain we have this levy for blank media but not only CD and DVD but also USB flash sticks , memory cards , hard disks and does n't end there : It also applies to Optical media recorders and MP3 players .
If you can read Spanish it 's explained here http : //es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon \ _por \ _copia \ _privada \ _ ( Espa \ % C3 \ % B1a ) [ wikipedia.org ] .
And after all of this you 'd think this would legalize filesharing ....it does n't .
This is supposedly a compensation for " private copy " which is something like making a copy from the original media for your personal use ( for example copying an audio cd you bought to use it in the car and prevent the original one to get damaged ) .
Of course the politicians are in bed with the intellectual rights societies ( SGAE is the most important here ) so this is unlikely to get better in the coming years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Spain we have this levy for blank media but not only CD and DVD but also USB flash sticks, memory cards, hard disks and doesn't end there: It also applies to Optical media recorders and MP3 players.
If you can read Spanish it's explained here http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon\_por\_copia\_privada\_(Espa\%C3\%B1a) [wikipedia.org].
And after all of this you'd think this would legalize filesharing ....it doesn't.
This is supposedly a compensation for "private copy" which is something like making a copy from the original media for your personal use (for example copying an audio cd you bought to use it in the car and prevent the original one to get damaged).
Of course the politicians are in bed with the intellectual rights societies (SGAE is the most important here) so this is unlikely to get better in the coming years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524146</id>
	<title>Re:Useful</title>
	<author>mandelbr0t</author>
	<datestamp>1268933580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's pretty effective. The prices for blank media didn't go up dramatically, and until this article, it was easy to forget I was even paying it.</p><p>Unfortunately, this is one of those issues that you need to be partisan on; the NDP is currently the only political party in Canada that is publicly against any kind of copyright reform. Unfortunately, their plans include things like this. Still, I'd rather the NDP get their way than the Conservatives, who have already twice tried to slam the Canadian DMCA down our throat.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's pretty effective .
The prices for blank media did n't go up dramatically , and until this article , it was easy to forget I was even paying it.Unfortunately , this is one of those issues that you need to be partisan on ; the NDP is currently the only political party in Canada that is publicly against any kind of copyright reform .
Unfortunately , their plans include things like this .
Still , I 'd rather the NDP get their way than the Conservatives , who have already twice tried to slam the Canadian DMCA down our throat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's pretty effective.
The prices for blank media didn't go up dramatically, and until this article, it was easy to forget I was even paying it.Unfortunately, this is one of those issues that you need to be partisan on; the NDP is currently the only political party in Canada that is publicly against any kind of copyright reform.
Unfortunately, their plans include things like this.
Still, I'd rather the NDP get their way than the Conservatives, who have already twice tried to slam the Canadian DMCA down our throat.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522526</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524086</id>
	<title>Re:Useful</title>
	<author>sonnejw0</author>
	<datestamp>1268933220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is a ridiculous law.  It's like putting an additional tax on every piece of cutlery because someone might use a knife to kill someone at some point.  It's not my responsibility when I want to buy a knife to cut my steak.<br> <br>
I know in Canada the assumption is guilty until proven innocent, so obviously this is a democratic way of saying "we're all guilty".  Maybe the labels should actually get enough evidence together to show that they make less money because of piracy and actually go through the judicial system<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... oh wait, because they can't get any evidence of the sort!<br> <br>At one point when I was very young and Napster was first released, I may or may not have downloaded some songs and listened to them, having no inclination whatsoever to spend money on them.  I am older now, and I have no inclination to pirate music over the internet or otherwise, and I still do not spend any money on CDs.  If I want music, I go to Pandora and listen to all of my favorite, thumbs-up songs for free.  Limited to 40 hours of listening a month per channel?  So what, I've got 12 different channels that all play the same songs.<br> <br>This is all bullshit. Maybe if you didn't have so many lawyers on retainer, record labels, you'd end up with more profits. I don't "not buy" CDs because I can pirate them. I don't buy CDs because music is a luxury that I can get for free legally elsewhere, and that I can more often than not do without, especially if the only way I can get it is to sell my soul. People still buy Elvis or Beatles CDs because Elvis and the Beatles were interesting. Taylor Swift and Rhianna are not interesting. That's why you have to show so many boobs on CD covers<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... otherwise no one would care. No one cares that you have a studio pitch-match their sucky vocals to some guitar player, and for people that actually have more money than hormones (i.e. what your demographic should be), boobs are free.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a ridiculous law .
It 's like putting an additional tax on every piece of cutlery because someone might use a knife to kill someone at some point .
It 's not my responsibility when I want to buy a knife to cut my steak .
I know in Canada the assumption is guilty until proven innocent , so obviously this is a democratic way of saying " we 're all guilty " .
Maybe the labels should actually get enough evidence together to show that they make less money because of piracy and actually go through the judicial system ... oh wait , because they ca n't get any evidence of the sort !
At one point when I was very young and Napster was first released , I may or may not have downloaded some songs and listened to them , having no inclination whatsoever to spend money on them .
I am older now , and I have no inclination to pirate music over the internet or otherwise , and I still do not spend any money on CDs .
If I want music , I go to Pandora and listen to all of my favorite , thumbs-up songs for free .
Limited to 40 hours of listening a month per channel ?
So what , I 've got 12 different channels that all play the same songs .
This is all bullshit .
Maybe if you did n't have so many lawyers on retainer , record labels , you 'd end up with more profits .
I do n't " not buy " CDs because I can pirate them .
I do n't buy CDs because music is a luxury that I can get for free legally elsewhere , and that I can more often than not do without , especially if the only way I can get it is to sell my soul .
People still buy Elvis or Beatles CDs because Elvis and the Beatles were interesting .
Taylor Swift and Rhianna are not interesting .
That 's why you have to show so many boobs on CD covers ... otherwise no one would care .
No one cares that you have a studio pitch-match their sucky vocals to some guitar player , and for people that actually have more money than hormones ( i.e .
what your demographic should be ) , boobs are free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a ridiculous law.
It's like putting an additional tax on every piece of cutlery because someone might use a knife to kill someone at some point.
It's not my responsibility when I want to buy a knife to cut my steak.
I know in Canada the assumption is guilty until proven innocent, so obviously this is a democratic way of saying "we're all guilty".
Maybe the labels should actually get enough evidence together to show that they make less money because of piracy and actually go through the judicial system ... oh wait, because they can't get any evidence of the sort!
At one point when I was very young and Napster was first released, I may or may not have downloaded some songs and listened to them, having no inclination whatsoever to spend money on them.
I am older now, and I have no inclination to pirate music over the internet or otherwise, and I still do not spend any money on CDs.
If I want music, I go to Pandora and listen to all of my favorite, thumbs-up songs for free.
Limited to 40 hours of listening a month per channel?
So what, I've got 12 different channels that all play the same songs.
This is all bullshit.
Maybe if you didn't have so many lawyers on retainer, record labels, you'd end up with more profits.
I don't "not buy" CDs because I can pirate them.
I don't buy CDs because music is a luxury that I can get for free legally elsewhere, and that I can more often than not do without, especially if the only way I can get it is to sell my soul.
People still buy Elvis or Beatles CDs because Elvis and the Beatles were interesting.
Taylor Swift and Rhianna are not interesting.
That's why you have to show so many boobs on CD covers ... otherwise no one would care.
No one cares that you have a studio pitch-match their sucky vocals to some guitar player, and for people that actually have more money than hormones (i.e.
what your demographic should be), boobs are free.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522460</id>
	<title>Common Sense</title>
	<author>Akido37</author>
	<datestamp>1268925540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>They pay a copying tax every time they buy media.  It seems to me this implies copying is then legal.

<br> <br>
However, with common sense and government, only occasionally do the two meet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They pay a copying tax every time they buy media .
It seems to me this implies copying is then legal .
However , with common sense and government , only occasionally do the two meet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They pay a copying tax every time they buy media.
It seems to me this implies copying is then legal.
However, with common sense and government, only occasionally do the two meet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522514</id>
	<title>Ugh, this again</title>
	<author>schmidt349</author>
	<datestamp>1268925780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hasn't the runaway success of services like iTunes and Amazon MP3 and all the rest of them mitigated the need to play this game where we supposedly all obtain our music illegally and have to pay for it with levies on media and devices?</p><p>Right, sorry, I forgot, the Soviet Socialist Republic of Record Labels wants its $20 cut of my iPhone/Nexus One/Pre/etc. And boy do they deserve it, considering the depth and genius of the cultural patrimony they've contributed. Like Britney Spears and Paris Hilton.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Has n't the runaway success of services like iTunes and Amazon MP3 and all the rest of them mitigated the need to play this game where we supposedly all obtain our music illegally and have to pay for it with levies on media and devices ? Right , sorry , I forgot , the Soviet Socialist Republic of Record Labels wants its $ 20 cut of my iPhone/Nexus One/Pre/etc .
And boy do they deserve it , considering the depth and genius of the cultural patrimony they 've contributed .
Like Britney Spears and Paris Hilton .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hasn't the runaway success of services like iTunes and Amazon MP3 and all the rest of them mitigated the need to play this game where we supposedly all obtain our music illegally and have to pay for it with levies on media and devices?Right, sorry, I forgot, the Soviet Socialist Republic of Record Labels wants its $20 cut of my iPhone/Nexus One/Pre/etc.
And boy do they deserve it, considering the depth and genius of the cultural patrimony they've contributed.
Like Britney Spears and Paris Hilton.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523540</id>
	<title>Re:Let's go all the way</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268930640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And a tax on thinking because some will commit thought crimes and not be caught.</p></div><p>Not nearly enough people think for this to be a problem.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And a tax on thinking because some will commit thought crimes and not be caught.Not nearly enough people think for this to be a problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And a tax on thinking because some will commit thought crimes and not be caught.Not nearly enough people think for this to be a problem.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523386</id>
	<title>Re:Useful</title>
	<author>DiademBedfordshire</author>
	<datestamp>1268929980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The private copying levy is distributed as per the Copyright Board's allocation as: 66\% to eligible authors and publishers,18.9\% to eligible performers and 15.1\% to eligible record companies.</p></div></blockquote><p> I may be wrong but aren't the Record Companies the Publishers?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The private copying levy is distributed as per the Copyright Board 's allocation as : 66 \ % to eligible authors and publishers,18.9 \ % to eligible performers and 15.1 \ % to eligible record companies .
I may be wrong but are n't the Record Companies the Publishers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The private copying levy is distributed as per the Copyright Board's allocation as: 66\% to eligible authors and publishers,18.9\% to eligible performers and 15.1\% to eligible record companies.
I may be wrong but aren't the Record Companies the Publishers?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522526</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523318</id>
	<title>Non-Canadians; UPC</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268929620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So long as you are a member of SOCAN and have music tracked by SoundScan, you're eligible for the levies</p></div><p>So if you happen not to be Canadian yet are the author of music that has been copied in Canada, how do you get into SOCAN? And it appears you need a UPC to get into SoundScan, and to get a UPC, you need at least some sort of label (even if not major). Besides, I didn't see anything on your flowchart about download sales (e.g. iTunes Store).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So long as you are a member of SOCAN and have music tracked by SoundScan , you 're eligible for the leviesSo if you happen not to be Canadian yet are the author of music that has been copied in Canada , how do you get into SOCAN ?
And it appears you need a UPC to get into SoundScan , and to get a UPC , you need at least some sort of label ( even if not major ) .
Besides , I did n't see anything on your flowchart about download sales ( e.g .
iTunes Store ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So long as you are a member of SOCAN and have music tracked by SoundScan, you're eligible for the leviesSo if you happen not to be Canadian yet are the author of music that has been copied in Canada, how do you get into SOCAN?
And it appears you need a UPC to get into SoundScan, and to get a UPC, you need at least some sort of label (even if not major).
Besides, I didn't see anything on your flowchart about download sales (e.g.
iTunes Store).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524262</id>
	<title>Re:Useful</title>
	<author>DarthVain</author>
	<datestamp>1268934000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The folks getting sued for 6 billion are the Canadian music industry associations that own money to individual artists.</p><p>From my understanding, if a label made a CD for an Artist, they pay them a royalty per CD. So for instance Bare Naked Ladies would get say, 2$ per CD sold. If they sell 1,000,000 CD's they would get paid 2million bucks from the label.</p><p>However...</p><p>If the label made a CD that was say "The Best of" or Dance Mix 2009 or something like that, where songs from different CDs all get mixed into one, they pay a "pending" royalty, which I suppose depends on how much money they make (as it isn't fixed perhaps).</p><p>Anyway the industry associations have been very bad about actually paying out this pending royalty, in that they haven't been. Multiply that by over a decade of abuse, and angry artists... So the artists filed a class action suit against the associations using the per song copyright infringement penalties being used in the US. This has NEVER been awarded in Canada, nor has a single case been tried, so the likelihood of wining this is pretty much NIL.</p><p>The whole point of this is to put the 6 Billion dollar figure in the paper and media so that people are aware of the music associations shenanigans, which would hopefully force them to pay up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The folks getting sued for 6 billion are the Canadian music industry associations that own money to individual artists.From my understanding , if a label made a CD for an Artist , they pay them a royalty per CD .
So for instance Bare Naked Ladies would get say , 2 $ per CD sold .
If they sell 1,000,000 CD 's they would get paid 2million bucks from the label.However...If the label made a CD that was say " The Best of " or Dance Mix 2009 or something like that , where songs from different CDs all get mixed into one , they pay a " pending " royalty , which I suppose depends on how much money they make ( as it is n't fixed perhaps ) .Anyway the industry associations have been very bad about actually paying out this pending royalty , in that they have n't been .
Multiply that by over a decade of abuse , and angry artists... So the artists filed a class action suit against the associations using the per song copyright infringement penalties being used in the US .
This has NEVER been awarded in Canada , nor has a single case been tried , so the likelihood of wining this is pretty much NIL.The whole point of this is to put the 6 Billion dollar figure in the paper and media so that people are aware of the music associations shenanigans , which would hopefully force them to pay up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The folks getting sued for 6 billion are the Canadian music industry associations that own money to individual artists.From my understanding, if a label made a CD for an Artist, they pay them a royalty per CD.
So for instance Bare Naked Ladies would get say, 2$ per CD sold.
If they sell 1,000,000 CD's they would get paid 2million bucks from the label.However...If the label made a CD that was say "The Best of" or Dance Mix 2009 or something like that, where songs from different CDs all get mixed into one, they pay a "pending" royalty, which I suppose depends on how much money they make (as it isn't fixed perhaps).Anyway the industry associations have been very bad about actually paying out this pending royalty, in that they haven't been.
Multiply that by over a decade of abuse, and angry artists... So the artists filed a class action suit against the associations using the per song copyright infringement penalties being used in the US.
This has NEVER been awarded in Canada, nor has a single case been tried, so the likelihood of wining this is pretty much NIL.The whole point of this is to put the 6 Billion dollar figure in the paper and media so that people are aware of the music associations shenanigans, which would hopefully force them to pay up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522572</id>
	<title>Fuck Off, Eh</title>
	<author>whisper\_jeff</author>
	<datestamp>1268925960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seriously, it boggles the mind that the media corporations have managed to brainwash people sufficiently that they have politicians proposing a tax that enables them to be paid \_FOR DOING NOTHING!\_ Just because they exist, they expect to be paid. It's a degree of entitlement that my brain has troubles comprehending. I want to rant more but I'm just too flabbergasted to be able to put together a coherent sentence... I clearly went into the wrong industry - I actually have to work for my pay check. I should have gone into music distribution where I can get paid just for being there.<br> <br>
Seriously, the media companies (music, first and foremost among them since the RIAA and CRIA are the most antagonistic of them) need to fuck off. Eh.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , it boggles the mind that the media corporations have managed to brainwash people sufficiently that they have politicians proposing a tax that enables them to be paid \ _FOR DOING NOTHING ! \ _ Just because they exist , they expect to be paid .
It 's a degree of entitlement that my brain has troubles comprehending .
I want to rant more but I 'm just too flabbergasted to be able to put together a coherent sentence... I clearly went into the wrong industry - I actually have to work for my pay check .
I should have gone into music distribution where I can get paid just for being there .
Seriously , the media companies ( music , first and foremost among them since the RIAA and CRIA are the most antagonistic of them ) need to fuck off .
Eh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, it boggles the mind that the media corporations have managed to brainwash people sufficiently that they have politicians proposing a tax that enables them to be paid \_FOR DOING NOTHING!\_ Just because they exist, they expect to be paid.
It's a degree of entitlement that my brain has troubles comprehending.
I want to rant more but I'm just too flabbergasted to be able to put together a coherent sentence... I clearly went into the wrong industry - I actually have to work for my pay check.
I should have gone into music distribution where I can get paid just for being there.
Seriously, the media companies (music, first and foremost among them since the RIAA and CRIA are the most antagonistic of them) need to fuck off.
Eh.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523004</id>
	<title>Enough already!</title>
	<author>radicalrendell</author>
	<datestamp>1268927940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Please can we stop worrying about the artists already?  Someone has to start thinking of the struggling lawyers and politicians.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Please can we stop worrying about the artists already ?
Someone has to start thinking of the struggling lawyers and politicians .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please can we stop worrying about the artists already?
Someone has to start thinking of the struggling lawyers and politicians.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523836</id>
	<title>Fock the bloc</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268932200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fock the bloc, and the FLQ, all I gotta say... turned quebec into the most racist place in NA, beating out Texas &amp; Florida!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fock the bloc , and the FLQ , all I got ta say... turned quebec into the most racist place in NA , beating out Texas &amp; Florida !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fock the bloc, and the FLQ, all I gotta say... turned quebec into the most racist place in NA, beating out Texas &amp; Florida!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522562</id>
	<title>Re:The levy only compensates Major Label artists</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268925960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's not entirely true, depending on what you mean by "independent". So long as you are a member of SOCAN and have music tracked by SoundScan, you're eligible for the levies, regardless of whether you're signed onto a major label. <a href="http://cpcc.ca/english/pdf/CPCC\_Distribution\_Eng\_0401\_2010.pdf" title="cpcc.ca">This flow chart</a> [cpcc.ca] (warning: PDF) describes the pay-out structure.
</p><p>The media have been kind of lacking here, though. I have no idea how this pay-out scheme works in practice<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(. Go go go investigative journalism!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's not entirely true , depending on what you mean by " independent " .
So long as you are a member of SOCAN and have music tracked by SoundScan , you 're eligible for the levies , regardless of whether you 're signed onto a major label .
This flow chart [ cpcc.ca ] ( warning : PDF ) describes the pay-out structure .
The media have been kind of lacking here , though .
I have no idea how this pay-out scheme works in practice : ( .
Go go go investigative journalism !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's not entirely true, depending on what you mean by "independent".
So long as you are a member of SOCAN and have music tracked by SoundScan, you're eligible for the levies, regardless of whether you're signed onto a major label.
This flow chart [cpcc.ca] (warning: PDF) describes the pay-out structure.
The media have been kind of lacking here, though.
I have no idea how this pay-out scheme works in practice :(.
Go go go investigative journalism!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522634</id>
	<title>What about other data storage devices?</title>
	<author>bradbury</author>
	<datestamp>1268926200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmmm.... I don't own an MP3 player.  Any MP3 files I might have are stored on my hard disk drive.  If I wanted to play them on an MP3 player I'd probably build one myself (plans are available on the Internet) and store the MP3s on a USB drive.  Surprising that they are stopping at simple MP3 players (which tend to be overpriced anyway) and not going after any and all data storage devices.</p><p>Broken model --&gt; Broken solutions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmmm.... I do n't own an MP3 player .
Any MP3 files I might have are stored on my hard disk drive .
If I wanted to play them on an MP3 player I 'd probably build one myself ( plans are available on the Internet ) and store the MP3s on a USB drive .
Surprising that they are stopping at simple MP3 players ( which tend to be overpriced anyway ) and not going after any and all data storage devices.Broken model -- &gt; Broken solutions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmmm.... I don't own an MP3 player.
Any MP3 files I might have are stored on my hard disk drive.
If I wanted to play them on an MP3 player I'd probably build one myself (plans are available on the Internet) and store the MP3s on a USB drive.
Surprising that they are stopping at simple MP3 players (which tend to be overpriced anyway) and not going after any and all data storage devices.Broken model --&gt; Broken solutions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523460</id>
	<title>control the artists</title>
	<author>jlebrech</author>
	<datestamp>1268930280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it looks like a clever way for the government to be the major source of income for artists, that way they can remove funding from artists that rebel against the system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it looks like a clever way for the government to be the major source of income for artists , that way they can remove funding from artists that rebel against the system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it looks like a clever way for the government to be the major source of income for artists, that way they can remove funding from artists that rebel against the system.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524250</id>
	<title>Re:Forget the MP3 tax...</title>
	<author>mandelbr0t</author>
	<datestamp>1268934000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wouldn't even worry about that. Canadian copyright law is plenty liberal, and if the Conservatives get their way, fair-dealing will be a moot point, just as it is in the USA.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't even worry about that .
Canadian copyright law is plenty liberal , and if the Conservatives get their way , fair-dealing will be a moot point , just as it is in the USA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't even worry about that.
Canadian copyright law is plenty liberal, and if the Conservatives get their way, fair-dealing will be a moot point, just as it is in the USA.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523600</id>
	<title>Re:First psot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268931000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hoser.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hoser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hoser.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522954</id>
	<title>Like a condom tax to cover the cost of rape?!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268927640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Could government bullshit possibly be any more ridiculous?!</p><p>And rape is an actual violation of Natural Rights, while "intellectual property" isn't based on Natural Law (i.e. tangible property rights based on scarcity) nor Contract Law - just a baseless construct backed by tyrannical government force!</p><p>And remember - if you're not a libertarian / Anarcho-Capitalist / agorist / tax resister then you're an enabler of government tyranny, whether you support its individual bits or not!</p><p>"Let them march all they want, so long as the pay their taxes." -- General Alexander Haig</p><p>(Signed:  Alex Libman's sock-puppet.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Could government bullshit possibly be any more ridiculous ?
! And rape is an actual violation of Natural Rights , while " intellectual property " is n't based on Natural Law ( i.e .
tangible property rights based on scarcity ) nor Contract Law - just a baseless construct backed by tyrannical government force ! And remember - if you 're not a libertarian / Anarcho-Capitalist / agorist / tax resister then you 're an enabler of government tyranny , whether you support its individual bits or not !
" Let them march all they want , so long as the pay their taxes .
" -- General Alexander Haig ( Signed : Alex Libman 's sock-puppet .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could government bullshit possibly be any more ridiculous?
!And rape is an actual violation of Natural Rights, while "intellectual property" isn't based on Natural Law (i.e.
tangible property rights based on scarcity) nor Contract Law - just a baseless construct backed by tyrannical government force!And remember - if you're not a libertarian / Anarcho-Capitalist / agorist / tax resister then you're an enabler of government tyranny, whether you support its individual bits or not!
"Let them march all they want, so long as the pay their taxes.
" -- General Alexander Haig(Signed:  Alex Libman's sock-puppet.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523914</id>
	<title>Belgium: Auvibel</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268932500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We already have that kind of tax here in Belgium, it's called "Auvibel".<br>See this page for the fees:<br>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private\_copying\_levy#Belgium</p><p>For example, &euro; 2.50 tax is added to a 16GB MP3 player...</p><p>Matthias</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We already have that kind of tax here in Belgium , it 's called " Auvibel " .See this page for the fees : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private \ _copying \ _levy # BelgiumFor example ,    2.50 tax is added to a 16GB MP3 player...Matthias</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We already have that kind of tax here in Belgium, it's called "Auvibel".See this page for the fees:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private\_copying\_levy#BelgiumFor example, € 2.50 tax is added to a 16GB MP3 player...Matthias</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524312</id>
	<title>Re:Fuck Off, Eh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268934180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You may look at it that way.  I look at it this way.</p><p>The CRIA is not going away.  No matter how badly it's needed or how much people want it, it's not going away.  It WILL get paid for music, there's no ifs, ands or buts about it.  The only question right now is "how".</p><p>The USA has opted for the 'pay $1 a song, no copying, drm-the-crap-out-of-it (although that one's slowly sliding away), and sue for a bajillion dollars anyone who does not follow our rules'.  That method clearly sucks.<br>If we can actually get the option of "tax on mp3 players", hell, I'm all for it!  I've got somewhere around 2000 mp3's, and if I were forced to pay $1 for each of those... it simply wouldn't occur.  For a tax on an mp3 player... even if it's like... $10 a player or even $100 (although I'm sure there'd be hell to pay if it was either of those, but go with me here)... that tax means I have unrestricted access to download every MP3 on the planet if I'm capable of it.  $100 is 100 songs or thereabouts.  Hell, even a few hundred songs if they're 'cheaper' ones.  That's the discography of several bands.  For the life of my MP3 player, I could download thousands upon thousands of mp3's, and have free access to move them, burn them, or play them however and wherever I want.</p><p>At which piont... I'm for that mp3 tax.  The option of "no pay in any way, shape, or form, legal download" simply doesn't exist, and never will.  I'm way too realistic (or pessimistic) to believe it.  It IS down to choosing the lesser of the evils.  The tax is by far the lesser.</p><p>Of course, we all well know that even fi they impose this tax, they will STILL try to force you to purchase mp3s, and attempt to prosecute you for downloading/uploading them.  But at least if brought to court, the consumer has a bit more ammunition to work with.</p><p>Note: Only posting anonymous because at work.  Username Kabuthunk</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You may look at it that way .
I look at it this way.The CRIA is not going away .
No matter how badly it 's needed or how much people want it , it 's not going away .
It WILL get paid for music , there 's no ifs , ands or buts about it .
The only question right now is " how " .The USA has opted for the 'pay $ 1 a song , no copying , drm-the-crap-out-of-it ( although that one 's slowly sliding away ) , and sue for a bajillion dollars anyone who does not follow our rules' .
That method clearly sucks.If we can actually get the option of " tax on mp3 players " , hell , I 'm all for it !
I 've got somewhere around 2000 mp3 's , and if I were forced to pay $ 1 for each of those... it simply would n't occur .
For a tax on an mp3 player... even if it 's like... $ 10 a player or even $ 100 ( although I 'm sure there 'd be hell to pay if it was either of those , but go with me here ) ... that tax means I have unrestricted access to download every MP3 on the planet if I 'm capable of it .
$ 100 is 100 songs or thereabouts .
Hell , even a few hundred songs if they 're 'cheaper ' ones .
That 's the discography of several bands .
For the life of my MP3 player , I could download thousands upon thousands of mp3 's , and have free access to move them , burn them , or play them however and wherever I want.At which piont... I 'm for that mp3 tax .
The option of " no pay in any way , shape , or form , legal download " simply does n't exist , and never will .
I 'm way too realistic ( or pessimistic ) to believe it .
It IS down to choosing the lesser of the evils .
The tax is by far the lesser.Of course , we all well know that even fi they impose this tax , they will STILL try to force you to purchase mp3s , and attempt to prosecute you for downloading/uploading them .
But at least if brought to court , the consumer has a bit more ammunition to work with.Note : Only posting anonymous because at work .
Username Kabuthunk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You may look at it that way.
I look at it this way.The CRIA is not going away.
No matter how badly it's needed or how much people want it, it's not going away.
It WILL get paid for music, there's no ifs, ands or buts about it.
The only question right now is "how".The USA has opted for the 'pay $1 a song, no copying, drm-the-crap-out-of-it (although that one's slowly sliding away), and sue for a bajillion dollars anyone who does not follow our rules'.
That method clearly sucks.If we can actually get the option of "tax on mp3 players", hell, I'm all for it!
I've got somewhere around 2000 mp3's, and if I were forced to pay $1 for each of those... it simply wouldn't occur.
For a tax on an mp3 player... even if it's like... $10 a player or even $100 (although I'm sure there'd be hell to pay if it was either of those, but go with me here)... that tax means I have unrestricted access to download every MP3 on the planet if I'm capable of it.
$100 is 100 songs or thereabouts.
Hell, even a few hundred songs if they're 'cheaper' ones.
That's the discography of several bands.
For the life of my MP3 player, I could download thousands upon thousands of mp3's, and have free access to move them, burn them, or play them however and wherever I want.At which piont... I'm for that mp3 tax.
The option of "no pay in any way, shape, or form, legal download" simply doesn't exist, and never will.
I'm way too realistic (or pessimistic) to believe it.
It IS down to choosing the lesser of the evils.
The tax is by far the lesser.Of course, we all well know that even fi they impose this tax, they will STILL try to force you to purchase mp3s, and attempt to prosecute you for downloading/uploading them.
But at least if brought to court, the consumer has a bit more ammunition to work with.Note: Only posting anonymous because at work.
Username Kabuthunk</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522736</id>
	<title>Effective or not</title>
	<author>vikingpower</author>
	<datestamp>1268926680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Whether the measure is effective or not does not matter in the first place. What matters in the first place, is having laws that make sense. Here, there is perfect sense in "decriminalizing". Only after the Canadians have actually got the law, they will need to look into ways to enforce it.

Way to go, Canada !!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Whether the measure is effective or not does not matter in the first place .
What matters in the first place , is having laws that make sense .
Here , there is perfect sense in " decriminalizing " .
Only after the Canadians have actually got the law , they will need to look into ways to enforce it .
Way to go , Canada !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whether the measure is effective or not does not matter in the first place.
What matters in the first place, is having laws that make sense.
Here, there is perfect sense in "decriminalizing".
Only after the Canadians have actually got the law, they will need to look into ways to enforce it.
Way to go, Canada !
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524654</id>
	<title>Re:Let's go all the way</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268935920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Let's have a tax on crowbars, because some will use it to break into houses and not be caught.  And a new tax on automobiles, because some will go through red lights and not be caught.  And a new tax on shoes, because some people will jaywalk and not be caught.  And a tax on thinking because some will commit thought crimes and not be caught.</p></div><p>You don't get it, you should use your crowbar to break into your onw home. That's whats legal.</p><p>In Canada, I can buy a CD and copy it for personal reason such as having one in my car and one in my bedroom. It makes perfect sense don't you think. How come doing such a thing in the land of the free is illegal? Copying CDs to give to others is totally illegal.</p><p>Copy for personal use : Legal<br>Copy for sharing : Illegal</p><p>That is how it should be everywhere don;t you think?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's have a tax on crowbars , because some will use it to break into houses and not be caught .
And a new tax on automobiles , because some will go through red lights and not be caught .
And a new tax on shoes , because some people will jaywalk and not be caught .
And a tax on thinking because some will commit thought crimes and not be caught.You do n't get it , you should use your crowbar to break into your onw home .
That 's whats legal.In Canada , I can buy a CD and copy it for personal reason such as having one in my car and one in my bedroom .
It makes perfect sense do n't you think .
How come doing such a thing in the land of the free is illegal ?
Copying CDs to give to others is totally illegal.Copy for personal use : LegalCopy for sharing : IllegalThat is how it should be everywhere don ; t you think ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's have a tax on crowbars, because some will use it to break into houses and not be caught.
And a new tax on automobiles, because some will go through red lights and not be caught.
And a new tax on shoes, because some people will jaywalk and not be caught.
And a tax on thinking because some will commit thought crimes and not be caught.You don't get it, you should use your crowbar to break into your onw home.
That's whats legal.In Canada, I can buy a CD and copy it for personal reason such as having one in my car and one in my bedroom.
It makes perfect sense don't you think.
How come doing such a thing in the land of the free is illegal?
Copying CDs to give to others is totally illegal.Copy for personal use : LegalCopy for sharing : IllegalThat is how it should be everywhere don;t you think?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522944</id>
	<title>Re:A good bad thing</title>
	<author>NotBornYesterday</author>
	<datestamp>1268927640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I thought you guys already enjoyed a certain legal tolerance for sharing because you get taxed on CDs and such.  If that's the case, what do you have to gain from another tax?  If this one is passed, how many more taxes are you guys going to be hit up for?  If sharing is quasi-legal indefinitely, they can come back in a few years and demand a tax on hard drives, SSDs, and any other storage media, most of which will likely never hold the copyrighted music files they are paying for.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought you guys already enjoyed a certain legal tolerance for sharing because you get taxed on CDs and such .
If that 's the case , what do you have to gain from another tax ?
If this one is passed , how many more taxes are you guys going to be hit up for ?
If sharing is quasi-legal indefinitely , they can come back in a few years and demand a tax on hard drives , SSDs , and any other storage media , most of which will likely never hold the copyrighted music files they are paying for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought you guys already enjoyed a certain legal tolerance for sharing because you get taxed on CDs and such.
If that's the case, what do you have to gain from another tax?
If this one is passed, how many more taxes are you guys going to be hit up for?
If sharing is quasi-legal indefinitely, they can come back in a few years and demand a tax on hard drives, SSDs, and any other storage media, most of which will likely never hold the copyrighted music files they are paying for.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522462</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523102</id>
	<title>Ogg Vorbis</title>
	<author>flyingfsck</author>
	<datestamp>1268928420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Fortunately I only play Oggs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fortunately I only play Oggs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fortunately I only play Oggs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522526</id>
	<title>Re:Useful</title>
	<author>value\_added</author>
	<datestamp>1268925780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Lets just hope the money gets to the struggling artists!</i></p><p>I'd have guess that it would be spent on either donuts or hockey tickets, but Wikipedia offers a different take:</p><blockquote><div><p>The private copying levy is distributed as per the Copyright Board's allocation as: 66\% to eligible authors and publishers,18.9\% to eligible performers and 15.1\% to eligible record companies.</p></div></blockquote><p>Maybe my Canadian friends can elaborate as to how effective this scheme is.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lets just hope the money gets to the struggling artists ! I 'd have guess that it would be spent on either donuts or hockey tickets , but Wikipedia offers a different take : The private copying levy is distributed as per the Copyright Board 's allocation as : 66 \ % to eligible authors and publishers,18.9 \ % to eligible performers and 15.1 \ % to eligible record companies.Maybe my Canadian friends can elaborate as to how effective this scheme is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lets just hope the money gets to the struggling artists!I'd have guess that it would be spent on either donuts or hockey tickets, but Wikipedia offers a different take:The private copying levy is distributed as per the Copyright Board's allocation as: 66\% to eligible authors and publishers,18.9\% to eligible performers and 15.1\% to eligible record companies.Maybe my Canadian friends can elaborate as to how effective this scheme is.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522570</id>
	<title>Let's go all the way</title>
	<author>Palestrina</author>
	<datestamp>1268925960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let's have a tax on crowbars, because some will use it to break into houses and not be caught.  And a new tax on automobiles, because some will go through red lights and not be caught.  And a new tax on shoes, because some people will jaywalk and not be caught.  And a tax on thinking because some will commit thought crimes and not be caught.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's have a tax on crowbars , because some will use it to break into houses and not be caught .
And a new tax on automobiles , because some will go through red lights and not be caught .
And a new tax on shoes , because some people will jaywalk and not be caught .
And a tax on thinking because some will commit thought crimes and not be caught .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's have a tax on crowbars, because some will use it to break into houses and not be caught.
And a new tax on automobiles, because some will go through red lights and not be caught.
And a new tax on shoes, because some people will jaywalk and not be caught.
And a tax on thinking because some will commit thought crimes and not be caught.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31532884</id>
	<title>Re:Ugh, this again</title>
	<author>sincewhen</author>
	<datestamp>1268933340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522560</id>
	<title>Could be passed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268925900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's important to note that the Conservatives, though currently having the most elected, aren't a majority, and that if the Liberals, NDP, and Bloc got together they'd have a majority. It has a chance at least<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>I like legislation like this simply because it would more explicitly decriminalize sharing music and it makes more sense to tax MP3 players than cd-r's and similar storage mediums because those are often used for other things. I wish it might go to the artists who need it rather than multinational corporations who post millions or billions in annual profits every year, but we can't have everything apparantly...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's important to note that the Conservatives , though currently having the most elected , are n't a majority , and that if the Liberals , NDP , and Bloc got together they 'd have a majority .
It has a chance at least : ) I like legislation like this simply because it would more explicitly decriminalize sharing music and it makes more sense to tax MP3 players than cd-r 's and similar storage mediums because those are often used for other things .
I wish it might go to the artists who need it rather than multinational corporations who post millions or billions in annual profits every year , but we ca n't have everything apparantly.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's important to note that the Conservatives, though currently having the most elected, aren't a majority, and that if the Liberals, NDP, and Bloc got together they'd have a majority.
It has a chance at least :)I like legislation like this simply because it would more explicitly decriminalize sharing music and it makes more sense to tax MP3 players than cd-r's and similar storage mediums because those are often used for other things.
I wish it might go to the artists who need it rather than multinational corporations who post millions or billions in annual profits every year, but we can't have everything apparantly...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525034</id>
	<title>Re:Common Sense</title>
	<author>DeepHurtn!</author>
	<datestamp>1268937540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The angle is that it's only legal when you copy on to a medium on which you paid the levy.  So, for example, we pay a levy on blank CDs.  I can copy music I have (that was itself legitimately obtained) onto a CD -- that's covered by the levy.  Putting it on a hard drive or iPod (for which there is no levy -- the Copyright Board authorized one, but the Federal courts ruled they didn't have the authority to do so) is, theoretically, infringing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The angle is that it 's only legal when you copy on to a medium on which you paid the levy .
So , for example , we pay a levy on blank CDs .
I can copy music I have ( that was itself legitimately obtained ) onto a CD -- that 's covered by the levy .
Putting it on a hard drive or iPod ( for which there is no levy -- the Copyright Board authorized one , but the Federal courts ruled they did n't have the authority to do so ) is , theoretically , infringing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The angle is that it's only legal when you copy on to a medium on which you paid the levy.
So, for example, we pay a levy on blank CDs.
I can copy music I have (that was itself legitimately obtained) onto a CD -- that's covered by the levy.
Putting it on a hard drive or iPod (for which there is no levy -- the Copyright Board authorized one, but the Federal courts ruled they didn't have the authority to do so) is, theoretically, infringing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522460</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31531198</id>
	<title>Re:The levy only compensates Major Label artists</title>
	<author>ZDRuX</author>
	<datestamp>1268918640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Like the saying goes...<br> <br>
<i>I don't believe anything the government tells me, unless they deny it.</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Like the saying goes.. . I do n't believe anything the government tells me , unless they deny it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like the saying goes... 
I don't believe anything the government tells me, unless they deny it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31532936</id>
	<title>Re:Useful</title>
	<author>fractoid</author>
	<datestamp>1268933880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Lets just hope the money gets to the struggling artists!</p></div><p>From what I've read about this media tax in the past, they seem to collect the tax money and just kind of sit around with it, waiting for artists to contact them and ask for a slice of the pie. This actually opens up a new business model for indie bands: Make some tracks, leak them onto torrent sites (bonus points if people actually download them), then send the bill to Canada.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lets just hope the money gets to the struggling artists ! From what I 've read about this media tax in the past , they seem to collect the tax money and just kind of sit around with it , waiting for artists to contact them and ask for a slice of the pie .
This actually opens up a new business model for indie bands : Make some tracks , leak them onto torrent sites ( bonus points if people actually download them ) , then send the bill to Canada .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lets just hope the money gets to the struggling artists!From what I've read about this media tax in the past, they seem to collect the tax money and just kind of sit around with it, waiting for artists to contact them and ask for a slice of the pie.
This actually opens up a new business model for indie bands: Make some tracks, leak them onto torrent sites (bonus points if people actually download them), then send the bill to Canada.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525202</id>
	<title>US has charged blank media tax for decades.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268938260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We've had that same tax on blank media in the United States for some time (no one remember Dee Snyder, John Denver and Frank Zappa testifying in front of Al Gore who was pushing legislation for his wife's pet project that was blatantly backed by the RIAA, which also brought us warning labels on music?), and the legality of sharing music has been anything but ambiguous here (at least in the eyes of the court).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 've had that same tax on blank media in the United States for some time ( no one remember Dee Snyder , John Denver and Frank Zappa testifying in front of Al Gore who was pushing legislation for his wife 's pet project that was blatantly backed by the RIAA , which also brought us warning labels on music ?
) , and the legality of sharing music has been anything but ambiguous here ( at least in the eyes of the court ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We've had that same tax on blank media in the United States for some time (no one remember Dee Snyder, John Denver and Frank Zappa testifying in front of Al Gore who was pushing legislation for his wife's pet project that was blatantly backed by the RIAA, which also brought us warning labels on music?
), and the legality of sharing music has been anything but ambiguous here (at least in the eyes of the court).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523192</id>
	<title>don't YOU</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268928840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>dont you know anything propsed by the Bloc Quebecois in Canada is pretty much the opposite of the majority in Canada. They are just stirring up the pot</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>dont you know anything propsed by the Bloc Quebecois in Canada is pretty much the opposite of the majority in Canada .
They are just stirring up the pot</tokentext>
<sentencetext>dont you know anything propsed by the Bloc Quebecois in Canada is pretty much the opposite of the majority in Canada.
They are just stirring up the pot</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523454</id>
	<title>New business model for artists?</title>
	<author>hlavac</author>
	<datestamp>1268930220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It amuses me how the "artists" are changing their business model from actually having to sell stuff (and make it good enough for anyone to want it) to something that boils down to a <i>private tax</i> on certain products...</htmltext>
<tokenext>It amuses me how the " artists " are changing their business model from actually having to sell stuff ( and make it good enough for anyone to want it ) to something that boils down to a private tax on certain products.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It amuses me how the "artists" are changing their business model from actually having to sell stuff (and make it good enough for anyone to want it) to something that boils down to a private tax on certain products...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524440</id>
	<title>Re:May not pass</title>
	<author>Champion3</author>
	<datestamp>1268934840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's also a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private\_member's\_bill#Canada" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">private member's bill</a> [wikipedia.org]. They rarely get passed anyway.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's also a private member 's bill [ wikipedia.org ] .
They rarely get passed anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's also a private member's bill [wikipedia.org].
They rarely get passed anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522686</id>
	<title>Re:Useful</title>
	<author>Akira Kogami</author>
	<datestamp>1268926500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hate major labels as much as the next guy, but to be fair supporting the corporation that the artists rely on for profit kinda is helping the artists.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate major labels as much as the next guy , but to be fair supporting the corporation that the artists rely on for profit kinda is helping the artists .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate major labels as much as the next guy, but to be fair supporting the corporation that the artists rely on for profit kinda is helping the artists.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524544</id>
	<title>Re:Parkinson's Law</title>
	<author>horigath</author>
	<datestamp>1268935320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Governor General's Award nominees pictured on the Canada Council website are old, because they are nominated for a major award for late-career artists. These are awards for career achievement, but the Canada Council is certainly more involved with the art scene here than you think and not just for olds. I'm employed by a non-profit artist-run centre staffed entirely by under-40s, most of us in our 20s, which is supported in part by the Canada Council as well as other federal, provincial and municipal government sources, private donors and members.</p><p>In any case, this isn't where the money goes in this case. The copyright board distributes the money through SOCAN. That means that any indie band that gets radio play (and that means a lot in Canada where the radio spectrum includes very healthy college and community radio stations distinct from their US counterparts as well as the CBC, all of which are mandated to play Canadian talent that doesn't make it onto commercial radio) will get some money. And they do&mdash;not always much, but a nice benefit and a stepping stone to a successful career.</p><p>There are perfectly good reasons to be opposed to this levy, or to dislike either the SOCAN or the federal arts-funding system (especially when the whole sector is destabilized by the expectation of unknown cuts to unknown areas, as we are now&mdash;makes budgeting tricky), but totally misunderstanding both isn't a great example.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Governor General 's Award nominees pictured on the Canada Council website are old , because they are nominated for a major award for late-career artists .
These are awards for career achievement , but the Canada Council is certainly more involved with the art scene here than you think and not just for olds .
I 'm employed by a non-profit artist-run centre staffed entirely by under-40s , most of us in our 20s , which is supported in part by the Canada Council as well as other federal , provincial and municipal government sources , private donors and members.In any case , this is n't where the money goes in this case .
The copyright board distributes the money through SOCAN .
That means that any indie band that gets radio play ( and that means a lot in Canada where the radio spectrum includes very healthy college and community radio stations distinct from their US counterparts as well as the CBC , all of which are mandated to play Canadian talent that does n't make it onto commercial radio ) will get some money .
And they do    not always much , but a nice benefit and a stepping stone to a successful career.There are perfectly good reasons to be opposed to this levy , or to dislike either the SOCAN or the federal arts-funding system ( especially when the whole sector is destabilized by the expectation of unknown cuts to unknown areas , as we are now    makes budgeting tricky ) , but totally misunderstanding both is n't a great example .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Governor General's Award nominees pictured on the Canada Council website are old, because they are nominated for a major award for late-career artists.
These are awards for career achievement, but the Canada Council is certainly more involved with the art scene here than you think and not just for olds.
I'm employed by a non-profit artist-run centre staffed entirely by under-40s, most of us in our 20s, which is supported in part by the Canada Council as well as other federal, provincial and municipal government sources, private donors and members.In any case, this isn't where the money goes in this case.
The copyright board distributes the money through SOCAN.
That means that any indie band that gets radio play (and that means a lot in Canada where the radio spectrum includes very healthy college and community radio stations distinct from their US counterparts as well as the CBC, all of which are mandated to play Canadian talent that doesn't make it onto commercial radio) will get some money.
And they do—not always much, but a nice benefit and a stepping stone to a successful career.There are perfectly good reasons to be opposed to this levy, or to dislike either the SOCAN or the federal arts-funding system (especially when the whole sector is destabilized by the expectation of unknown cuts to unknown areas, as we are now—makes budgeting tricky), but totally misunderstanding both isn't a great example.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522866</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522504</id>
	<title>If it were anywhere else I'd say YRO, but CANADA?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268925720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Canada is to piracy like Nigeria is to 419 scams.  'nuff said!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Canada is to piracy like Nigeria is to 419 scams .
'nuff said !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Canada is to piracy like Nigeria is to 419 scams.
'nuff said!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522608</id>
	<title>Stupid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268926140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Annoying government intervention is annoying. Can we fire these egomaniacs who keep trying to tell us how to use our toys?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Annoying government intervention is annoying .
Can we fire these egomaniacs who keep trying to tell us how to use our toys ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Annoying government intervention is annoying.
Can we fire these egomaniacs who keep trying to tell us how to use our toys?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525010</id>
	<title>Re:They finally realize they can't stop us</title>
	<author>deains</author>
	<datestamp>1268937420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Decriminalise weed? This is Canada we're talking about...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Decriminalise weed ?
This is Canada we 're talking about.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Decriminalise weed?
This is Canada we're talking about...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522816</id>
	<title>Re:The levy only compensates Major Label artists</title>
	<author>JobyOne</author>
	<datestamp>1268927040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course they are. They don't have enough money to be of concern to a government.</p><p>In all seriousness though, this is how it <i>always</i> goes: somebody has a halfway decent idea but somewhere along the line of being implemented it gets perverted by the special interest with the most money. It's always subtle though, that way the special interests get what they need and the politicians still get PR points.</p><p>Remember the increase in tobacco taxes here in the US recently? Pre-rolled cigarettes (made by giant corporations) saw a modest increase in taxation of about 150\%. Rolling tobacco (mostly made by smaller, often local businesses) saw their taxes increase by 2,200\%.</p><p>The net result? Big tobacco actually gets <i>more</i> business as people ditch the now-obscenely-expensive rolling tobacco, so they're happy. Politicians get to say they're raising money and helping the budget. In reality though, we're driving small businesses down and moving smokers into spending their money to buy an arguably <i>more</i> dangerous cigarette while at the same time not supporting their own local economies.</p><p>I basically assume anything I hear on the news or from a government press conference is at least a gross misrepresentation - if not a flat-out lie.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course they are .
They do n't have enough money to be of concern to a government.In all seriousness though , this is how it always goes : somebody has a halfway decent idea but somewhere along the line of being implemented it gets perverted by the special interest with the most money .
It 's always subtle though , that way the special interests get what they need and the politicians still get PR points.Remember the increase in tobacco taxes here in the US recently ?
Pre-rolled cigarettes ( made by giant corporations ) saw a modest increase in taxation of about 150 \ % .
Rolling tobacco ( mostly made by smaller , often local businesses ) saw their taxes increase by 2,200 \ % .The net result ?
Big tobacco actually gets more business as people ditch the now-obscenely-expensive rolling tobacco , so they 're happy .
Politicians get to say they 're raising money and helping the budget .
In reality though , we 're driving small businesses down and moving smokers into spending their money to buy an arguably more dangerous cigarette while at the same time not supporting their own local economies.I basically assume anything I hear on the news or from a government press conference is at least a gross misrepresentation - if not a flat-out lie .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course they are.
They don't have enough money to be of concern to a government.In all seriousness though, this is how it always goes: somebody has a halfway decent idea but somewhere along the line of being implemented it gets perverted by the special interest with the most money.
It's always subtle though, that way the special interests get what they need and the politicians still get PR points.Remember the increase in tobacco taxes here in the US recently?
Pre-rolled cigarettes (made by giant corporations) saw a modest increase in taxation of about 150\%.
Rolling tobacco (mostly made by smaller, often local businesses) saw their taxes increase by 2,200\%.The net result?
Big tobacco actually gets more business as people ditch the now-obscenely-expensive rolling tobacco, so they're happy.
Politicians get to say they're raising money and helping the budget.
In reality though, we're driving small businesses down and moving smokers into spending their money to buy an arguably more dangerous cigarette while at the same time not supporting their own local economies.I basically assume anything I hear on the news or from a government press conference is at least a gross misrepresentation - if not a flat-out lie.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525248</id>
	<title>Re:What?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268938560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All I know is up here it costs me more to buy blank CDs than blank DVDs</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All I know is up here it costs me more to buy blank CDs than blank DVDs</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All I know is up here it costs me more to buy blank CDs than blank DVDs</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523410</id>
	<title>Come on Liberals</title>
	<author>Deliveranc3</author>
	<datestamp>1268930100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Get us this option, please.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Get us this option , please .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get us this option, please.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523556</id>
	<title>Re:Ugh, this again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268930760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We don't get Amazon mp3 in Canada.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We do n't get Amazon mp3 in Canada .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We don't get Amazon mp3 in Canada.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522466</id>
	<title>They finally realize they can't stop us</title>
	<author>voodoo cheesecake</author>
	<datestamp>1268925540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wish they would do this with my rolling papers and decriminalize non-medicinal marijuana!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wish they would do this with my rolling papers and decriminalize non-medicinal marijuana !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wish they would do this with my rolling papers and decriminalize non-medicinal marijuana!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31526002</id>
	<title>Re:Let's go all the way</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268941500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Clearly the best solution is to tax taxes, so that the taxes taxed by taxing taxes serve to offset those who skip out on their taxes.  We could even start in Texas!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Clearly the best solution is to tax taxes , so that the taxes taxed by taxing taxes serve to offset those who skip out on their taxes .
We could even start in Texas !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Clearly the best solution is to tax taxes, so that the taxes taxed by taxing taxes serve to offset those who skip out on their taxes.
We could even start in Texas!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31540764</id>
	<title>This levy is terrible for a lot of reasons</title>
	<author>Dixie\_Flatline</author>
	<datestamp>1269023520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Copying is ALREADY legal, irrespective of the levy. This is the biggest problem with the levy.</p><p>Downloading music is NOT illegal. Uploading music IS illegal. Leaving the music sitting around with your file sharing client open is NOT illegal, because you're not actively giving it to someone. It's murky and weird.</p><p>If there was a levy on bullets so that we compensated the families of victims of gun crimes, it wouldn't make shooting people legal.</p><p>This is one of MANY reasons why the levy is a terrible idea. It gives people the idea that copyright infringement is now both legal and, to an extent, moral. If they've paid up front, why NOT download music?</p><p>I pay for all my music. The music has value to me. To charge ME a levy is the height of bad planning. Why should I bother paying for my music in a normal way (like the iTunes music store, for instance) if I've kind of already paid for it through this device tax?</p><p>It's a poorly thought out system. I'm all for compensating artists (obviously, if I'm the kind of person that pays for the music at a time where it's so easily acquired for free), but there has to be a better way than over-charging people like me, and under-charging those that download indiscriminately. It's a money grab for an industry and system that are antiquated.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Copying is ALREADY legal , irrespective of the levy .
This is the biggest problem with the levy.Downloading music is NOT illegal .
Uploading music IS illegal .
Leaving the music sitting around with your file sharing client open is NOT illegal , because you 're not actively giving it to someone .
It 's murky and weird.If there was a levy on bullets so that we compensated the families of victims of gun crimes , it would n't make shooting people legal.This is one of MANY reasons why the levy is a terrible idea .
It gives people the idea that copyright infringement is now both legal and , to an extent , moral .
If they 've paid up front , why NOT download music ? I pay for all my music .
The music has value to me .
To charge ME a levy is the height of bad planning .
Why should I bother paying for my music in a normal way ( like the iTunes music store , for instance ) if I 've kind of already paid for it through this device tax ? It 's a poorly thought out system .
I 'm all for compensating artists ( obviously , if I 'm the kind of person that pays for the music at a time where it 's so easily acquired for free ) , but there has to be a better way than over-charging people like me , and under-charging those that download indiscriminately .
It 's a money grab for an industry and system that are antiquated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Copying is ALREADY legal, irrespective of the levy.
This is the biggest problem with the levy.Downloading music is NOT illegal.
Uploading music IS illegal.
Leaving the music sitting around with your file sharing client open is NOT illegal, because you're not actively giving it to someone.
It's murky and weird.If there was a levy on bullets so that we compensated the families of victims of gun crimes, it wouldn't make shooting people legal.This is one of MANY reasons why the levy is a terrible idea.
It gives people the idea that copyright infringement is now both legal and, to an extent, moral.
If they've paid up front, why NOT download music?I pay for all my music.
The music has value to me.
To charge ME a levy is the height of bad planning.
Why should I bother paying for my music in a normal way (like the iTunes music store, for instance) if I've kind of already paid for it through this device tax?It's a poorly thought out system.
I'm all for compensating artists (obviously, if I'm the kind of person that pays for the music at a time where it's so easily acquired for free), but there has to be a better way than over-charging people like me, and under-charging those that download indiscriminately.
It's a money grab for an industry and system that are antiquated.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31527952</id>
	<title>Nothing to see here, folks</title>
	<author>gordguide</author>
	<datestamp>1268903820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some baseless rambling by a non-governing member of the opposition. The government of the day is against the idea completely. He could introduce a Private Member's Bill, but let me put it this way:</p><p>You could lose a finger for every Private Member's Bill that made it into law in Canada in the last 100 years, and still be able to touch type 60 wpm.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some baseless rambling by a non-governing member of the opposition .
The government of the day is against the idea completely .
He could introduce a Private Member 's Bill , but let me put it this way : You could lose a finger for every Private Member 's Bill that made it into law in Canada in the last 100 years , and still be able to touch type 60 wpm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some baseless rambling by a non-governing member of the opposition.
The government of the day is against the idea completely.
He could introduce a Private Member's Bill, but let me put it this way:You could lose a finger for every Private Member's Bill that made it into law in Canada in the last 100 years, and still be able to touch type 60 wpm.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31540868</id>
	<title>Re:Of course the consertatives oppose it...</title>
	<author>Dixie\_Flatline</author>
	<datestamp>1269023880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you're giving them too much credit. The Conservatives oppose it because taxes and levies are unpopular. Politically, it's as simple as that.</p><p>None of the parties have given the levy enough thought; there are so many reasons why it's bad and the product of old-school, bricks-and-mortar-store thinking.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you 're giving them too much credit .
The Conservatives oppose it because taxes and levies are unpopular .
Politically , it 's as simple as that.None of the parties have given the levy enough thought ; there are so many reasons why it 's bad and the product of old-school , bricks-and-mortar-store thinking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you're giving them too much credit.
The Conservatives oppose it because taxes and levies are unpopular.
Politically, it's as simple as that.None of the parties have given the levy enough thought; there are so many reasons why it's bad and the product of old-school, bricks-and-mortar-store thinking.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522544</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31531608</id>
	<title>Re:The levy only compensates Major Label artists</title>
	<author>sachamm</author>
	<datestamp>1268921520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can confirm this. My dad was in an indie roots/folk band a couple/few decades back ("Les Fr&#233;re Mallet"). He certainly never signed a record deal with the major labels, but still receives royalty cheques for their one album every once in a while.

I have no idea if their accounting is accurate or fair, but they do pay people that are registered with SOCAN.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can confirm this .
My dad was in an indie roots/folk band a couple/few decades back ( " Les Fr   re Mallet " ) .
He certainly never signed a record deal with the major labels , but still receives royalty cheques for their one album every once in a while .
I have no idea if their accounting is accurate or fair , but they do pay people that are registered with SOCAN .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can confirm this.
My dad was in an indie roots/folk band a couple/few decades back ("Les Frére Mallet").
He certainly never signed a record deal with the major labels, but still receives royalty cheques for their one album every once in a while.
I have no idea if their accounting is accurate or fair, but they do pay people that are registered with SOCAN.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522432</id>
	<title>The levy only compensates Major Label artists</title>
	<author>commodore64\_love</author>
	<datestamp>1268925360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Indepedent artists are still left out in the cold.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Indepedent artists are still left out in the cold .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indepedent artists are still left out in the cold.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523818</id>
	<title>Not again...</title>
	<author>yabos</author>
	<datestamp>1268932080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>How many<br>
<a href="http://news.cnet.com/No-iPod-tax-for-Canada/2100-1041\_3-5809117.html" title="cnet.com">http://news.cnet.com/No-iPod-tax-for-Canada/2100-1041\_3-5809117.html</a> [cnet.com] <br>
times<br>
<a href="http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=235987" title="nationalpost.com">http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=235987</a> [nationalpost.com] <br>
are they going to try and bring this tax in?  This has to be the 3rd or 4th time this has come up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How many http : //news.cnet.com/No-iPod-tax-for-Canada/2100-1041 \ _3-5809117.html [ cnet.com ] times http : //www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html ? id = 235987 [ nationalpost.com ] are they going to try and bring this tax in ?
This has to be the 3rd or 4th time this has come up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many
http://news.cnet.com/No-iPod-tax-for-Canada/2100-1041\_3-5809117.html [cnet.com] 
times
http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=235987 [nationalpost.com] 
are they going to try and bring this tax in?
This has to be the 3rd or 4th time this has come up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31526972</id>
	<title>Re:Non-Canadians; UPC</title>
	<author>debrain</author>
	<datestamp>1268944260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So if you happen not to be Canadian yet are the author of music that has been copied in Canada, how do you get into SOCAN? And it appears you need a UPC to get into SoundScan, and to get a UPC, you need at least some sort of label (even if not major). Besides, I didn't see anything on your flowchart about download sales (e.g. iTunes Store).</p></div><p>You could have a claim under the NAFTA.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So if you happen not to be Canadian yet are the author of music that has been copied in Canada , how do you get into SOCAN ?
And it appears you need a UPC to get into SoundScan , and to get a UPC , you need at least some sort of label ( even if not major ) .
Besides , I did n't see anything on your flowchart about download sales ( e.g .
iTunes Store ) .You could have a claim under the NAFTA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So if you happen not to be Canadian yet are the author of music that has been copied in Canada, how do you get into SOCAN?
And it appears you need a UPC to get into SoundScan, and to get a UPC, you need at least some sort of label (even if not major).
Besides, I didn't see anything on your flowchart about download sales (e.g.
iTunes Store).You could have a claim under the NAFTA.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524206</id>
	<title>Re:Fuck Off, Eh</title>
	<author>c\_sd\_m</author>
	<datestamp>1268933820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's like healthcare: pay a little now and get protection from bankruptcy later. Plus it lets Canada legislate where the media tax proceeds are going.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's like healthcare : pay a little now and get protection from bankruptcy later .
Plus it lets Canada legislate where the media tax proceeds are going .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's like healthcare: pay a little now and get protection from bankruptcy later.
Plus it lets Canada legislate where the media tax proceeds are going.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522544</id>
	<title>Of course the consertatives oppose it...</title>
	<author>mark-t</author>
	<datestamp>1268925840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>They want to criminalize most forms of private copying in the digital age anyways, so it wouldn't make any sense to continue to have a levy for something that is illegal (contrary to what a lot of people think, the current levy only exists to compensate for private use copying, which is perfectly legal, not piracy).</htmltext>
<tokenext>They want to criminalize most forms of private copying in the digital age anyways , so it would n't make any sense to continue to have a levy for something that is illegal ( contrary to what a lot of people think , the current levy only exists to compensate for private use copying , which is perfectly legal , not piracy ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They want to criminalize most forms of private copying in the digital age anyways, so it wouldn't make any sense to continue to have a levy for something that is illegal (contrary to what a lot of people think, the current levy only exists to compensate for private use copying, which is perfectly legal, not piracy).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31530764</id>
	<title>Re:Non-Canadians; UPC</title>
	<author>Stereoface</author>
	<datestamp>1268915820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>SOCAN pays out to the US Performing rights agencies quarterly. As do all PROs in the world. It takes time, but it works. ASCAP and BMI are the largest of the three PROs in the US, followed by SESAC.
But what you're describing is for performing rights- ie. Radio play. Live shows, TV movies, ect....

If you are collecting revenue from itunes, that's a mechanical royalty, and that is handled by the CMRRA in Canada, or the Harry Fox Agency in the US.

As a US citizen, you don't have to worry about it- you just pick between ASCAP and BMI.</htmltext>
<tokenext>SOCAN pays out to the US Performing rights agencies quarterly .
As do all PROs in the world .
It takes time , but it works .
ASCAP and BMI are the largest of the three PROs in the US , followed by SESAC .
But what you 're describing is for performing rights- ie .
Radio play .
Live shows , TV movies , ect... . If you are collecting revenue from itunes , that 's a mechanical royalty , and that is handled by the CMRRA in Canada , or the Harry Fox Agency in the US .
As a US citizen , you do n't have to worry about it- you just pick between ASCAP and BMI .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SOCAN pays out to the US Performing rights agencies quarterly.
As do all PROs in the world.
It takes time, but it works.
ASCAP and BMI are the largest of the three PROs in the US, followed by SESAC.
But what you're describing is for performing rights- ie.
Radio play.
Live shows, TV movies, ect....

If you are collecting revenue from itunes, that's a mechanical royalty, and that is handled by the CMRRA in Canada, or the Harry Fox Agency in the US.
As a US citizen, you don't have to worry about it- you just pick between ASCAP and BMI.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31529634</id>
	<title>Re:Parkinson's Law</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268909760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your question should also involve which Canadian artists are receiving money. Is it simply the artists that are with the CRIA (Canada's RIAA)?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your question should also involve which Canadian artists are receiving money .
Is it simply the artists that are with the CRIA ( Canada 's RIAA ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your question should also involve which Canadian artists are receiving money.
Is it simply the artists that are with the CRIA (Canada's RIAA)?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522866</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522774</id>
	<title>Forget the MP3 tax...</title>
	<author>Jabrwock</author>
	<datestamp>1268926860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm more interested in the other private members bill, the one that would expand the definition of fair-dealing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm more interested in the other private members bill , the one that would expand the definition of fair-dealing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm more interested in the other private members bill, the one that would expand the definition of fair-dealing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522698</id>
	<title>Computes</title>
	<author>wisnoskij</author>
	<datestamp>1268926560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The original article mentions the tax is also proposed for computers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The original article mentions the tax is also proposed for computers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The original article mentions the tax is also proposed for computers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522674</id>
	<title>If I would have pay the tax</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268926380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I would have pay the tax I would feel quite entitled to pirate music, since I "pay" for it. I mean there is something wrong with this method.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I would have pay the tax I would feel quite entitled to pirate music , since I " pay " for it .
I mean there is something wrong with this method .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I would have pay the tax I would feel quite entitled to pirate music, since I "pay" for it.
I mean there is something wrong with this method.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31543680</id>
	<title>in Italy....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268992560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...since january 2010, we have taxes on Hard Disks, USB Memory, Blank CD&amp;DVD and Mp3 Player.<br>For us is law, is not a proposal.<br>God save us, that's just unbelievable.<br>But it is true.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...since january 2010 , we have taxes on Hard Disks , USB Memory , Blank CD&amp;DVD and Mp3 Player.For us is law , is not a proposal.God save us , that 's just unbelievable.But it is true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...since january 2010, we have taxes on Hard Disks, USB Memory, Blank CD&amp;DVD and Mp3 Player.For us is law, is not a proposal.God save us, that's just unbelievable.But it is true.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522404</id>
	<title>First psot</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1268925240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First poost, eh?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First poost , eh ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First poost, eh?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524368</id>
	<title>Re:What about other data storage devices?</title>
	<author>Idiomatick</author>
	<datestamp>1268934420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd say the vast vast majority of mp3 players involve piracy. Only a chunk of hard drives are though. So the tax there would be misguided. Feel free to build a usb stick to avoid it. <br> <br>The law isn't perfect TRUE. But it sure as fuck is better than having the majority of Canadians commiting a crime. (If MOST of a population commits a crime it shouldn't be against the law). We can fix the details later, but for now file sharing should be legalized pretty much however it can get through.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd say the vast vast majority of mp3 players involve piracy .
Only a chunk of hard drives are though .
So the tax there would be misguided .
Feel free to build a usb stick to avoid it .
The law is n't perfect TRUE .
But it sure as fuck is better than having the majority of Canadians commiting a crime .
( If MOST of a population commits a crime it should n't be against the law ) .
We can fix the details later , but for now file sharing should be legalized pretty much however it can get through .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd say the vast vast majority of mp3 players involve piracy.
Only a chunk of hard drives are though.
So the tax there would be misguided.
Feel free to build a usb stick to avoid it.
The law isn't perfect TRUE.
But it sure as fuck is better than having the majority of Canadians commiting a crime.
(If MOST of a population commits a crime it shouldn't be against the law).
We can fix the details later, but for now file sharing should be legalized pretty much however it can get through.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522634</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525306</id>
	<title>Finally something that doesn't screw me over</title>
	<author>roman\_mir</author>
	<datestamp>1268938740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Finally some stupid levy idea that does not cause me to pay for something I don't use.</p><p>MP3 players will have a levy on them?  Go right ahead.  Can we please get rid of the other levies though, like on hard drives and blank DVDs?  I don't own an mp3 player, so it does not concern me, but I don't listen to music at all, and the other levies are definitely a discrimination against myself and the other people who do not download or listen to music but who do buy blank media and hard-drives.</p><p>Thanks, idiots in the government.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Finally some stupid levy idea that does not cause me to pay for something I do n't use.MP3 players will have a levy on them ?
Go right ahead .
Can we please get rid of the other levies though , like on hard drives and blank DVDs ?
I do n't own an mp3 player , so it does not concern me , but I do n't listen to music at all , and the other levies are definitely a discrimination against myself and the other people who do not download or listen to music but who do buy blank media and hard-drives.Thanks , idiots in the government .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finally some stupid levy idea that does not cause me to pay for something I don't use.MP3 players will have a levy on them?
Go right ahead.
Can we please get rid of the other levies though, like on hard drives and blank DVDs?
I don't own an mp3 player, so it does not concern me, but I don't listen to music at all, and the other levies are definitely a discrimination against myself and the other people who do not download or listen to music but who do buy blank media and hard-drives.Thanks, idiots in the government.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522880</id>
	<title>Re:What about other data storage devices?</title>
	<author>Galestar</author>
	<datestamp>1268927400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>From the article:<p><div class="quote"><p>It would extend the private copying levy &mdash; which adds a small tax to all blank media, such as CDs and DVDs &mdash; to devices that can reproduce media, including MP3 players and <b>computers</b>.</p></div><p>
My question is; which part of the computer? I custom build all my computers, so which individual part do I need to order from the US?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the article : It would extend the private copying levy    which adds a small tax to all blank media , such as CDs and DVDs    to devices that can reproduce media , including MP3 players and computers .
My question is ; which part of the computer ?
I custom build all my computers , so which individual part do I need to order from the US ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the article:It would extend the private copying levy — which adds a small tax to all blank media, such as CDs and DVDs — to devices that can reproduce media, including MP3 players and computers.
My question is; which part of the computer?
I custom build all my computers, so which individual part do I need to order from the US?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522634</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522478</id>
	<title>A great idea</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268925600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A sensible solution to something which is not going away. music piracy is here to stay and a small levy on mp3 players is a great way to recoup some of the lost earnings.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A sensible solution to something which is not going away .
music piracy is here to stay and a small levy on mp3 players is a great way to recoup some of the lost earnings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A sensible solution to something which is not going away.
music piracy is here to stay and a small levy on mp3 players is a great way to recoup some of the lost earnings.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525012</id>
	<title>Re:The levy only compensates Major Label artists</title>
	<author>jmac\_the\_man</author>
	<datestamp>1268937420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's Canada. EVERYONE is out in the cold.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's Canada .
EVERYONE is out in the cold .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's Canada.
EVERYONE is out in the cold.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522902</id>
	<title>Re:What about other data storage devices?</title>
	<author>srussia</author>
	<datestamp>1268927460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Hmmm.... I don't own an MP3 player.  Any MP3 files I might have are stored on my hard disk drive.  If I wanted to play them on an MP3 player I'd probably build one myself (plans are available on the Internet) and store the MP3s on a USB drive.  Surprising that they are stopping at simple MP3 players (which tend to be overpriced anyway) and not going after any and all data storage devices.</p><p>Broken model --&gt; Broken solutions.</p></div><p>All the music I listen to are re-performances in the Zenph sense (http://www.zenph.com/reperformance.html). Except where they use a piano and high-def MIDI, I use a different kind of electro-acoustic transducer and a different encoding scheme.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmmm.... I do n't own an MP3 player .
Any MP3 files I might have are stored on my hard disk drive .
If I wanted to play them on an MP3 player I 'd probably build one myself ( plans are available on the Internet ) and store the MP3s on a USB drive .
Surprising that they are stopping at simple MP3 players ( which tend to be overpriced anyway ) and not going after any and all data storage devices.Broken model -- &gt; Broken solutions.All the music I listen to are re-performances in the Zenph sense ( http : //www.zenph.com/reperformance.html ) .
Except where they use a piano and high-def MIDI , I use a different kind of electro-acoustic transducer and a different encoding scheme .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmmm.... I don't own an MP3 player.
Any MP3 files I might have are stored on my hard disk drive.
If I wanted to play them on an MP3 player I'd probably build one myself (plans are available on the Internet) and store the MP3s on a USB drive.
Surprising that they are stopping at simple MP3 players (which tend to be overpriced anyway) and not going after any and all data storage devices.Broken model --&gt; Broken solutions.All the music I listen to are re-performances in the Zenph sense (http://www.zenph.com/reperformance.html).
Except where they use a piano and high-def MIDI, I use a different kind of electro-acoustic transducer and a different encoding scheme.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522634</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522848</id>
	<title>What?</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1268927280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is partly due to a levy imposed on blank media, CD-Rs and cassette tapes,</p></div><p>So, blank CD-Rs and tapes are somehow different than "blank media"?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is partly due to a levy imposed on blank media , CD-Rs and cassette tapes,So , blank CD-Rs and tapes are somehow different than " blank media " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is partly due to a levy imposed on blank media, CD-Rs and cassette tapes,So, blank CD-Rs and tapes are somehow different than "blank media"?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522408</id>
	<title>Useful</title>
	<author>symes</author>
	<datestamp>1268925300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A little bit extra for an aweful lot more - this makes perfectly reasonable sense. Lets just hope the money gets to the struggling artists!</htmltext>
<tokenext>A little bit extra for an aweful lot more - this makes perfectly reasonable sense .
Lets just hope the money gets to the struggling artists !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A little bit extra for an aweful lot more - this makes perfectly reasonable sense.
Lets just hope the money gets to the struggling artists!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524218</id>
	<title>Re:Let's go all the way</title>
	<author>mandelbr0t</author>
	<datestamp>1268933880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ah. NOW you're thinking like the NDP<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah .
NOW you 're thinking like the NDP : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah.
NOW you're thinking like the NDP :-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523928</id>
	<title>This was discussed back in 2002 - it won't die!</title>
	<author>rcpitt</author>
	<datestamp>1268932560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Back in 2002 I spoke before the Copyright Board of Canada about the Blank Media Levy. Then, the CPCC was asking for <a href="http://richard.pacdat.net/Digital\_Rag/2002/formal\_objection1-0.htm#\_Toc8101984" title="pacdat.net">$10 per Gigabyte</a> [pacdat.net] which in today's light would be even more absurd than it was then.
<p>
The point is that no matter what the levy, in today's wired world the only losers would be the Canadian retail sellers of such items - because any levy would be enough to more than pay for the shipping of a unit from outside the country - so neither the musicians nor the retailers would profit.
</p><p>
kind of makes me wonder if it is the US resellers who are behind this<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Back in 2002 I spoke before the Copyright Board of Canada about the Blank Media Levy .
Then , the CPCC was asking for $ 10 per Gigabyte [ pacdat.net ] which in today 's light would be even more absurd than it was then .
The point is that no matter what the levy , in today 's wired world the only losers would be the Canadian retail sellers of such items - because any levy would be enough to more than pay for the shipping of a unit from outside the country - so neither the musicians nor the retailers would profit .
kind of makes me wonder if it is the US resellers who are behind this ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back in 2002 I spoke before the Copyright Board of Canada about the Blank Media Levy.
Then, the CPCC was asking for $10 per Gigabyte [pacdat.net] which in today's light would be even more absurd than it was then.
The point is that no matter what the levy, in today's wired world the only losers would be the Canadian retail sellers of such items - because any levy would be enough to more than pay for the shipping of a unit from outside the country - so neither the musicians nor the retailers would profit.
kind of makes me wonder if it is the US resellers who are behind this ;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524572</id>
	<title>Re:Parkinson's Law</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268935440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1587194&amp;cid=31522562" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1587194&amp;cid=31522562</a> [slashdot.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1587194&amp;cid = 31522562 [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1587194&amp;cid=31522562 [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522866</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525230</id>
	<title>Re:Non-Canadians; UPC</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268938440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You don't need to be with a label to get a UPC--any competent CD manufacturer will provide you with one as part of your mfg package, for around an extra $10. (Speaking from experience, last summer, via <a href="http://www.mmsdirect.com/" title="mmsdirect.com" rel="nofollow">MMS</a> [mmsdirect.com].)</p><p>You need the same UPC to sell CDs on Amazon, BTW.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't need to be with a label to get a UPC--any competent CD manufacturer will provide you with one as part of your mfg package , for around an extra $ 10 .
( Speaking from experience , last summer , via MMS [ mmsdirect.com ] .
) You need the same UPC to sell CDs on Amazon , BTW .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't need to be with a label to get a UPC--any competent CD manufacturer will provide you with one as part of your mfg package, for around an extra $10.
(Speaking from experience, last summer, via MMS [mmsdirect.com].
)You need the same UPC to sell CDs on Amazon, BTW.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522866</id>
	<title>Parkinson's Law</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268927340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Parkinson's Law, theorized by C. Northcote Parkinson, a British Royal Navy historian and author, explains this phenomenon by stating that "work expands to fill the time available for its completion" and in bureaucratic organizations, the number of people required to do the work will continually rise whether the actual volume of work stays the same, increases, decreases or disappears.</p></div><p>
The question is how much do Canadian artists get handed from the government in the existing "tax the media" scheme?  I'd warrant they don't get anything and that the government keeps track of what they collect and injects "money into supporting artists, including more money for the Canada Council for the Arts and the Canada Music Fund." (from TFA).  I mean, what else could they do?  Say I was a terrible artist (not too much of a stretch) and I put out a terrible album with nothing on it that anybody would want.  Do I have my hand out for the MP3 tax?  How much would the government give me?  How would they determine that?
<br> <br>
They can't.  And they don't.   This is a stupid idea based on another stupid idea.
<br> <br>
Want to see what they do with the money?

</p><ul>
<li> <a href="http://www.canadacouncil.ca/" title="canadacouncil.ca">Canada Council for the Arts</a> [canadacouncil.ca]  Nobody on the front page is under 50.</li><li> <a href="http://www.pch.gc.ca/cmf-music" title="pch.gc.ca">Canada Music Fund</a> [pch.gc.ca]  They help you be successful as an artist.  Oh the irony...</li></ul><p>

So they tax our media.  Then they give it to bureaucratic organizations that consume themselves.  And the indy rock band gets?  You guessed it.  The shaft.

And we are proposing to extend this to new media.  Excellent.  Let me just get out my wallet...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Parkinson 's Law , theorized by C. Northcote Parkinson , a British Royal Navy historian and author , explains this phenomenon by stating that " work expands to fill the time available for its completion " and in bureaucratic organizations , the number of people required to do the work will continually rise whether the actual volume of work stays the same , increases , decreases or disappears .
The question is how much do Canadian artists get handed from the government in the existing " tax the media " scheme ?
I 'd warrant they do n't get anything and that the government keeps track of what they collect and injects " money into supporting artists , including more money for the Canada Council for the Arts and the Canada Music Fund .
" ( from TFA ) .
I mean , what else could they do ?
Say I was a terrible artist ( not too much of a stretch ) and I put out a terrible album with nothing on it that anybody would want .
Do I have my hand out for the MP3 tax ?
How much would the government give me ?
How would they determine that ?
They ca n't .
And they do n't .
This is a stupid idea based on another stupid idea .
Want to see what they do with the money ?
Canada Council for the Arts [ canadacouncil.ca ] Nobody on the front page is under 50 .
Canada Music Fund [ pch.gc.ca ] They help you be successful as an artist .
Oh the irony.. . So they tax our media .
Then they give it to bureaucratic organizations that consume themselves .
And the indy rock band gets ?
You guessed it .
The shaft .
And we are proposing to extend this to new media .
Excellent. Let me just get out my wallet.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Parkinson's Law, theorized by C. Northcote Parkinson, a British Royal Navy historian and author, explains this phenomenon by stating that "work expands to fill the time available for its completion" and in bureaucratic organizations, the number of people required to do the work will continually rise whether the actual volume of work stays the same, increases, decreases or disappears.
The question is how much do Canadian artists get handed from the government in the existing "tax the media" scheme?
I'd warrant they don't get anything and that the government keeps track of what they collect and injects "money into supporting artists, including more money for the Canada Council for the Arts and the Canada Music Fund.
" (from TFA).
I mean, what else could they do?
Say I was a terrible artist (not too much of a stretch) and I put out a terrible album with nothing on it that anybody would want.
Do I have my hand out for the MP3 tax?
How much would the government give me?
How would they determine that?
They can't.
And they don't.
This is a stupid idea based on another stupid idea.
Want to see what they do with the money?
Canada Council for the Arts [canadacouncil.ca]  Nobody on the front page is under 50.
Canada Music Fund [pch.gc.ca]  They help you be successful as an artist.
Oh the irony...

So they tax our media.
Then they give it to bureaucratic organizations that consume themselves.
And the indy rock band gets?
You guessed it.
The shaft.
And we are proposing to extend this to new media.
Excellent.  Let me just get out my wallet...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522426</id>
	<title>Well, I know which country hosts my next VPS</title>
	<author>autocracy</author>
	<datestamp>1268925360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just saying...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just saying... : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just saying... :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524694</id>
	<title>Re:Common Sense</title>
	<author>Dzimas</author>
	<datestamp>1268936160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The levy is ridiculously outdated, to the point of being inconsequential. The rate is 24 cents per blank cassette tape (longer than 40 min), and 29 cents per blank MiniDisc, CD-R or CD-RW. They might as well tax phonograph cylinders and 8-track tapes - it would have about the same impact.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The levy is ridiculously outdated , to the point of being inconsequential .
The rate is 24 cents per blank cassette tape ( longer than 40 min ) , and 29 cents per blank MiniDisc , CD-R or CD-RW .
They might as well tax phonograph cylinders and 8-track tapes - it would have about the same impact .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The levy is ridiculously outdated, to the point of being inconsequential.
The rate is 24 cents per blank cassette tape (longer than 40 min), and 29 cents per blank MiniDisc, CD-R or CD-RW.
They might as well tax phonograph cylinders and 8-track tapes - it would have about the same impact.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522460</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523262</id>
	<title>Re:Let's go all the way</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1268929200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except you've got it backwards - Here in Canada, we don't define downloading music as an illegal activity, or if we do, we do NOTHING about it. In fact, I think its only Movies (which seems kind of double standards to me but hey its Canada). I know tons of people who download entire albums and never get so much as throttling from their ISP. I know a few people who tried to download a movie from Bittorrent a few times - WOOSH Throttled down within half an hour, and an email or phone call about not downloading that stuff because its illegal.</p><p>This tax suggests that downloading music IS Legal, not illegal. To put it in a Car Analogy:</p><p>It'd be like putting a tax on Electrical cars since they don't consume as much if any Gasoline. In most cases, this means money is coming out of regular consumers pockets and into those of an oil company or music label - which doesn't seem right - but on the other hand, its not punishing people for using their ingenuity.</p><p>Savvy?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except you 've got it backwards - Here in Canada , we do n't define downloading music as an illegal activity , or if we do , we do NOTHING about it .
In fact , I think its only Movies ( which seems kind of double standards to me but hey its Canada ) .
I know tons of people who download entire albums and never get so much as throttling from their ISP .
I know a few people who tried to download a movie from Bittorrent a few times - WOOSH Throttled down within half an hour , and an email or phone call about not downloading that stuff because its illegal.This tax suggests that downloading music IS Legal , not illegal .
To put it in a Car Analogy : It 'd be like putting a tax on Electrical cars since they do n't consume as much if any Gasoline .
In most cases , this means money is coming out of regular consumers pockets and into those of an oil company or music label - which does n't seem right - but on the other hand , its not punishing people for using their ingenuity.Savvy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except you've got it backwards - Here in Canada, we don't define downloading music as an illegal activity, or if we do, we do NOTHING about it.
In fact, I think its only Movies (which seems kind of double standards to me but hey its Canada).
I know tons of people who download entire albums and never get so much as throttling from their ISP.
I know a few people who tried to download a movie from Bittorrent a few times - WOOSH Throttled down within half an hour, and an email or phone call about not downloading that stuff because its illegal.This tax suggests that downloading music IS Legal, not illegal.
To put it in a Car Analogy:It'd be like putting a tax on Electrical cars since they don't consume as much if any Gasoline.
In most cases, this means money is coming out of regular consumers pockets and into those of an oil company or music label - which doesn't seem right - but on the other hand, its not punishing people for using their ingenuity.Savvy?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522462</id>
	<title>A good bad thing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268925540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's nice that we don't face the same persecution the Yanks face from the MAFIAA, I like my shared music... And healthcare<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)
But this system will alienate the one or two people who do still pay for music and cause them to re-evaluate their position on piracy. If it's justified through yet another tax, then why pay for music at all? And... what's the difference between music, movies and games? A bitstream by any other name is still just a bitstream.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's nice that we do n't face the same persecution the Yanks face from the MAFIAA , I like my shared music... And healthcare ; ) But this system will alienate the one or two people who do still pay for music and cause them to re-evaluate their position on piracy .
If it 's justified through yet another tax , then why pay for music at all ?
And... what 's the difference between music , movies and games ?
A bitstream by any other name is still just a bitstream .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's nice that we don't face the same persecution the Yanks face from the MAFIAA, I like my shared music... And healthcare ;)
But this system will alienate the one or two people who do still pay for music and cause them to re-evaluate their position on piracy.
If it's justified through yet another tax, then why pay for music at all?
And... what's the difference between music, movies and games?
A bitstream by any other name is still just a bitstream.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525550</id>
	<title>Communist in Canada?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268939940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>[sarcasm] Communism in Canada? Never. [/sarcasm]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>[ sarcasm ] Communism in Canada ?
Never. [ /sarcasm ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[sarcasm] Communism in Canada?
Never. [/sarcasm]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522598</id>
	<title>Re:Useful</title>
	<author>Yvan256</author>
	<datestamp>1268926140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Payment\_pending;\_Canadian\_recording\_industry\_set\_for\_six\_billion\_penalties\%3F" title="wikinews.org">Not effective at all</a> [wikinews.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not effective at all [ wikinews.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not effective at all [wikinews.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522526</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524264</id>
	<title>Re:Let's go all the way</title>
	<author>Idiomatick</author>
	<datestamp>1268934000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>MP3 players are pointless WITHOUT filesharing though. I mean most crowbars aren't used in break and enters. The vast vast majority of mp3 players are used with file sharing. <br> <br>For example, iPod has a 160GB. If you buy from iTunes, songs cost $1.29. The cost of filling an iPod is then $52,838.40. If you think that people are sinking that much money into their mp3 players you would be really really wrong.<br> <br>

So the crowbar comparison is completely unfair. I'd be totally fine with taxing mp3 players, hell double the cost and make mp3 sharing totally legal. I'm sure the vast majority of people would be ok with that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>MP3 players are pointless WITHOUT filesharing though .
I mean most crowbars are n't used in break and enters .
The vast vast majority of mp3 players are used with file sharing .
For example , iPod has a 160GB .
If you buy from iTunes , songs cost $ 1.29 .
The cost of filling an iPod is then $ 52,838.40 .
If you think that people are sinking that much money into their mp3 players you would be really really wrong .
So the crowbar comparison is completely unfair .
I 'd be totally fine with taxing mp3 players , hell double the cost and make mp3 sharing totally legal .
I 'm sure the vast majority of people would be ok with that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MP3 players are pointless WITHOUT filesharing though.
I mean most crowbars aren't used in break and enters.
The vast vast majority of mp3 players are used with file sharing.
For example, iPod has a 160GB.
If you buy from iTunes, songs cost $1.29.
The cost of filling an iPod is then $52,838.40.
If you think that people are sinking that much money into their mp3 players you would be really really wrong.
So the crowbar comparison is completely unfair.
I'd be totally fine with taxing mp3 players, hell double the cost and make mp3 sharing totally legal.
I'm sure the vast majority of people would be ok with that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525318</id>
	<title>Re:More like a little bit extra for nothing at all</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1268938800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>When the main medium of sharing were cassettes or CDs, did introducing those levies actually cause copying a cassette or CD to be decriminalized?</p></div><p>It did in Canada. If you make a copy <b>for private use</b>, such copy is legal.</p><p>It actually works in a very funny way. Say, you want to share a CD (that you legally own in the first place) with your friend. If he gives you a blank CD-R, and you copy your CD onto it, and hand it over to him, what you just did was "distribution", and it wasn't "for private use" - so that's illegal.</p><p>But if just give him the original CD, and <em>he</em> copies the file off it onto his own medium, and returns your CD to you, it's perfectly legal, because your friend did a "copy for private use". That he did it off a medium he didn't own is of no relevance according to the law as it stands.</p><p>In fact, if you steal someone's CD (which they legally own), and copy it, you're not guilty of copyright infringement - only of theft.</p><p>However, because the levy is only paid on blank CD-Rs that are labeled "audio", all of the above only applies to audio works, not to books, video or software.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>When the main medium of sharing were cassettes or CDs , did introducing those levies actually cause copying a cassette or CD to be decriminalized ? It did in Canada .
If you make a copy for private use , such copy is legal.It actually works in a very funny way .
Say , you want to share a CD ( that you legally own in the first place ) with your friend .
If he gives you a blank CD-R , and you copy your CD onto it , and hand it over to him , what you just did was " distribution " , and it was n't " for private use " - so that 's illegal.But if just give him the original CD , and he copies the file off it onto his own medium , and returns your CD to you , it 's perfectly legal , because your friend did a " copy for private use " .
That he did it off a medium he did n't own is of no relevance according to the law as it stands.In fact , if you steal someone 's CD ( which they legally own ) , and copy it , you 're not guilty of copyright infringement - only of theft.However , because the levy is only paid on blank CD-Rs that are labeled " audio " , all of the above only applies to audio works , not to books , video or software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When the main medium of sharing were cassettes or CDs, did introducing those levies actually cause copying a cassette or CD to be decriminalized?It did in Canada.
If you make a copy for private use, such copy is legal.It actually works in a very funny way.
Say, you want to share a CD (that you legally own in the first place) with your friend.
If he gives you a blank CD-R, and you copy your CD onto it, and hand it over to him, what you just did was "distribution", and it wasn't "for private use" - so that's illegal.But if just give him the original CD, and he copies the file off it onto his own medium, and returns your CD to you, it's perfectly legal, because your friend did a "copy for private use".
That he did it off a medium he didn't own is of no relevance according to the law as it stands.In fact, if you steal someone's CD (which they legally own), and copy it, you're not guilty of copyright infringement - only of theft.However, because the levy is only paid on blank CD-Rs that are labeled "audio", all of the above only applies to audio works, not to books, video or software.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523378</id>
	<title>Re:The levy only compensates Major Label artists</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268929920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except that in the real world, your LABEL gets the money. The artists never get anything from it. And that is the whole point.</p><p>After all, the music industry is the natural enemy of the musician industry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except that in the real world , your LABEL gets the money .
The artists never get anything from it .
And that is the whole point.After all , the music industry is the natural enemy of the musician industry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except that in the real world, your LABEL gets the money.
The artists never get anything from it.
And that is the whole point.After all, the music industry is the natural enemy of the musician industry.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524400</id>
	<title>speaking as ...</title>
	<author>rgviza</author>
	<datestamp>1268934600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... someone that pays for all of their music, without exception, I would certainly welcome such a tax. However I'd move to just copying everything instead of buying it. I wouldn't pay for my music twice ; )</p><p>I'm pretty sure most other people would feel the same way. Doing this essentially socializes entertainment since the government becomes the record store.</p><p>I'm pretty sure that doing this will result in a net loss for the music industry... There's no way people will buy their music unless they are idiots since this tax sanctions copying. People will just form music clubs where you can copy whatever you want without buying it.</p><p>Record stores could simply burn mix cds for people. It's not online, the record store owner is simply copying with friends right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... someone that pays for all of their music , without exception , I would certainly welcome such a tax .
However I 'd move to just copying everything instead of buying it .
I would n't pay for my music twice ; ) I 'm pretty sure most other people would feel the same way .
Doing this essentially socializes entertainment since the government becomes the record store.I 'm pretty sure that doing this will result in a net loss for the music industry... There 's no way people will buy their music unless they are idiots since this tax sanctions copying .
People will just form music clubs where you can copy whatever you want without buying it.Record stores could simply burn mix cds for people .
It 's not online , the record store owner is simply copying with friends right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... someone that pays for all of their music, without exception, I would certainly welcome such a tax.
However I'd move to just copying everything instead of buying it.
I wouldn't pay for my music twice ; )I'm pretty sure most other people would feel the same way.
Doing this essentially socializes entertainment since the government becomes the record store.I'm pretty sure that doing this will result in a net loss for the music industry... There's no way people will buy their music unless they are idiots since this tax sanctions copying.
People will just form music clubs where you can copy whatever you want without buying it.Record stores could simply burn mix cds for people.
It's not online, the record store owner is simply copying with friends right?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31528710</id>
	<title>Not concerned</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268906160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a Canadian, I am not worried about this at all. If only the NDP and the Bloc want it we won't see the tax. The NDP doesn't have enough pull and no one cares what the Bloc thinks... well no one important.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a Canadian , I am not worried about this at all .
If only the NDP and the Bloc want it we wo n't see the tax .
The NDP does n't have enough pull and no one cares what the Bloc thinks... well no one important .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a Canadian, I am not worried about this at all.
If only the NDP and the Bloc want it we won't see the tax.
The NDP doesn't have enough pull and no one cares what the Bloc thinks... well no one important.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525954</id>
	<title>Re:Common Sense</title>
	<author>c</author>
	<datestamp>1268941320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; They pay a copying tax every time they buy media.<br>&gt; It seems to me this implies copying is then legal.</p><p>Yep. The problem for the record industry is that the rules were created when people actually bought blank media in order to copy music. Portable players like the iPod pretty much eliminate the "buy media" part. The way it works now, most people who buy blank media aren't bothering to put music on it.</p><p>Technology changes a lot faster than the law...</p><p>c.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; They pay a copying tax every time they buy media. &gt; It seems to me this implies copying is then legal.Yep .
The problem for the record industry is that the rules were created when people actually bought blank media in order to copy music .
Portable players like the iPod pretty much eliminate the " buy media " part .
The way it works now , most people who buy blank media are n't bothering to put music on it.Technology changes a lot faster than the law...c .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; They pay a copying tax every time they buy media.&gt; It seems to me this implies copying is then legal.Yep.
The problem for the record industry is that the rules were created when people actually bought blank media in order to copy music.
Portable players like the iPod pretty much eliminate the "buy media" part.
The way it works now, most people who buy blank media aren't bothering to put music on it.Technology changes a lot faster than the law...c.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522460</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523072</id>
	<title>Try, try again</title>
	<author>debrain</author>
	<datestamp>1268928240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I participated in the effort to <a href="http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/fca/doc/2004/2004fca424/2004fca424.html" title="canlii.org">defeat this same proposal in 2002-2004</a> [canlii.org]. However these guys never quit. The good news is that they aren't particularly inspired &ndash;  or inspiring.</p><p>It's noteworthy that I found out about the last go-around of this effort by the Canadian Private Copying Collective on Slashdot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I participated in the effort to defeat this same proposal in 2002-2004 [ canlii.org ] .
However these guys never quit .
The good news is that they are n't particularly inspired    or inspiring.It 's noteworthy that I found out about the last go-around of this effort by the Canadian Private Copying Collective on Slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I participated in the effort to defeat this same proposal in 2002-2004 [canlii.org].
However these guys never quit.
The good news is that they aren't particularly inspired –  or inspiring.It's noteworthy that I found out about the last go-around of this effort by the Canadian Private Copying Collective on Slashdot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525286</id>
	<title>Re:Useful</title>
	<author>umghhh</author>
	<datestamp>1268938680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>excellent sense of humor or is it a sarcastic remark? I mean some artists will get some money I am sure but judging by the way things are going this is probably not true. OTOH somebody must stop the nonsense that is going on good that <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8570913.stm" title="bbc.co.uk">O2 is trying</a> [bbc.co.uk].</htmltext>
<tokenext>excellent sense of humor or is it a sarcastic remark ?
I mean some artists will get some money I am sure but judging by the way things are going this is probably not true .
OTOH somebody must stop the nonsense that is going on good that O2 is trying [ bbc.co.uk ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>excellent sense of humor or is it a sarcastic remark?
I mean some artists will get some money I am sure but judging by the way things are going this is probably not true.
OTOH somebody must stop the nonsense that is going on good that O2 is trying [bbc.co.uk].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523584</id>
	<title>More like a little bit extra for nothing at all</title>
	<author>Moraelin</author>
	<datestamp>1268930820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, call me a jaded old cynic, but what makes anyone think it would be different from the other levies?</p><p>When the main medium of sharing were cassettes or CDs, did introducing those levies actually cause copying a cassette or CD to be decriminalized? Or I'm pretty sure I'm paying such an extra already both for DVD blanks and for any DVD burner I've ever bought. Does that cause them to even stop stop wasting my time with that "you wouldn't steal a car" anti-piracy warning on DVD's.</p><p>Essentially I pay the levy \_and\_ get to be treated like a pirate, whether I actually pirate anything or not. And TBH it's the "or not" part that bothers me the most, but either is fundamentally wrong. We're basically taxed to pay those guys to make up for piracy, but don't actually get anything in return.</p><p>It's essentially like, say, as if everyone in town gets to pay 5 bucks to Joe Landlord, owner of a nice orchard, for the fact that (supposedly) some people trespass on it and misuse it as a picnick ground. But basically nobody gets anything in exchange for those 5 bucks. It's still forbidden to trespass there, and Joe Landlord still gets to sue anyone he catches there. Then what are we paying for? And why is the town essentially subsidizing Joe's orchard?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , call me a jaded old cynic , but what makes anyone think it would be different from the other levies ? When the main medium of sharing were cassettes or CDs , did introducing those levies actually cause copying a cassette or CD to be decriminalized ?
Or I 'm pretty sure I 'm paying such an extra already both for DVD blanks and for any DVD burner I 've ever bought .
Does that cause them to even stop stop wasting my time with that " you would n't steal a car " anti-piracy warning on DVD 's.Essentially I pay the levy \ _and \ _ get to be treated like a pirate , whether I actually pirate anything or not .
And TBH it 's the " or not " part that bothers me the most , but either is fundamentally wrong .
We 're basically taxed to pay those guys to make up for piracy , but do n't actually get anything in return.It 's essentially like , say , as if everyone in town gets to pay 5 bucks to Joe Landlord , owner of a nice orchard , for the fact that ( supposedly ) some people trespass on it and misuse it as a picnick ground .
But basically nobody gets anything in exchange for those 5 bucks .
It 's still forbidden to trespass there , and Joe Landlord still gets to sue anyone he catches there .
Then what are we paying for ?
And why is the town essentially subsidizing Joe 's orchard ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, call me a jaded old cynic, but what makes anyone think it would be different from the other levies?When the main medium of sharing were cassettes or CDs, did introducing those levies actually cause copying a cassette or CD to be decriminalized?
Or I'm pretty sure I'm paying such an extra already both for DVD blanks and for any DVD burner I've ever bought.
Does that cause them to even stop stop wasting my time with that "you wouldn't steal a car" anti-piracy warning on DVD's.Essentially I pay the levy \_and\_ get to be treated like a pirate, whether I actually pirate anything or not.
And TBH it's the "or not" part that bothers me the most, but either is fundamentally wrong.
We're basically taxed to pay those guys to make up for piracy, but don't actually get anything in return.It's essentially like, say, as if everyone in town gets to pay 5 bucks to Joe Landlord, owner of a nice orchard, for the fact that (supposedly) some people trespass on it and misuse it as a picnick ground.
But basically nobody gets anything in exchange for those 5 bucks.
It's still forbidden to trespass there, and Joe Landlord still gets to sue anyone he catches there.
Then what are we paying for?
And why is the town essentially subsidizing Joe's orchard?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522480</id>
	<title>May not pass</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268925600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Conservatives are opposed to the bill, and currently they have 145/308 seats in the House of Commons.</p><p>They only have to convince 9 of the Liberals, NDP, or Bloc to agree.</p><p>Not everything is voted on party lines, but most is. It is likely the conservatives will have to make a concession in some other form to get the Liberals to side with them. And that is extremely likely, because the Liberals no longer hold the threatening role they had a couple months ago.</p><p>Yes, I am Canadian.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Conservatives are opposed to the bill , and currently they have 145/308 seats in the House of Commons.They only have to convince 9 of the Liberals , NDP , or Bloc to agree.Not everything is voted on party lines , but most is .
It is likely the conservatives will have to make a concession in some other form to get the Liberals to side with them .
And that is extremely likely , because the Liberals no longer hold the threatening role they had a couple months ago.Yes , I am Canadian .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Conservatives are opposed to the bill, and currently they have 145/308 seats in the House of Commons.They only have to convince 9 of the Liberals, NDP, or Bloc to agree.Not everything is voted on party lines, but most is.
It is likely the conservatives will have to make a concession in some other form to get the Liberals to side with them.
And that is extremely likely, because the Liberals no longer hold the threatening role they had a couple months ago.Yes, I am Canadian.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525954
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525248
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522526
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522526
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31531608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522572
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522514
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31529634
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31530764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522526
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31532884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522514
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522774
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522572
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522466
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522686
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524218
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522944
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522462
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524264
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31532936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523600
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522404
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524368
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522634
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31531198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31526002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522634
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31526972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522634
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1158248_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31540868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522544
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523836
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522404
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523600
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522572
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524312
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524206
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522432
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525012
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522562
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523378
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523318
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31530764
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31526972
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525230
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31531608
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522816
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31531198
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522954
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524400
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522504
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522774
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524250
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522514
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31532884
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523556
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522460
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525034
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525954
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524694
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522478
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522848
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525248
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522698
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522466
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525010
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522494
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522866
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31529634
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524572
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524544
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524264
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524654
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523540
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524218
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31526002
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523102
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522480
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524440
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522426
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522462
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522944
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522544
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31540868
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522634
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522902
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524368
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522880
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522408
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522686
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523584
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525318
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31532936
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31525286
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522526
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31523386
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522598
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524262
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31524146
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1158248.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1158248.31522674
</commentlist>
</conversation>
