<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_22_081200</id>
	<title>Dueling Summary Judgment Motions In Viacom v. YouTube</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1269250020000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.eff.org/support" rel="nofollow">I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property</a> writes <i>"Eric Goldman, an Associate Professor of Law at Santa Clara University School of Law, has an <a href="http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2010/03/viacom\_v\_youtub.htm">excellent analysis of the dueling summary judgment motions</a> in Viacom v. YouTube.  Basically, both sides have been trotting out the most damning things they can find and asking the judge to rule against the other party.  Viacom is mad that Chad Hurley, one of YouTube's co-founders, lost his email archive and couldn't remember some old emails.  Worse, YouTube founder Karim once uploaded infringing content.  But then Google points out that only a very small percentage of the users are engaged in infringing activity (some 0.016\% of all YouTube accounts have been deleted for infringement), one of the clips Viacom is suing over is only one second long (what about fair use?), and most of YouTube's content is non-infringing, including the campaign videos which all major US presidential candidates posted to YouTube."</i> (More below.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I Do n't Believe in Imaginary Property writes " Eric Goldman , an Associate Professor of Law at Santa Clara University School of Law , has an excellent analysis of the dueling summary judgment motions in Viacom v. YouTube. Basically , both sides have been trotting out the most damning things they can find and asking the judge to rule against the other party .
Viacom is mad that Chad Hurley , one of YouTube 's co-founders , lost his email archive and could n't remember some old emails .
Worse , YouTube founder Karim once uploaded infringing content .
But then Google points out that only a very small percentage of the users are engaged in infringing activity ( some 0.016 \ % of all YouTube accounts have been deleted for infringement ) , one of the clips Viacom is suing over is only one second long ( what about fair use ?
) , and most of YouTube 's content is non-infringing , including the campaign videos which all major US presidential candidates posted to YouTube .
" ( More below .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "Eric Goldman, an Associate Professor of Law at Santa Clara University School of Law, has an excellent analysis of the dueling summary judgment motions in Viacom v. YouTube.  Basically, both sides have been trotting out the most damning things they can find and asking the judge to rule against the other party.
Viacom is mad that Chad Hurley, one of YouTube's co-founders, lost his email archive and couldn't remember some old emails.
Worse, YouTube founder Karim once uploaded infringing content.
But then Google points out that only a very small percentage of the users are engaged in infringing activity (some 0.016\% of all YouTube accounts have been deleted for infringement), one of the clips Viacom is suing over is only one second long (what about fair use?
), and most of YouTube's content is non-infringing, including the campaign videos which all major US presidential candidates posted to YouTube.
" (More below.
)</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31579470</id>
	<title>Re:Its not about the content.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269278940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm hearing "it's too big to fail" somewhere in all this. #bailouts</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm hearing " it 's too big to fail " somewhere in all this .
# bailouts</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm hearing "it's too big to fail" somewhere in all this.
#bailouts</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565206</id>
	<title>Attorney generals? As Goldman says, "WTF?"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269260460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What kind of law professor doesn't know that it's Attorney<b>s</b> General?

</p><p>Those who can, do.  Those who can't, get tenure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What kind of law professor does n't know that it 's Attorneys General ?
Those who can , do .
Those who ca n't , get tenure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What kind of law professor doesn't know that it's Attorneys General?
Those who can, do.
Those who can't, get tenure.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31579268</id>
	<title>Copyrighted does not always equal Infringing</title>
	<author>BillX</author>
	<datestamp>1269276840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Worse, YouTube founder Karim once uploaded infringing content."</p><p>Hey, we get it - there were some emails from the early days of YouTube that make clear that they (pre-Google) were aware of copyrighted videos on the site, and decided on a case-by-case basis what to do about them (delete immediately, delete in a couple weeks when a viral traffic spike dies down, wait until someone formally complains). But was it ever ruled that any of these videos were actually infringing (and not e.g. fake-leaked videos by an authorized marketing company, or fair use)?</p><p>Scenario: Karim copies a 15-second CNN 'oops' clip in which a reporter's pants fall down during a live interview, from Break.com, or the early-youtube equivalent of Fail Blog, etc. Obviously, CNN has copyright ownership in it, maybe a lawyer could argue early-failblog has some derivative-work interest in it somehow (an early-failblog watermark stamped into the corner). But whether this is actual infringement, and to whom, is a matter only the court can decide. Until such a decision, I don't see how the "incriminating" Youtube emails are worth the paper they're printed on as proof of wrongdoing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Worse , YouTube founder Karim once uploaded infringing content .
" Hey , we get it - there were some emails from the early days of YouTube that make clear that they ( pre-Google ) were aware of copyrighted videos on the site , and decided on a case-by-case basis what to do about them ( delete immediately , delete in a couple weeks when a viral traffic spike dies down , wait until someone formally complains ) .
But was it ever ruled that any of these videos were actually infringing ( and not e.g .
fake-leaked videos by an authorized marketing company , or fair use ) ? Scenario : Karim copies a 15-second CNN 'oops ' clip in which a reporter 's pants fall down during a live interview , from Break.com , or the early-youtube equivalent of Fail Blog , etc .
Obviously , CNN has copyright ownership in it , maybe a lawyer could argue early-failblog has some derivative-work interest in it somehow ( an early-failblog watermark stamped into the corner ) .
But whether this is actual infringement , and to whom , is a matter only the court can decide .
Until such a decision , I do n't see how the " incriminating " Youtube emails are worth the paper they 're printed on as proof of wrongdoing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Worse, YouTube founder Karim once uploaded infringing content.
"Hey, we get it - there were some emails from the early days of YouTube that make clear that they (pre-Google) were aware of copyrighted videos on the site, and decided on a case-by-case basis what to do about them (delete immediately, delete in a couple weeks when a viral traffic spike dies down, wait until someone formally complains).
But was it ever ruled that any of these videos were actually infringing (and not e.g.
fake-leaked videos by an authorized marketing company, or fair use)?Scenario: Karim copies a 15-second CNN 'oops' clip in which a reporter's pants fall down during a live interview, from Break.com, or the early-youtube equivalent of Fail Blog, etc.
Obviously, CNN has copyright ownership in it, maybe a lawyer could argue early-failblog has some derivative-work interest in it somehow (an early-failblog watermark stamped into the corner).
But whether this is actual infringement, and to whom, is a matter only the court can decide.
Until such a decision, I don't see how the "incriminating" Youtube emails are worth the paper they're printed on as proof of wrongdoing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564986</id>
	<title>Viacom deserves to lose protections.</title>
	<author>TheAlkymyst</author>
	<datestamp>1269257160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you intend to use the copyright system as a means to cheat when you don't get your way, I feel you should be removed from the system and its protection. Viacom's copyrights should pass into the realm of public domain for their behavior in this case.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you intend to use the copyright system as a means to cheat when you do n't get your way , I feel you should be removed from the system and its protection .
Viacom 's copyrights should pass into the realm of public domain for their behavior in this case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you intend to use the copyright system as a means to cheat when you don't get your way, I feel you should be removed from the system and its protection.
Viacom's copyrights should pass into the realm of public domain for their behavior in this case.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31566030</id>
	<title>Re:Where is godzilla when we need him?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269266520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Godzilla lives on Rizon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Godzilla lives on Rizon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Godzilla lives on Rizon.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564834</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564780</id>
	<title>GNAA unveils new wiki-based corporate website</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269253680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sunday, March 14, 2010</p><p>GNAA unveils new wiki-based corporate website</p><p>Today GNAA President weev shampooed his neckbeard, put on a greasy Linux t-shirt and left the warm glow of his spamcave to unveil the new GNAA corporate website in a keynote speech. "Inspired by the success of wikis like Wikipedia as platforms for spreading misinformation and infuriating trolls, we decided to transition our corporate webpage to the wiki format," said weev in between gulps and disgusting chewing noises as he stuffed his face with summer sausages and snack cakes to gain the calories needed to satiate his anxiety at being confronted with other human beings. "Jimbo Wales and his team of basement dwelling pedophiles have really taken the wiki platform leaps and bounds in propagating biased, inflammatory garbage. You can log on Wikipedia at any given moment and start or join some inane troll battle that amounts to semantics. They even manage to present defending child molesters as an encyclopedic pursuit while making <a href="http://www.cydeweys.com/blog/2008/05/08/erik-moller-wmf/" title="cydeweys.com" rel="nofollow">active</a> [cydeweys.com] <a href="http://valleywag.com/388503/wikipedias-porn+loving-no-2-and-his-abiding-concern-for-the-children" title="valleywag.com" rel="nofollow">pedophiles</a> [valleywag.com] who <a href="http://valleywag.gawker.com/372140/erik-mller-no-2-at-wikipedia-a-defender-of-pedophilia" title="gawker.com" rel="nofollow">host child pornography</a> [gawker.com] paid members of their staff. I can't think of anything more offensive. I'd like to take a minute to recognize Wikipedia as one of the most wildly successful troll organizations on the planet."</p><p>Weev went on to deride the agents of Zionism on the Internet. "Of course, we couldn't possibly go with MediaWiki. Everybody knows that PHP is run by the Mossad. As a consistent promoter of racial equality we couldn't let our Wiki be subverted by Zionist control." He went along to praise the python-based framework the site now operates on. "We went with Trac primarily because it is written in Python. As you all know, Python is a fascist with whitespace. As an organization of black men, we do believe that whites need to be regulated in their spaces very carefully. All hail the prophet Mohammed, and the messenger Malcolm X." At this point weev made a fist in the air before switching his comfort food to fried chicken and watermelon.  "May Allah bless us, and bring us to the day when we may see constant troll edit wars on our wiki, just like Wikipedia.</p><p>


<b>About GNAA</b>:<br>
<b>GNAA</b> (<i>GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA</i>) is the first
organization which gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one
common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.<br>
<br>
Are you <a href="http://klerck.org/spin.gif" title="klerck.org" rel="nofollow"> <b>GAY</b> </a> [klerck.org]?<br>
Are you a <a href="http://www.mugshots.org/sports/oj-simpson.jpg" title="mugshots.org" rel="nofollow"> <b>NIGGER</b> </a> [mugshots.org]?<br>
Are you a <a href="http://www.gay-sex-access.com/gay-black-sex.jpg" title="gay-sex-access.com" rel="nofollow"> <b>GAY NIGGER</b> </a> [gay-sex-access.com]?<br>
<br>
If you answered "Yes" to all of the above questions, then <b>GNAA</b> (<i>GAY NIGGER
ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA</i>) might be exactly what you've been looking for!<br>
Join <b>GNAA</b> (<i>GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA</i>) today, and enjoy
all the benefits of being a full-time <b>GNAA</b> member.<br>
<b>GNAA</b> (<i>GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA</i>) is the fastest-growing
GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of
America and the World! You, too, can be a part of <b>GNAA</b> if you join
today!<br>
<br>
Why not? It's quick and easy - <b>only 3 simple steps!</b> </p><ul>
<li>First, you have to obtain a copy of <a href="http://us.imdb.com/Title?0274518" title="imdb.com" rel="nofollow"> <i>GAYNIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE</i> </a> [imdb.com] and watch it. You can <a href="http://pepper.idge.net/gnaa/gnfos\_dr.torrent" title="idge.net" rel="nofollow">download the movie</a> [idge.net] (~130mb) using BitTorrent.</li><li>Second, you need to succeed in posting a <b>GNAA</b> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First\_Post" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow"> <i>First Post</i> </a> [wikipedia.org] on <a href="http://slashdot.org/" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">slashdot.org</a> [slashdot.org], a popular "news for trolls" website.</li><li>Third, you need to join the official <b>GNAA</b> irc channel #GNAA on irc.gnaa.eu, and apply fo</li></ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sunday , March 14 , 2010GNAA unveils new wiki-based corporate websiteToday GNAA President weev shampooed his neckbeard , put on a greasy Linux t-shirt and left the warm glow of his spamcave to unveil the new GNAA corporate website in a keynote speech .
" Inspired by the success of wikis like Wikipedia as platforms for spreading misinformation and infuriating trolls , we decided to transition our corporate webpage to the wiki format , " said weev in between gulps and disgusting chewing noises as he stuffed his face with summer sausages and snack cakes to gain the calories needed to satiate his anxiety at being confronted with other human beings .
" Jimbo Wales and his team of basement dwelling pedophiles have really taken the wiki platform leaps and bounds in propagating biased , inflammatory garbage .
You can log on Wikipedia at any given moment and start or join some inane troll battle that amounts to semantics .
They even manage to present defending child molesters as an encyclopedic pursuit while making active [ cydeweys.com ] pedophiles [ valleywag.com ] who host child pornography [ gawker.com ] paid members of their staff .
I ca n't think of anything more offensive .
I 'd like to take a minute to recognize Wikipedia as one of the most wildly successful troll organizations on the planet .
" Weev went on to deride the agents of Zionism on the Internet .
" Of course , we could n't possibly go with MediaWiki .
Everybody knows that PHP is run by the Mossad .
As a consistent promoter of racial equality we could n't let our Wiki be subverted by Zionist control .
" He went along to praise the python-based framework the site now operates on .
" We went with Trac primarily because it is written in Python .
As you all know , Python is a fascist with whitespace .
As an organization of black men , we do believe that whites need to be regulated in their spaces very carefully .
All hail the prophet Mohammed , and the messenger Malcolm X .
" At this point weev made a fist in the air before switching his comfort food to fried chicken and watermelon .
" May Allah bless us , and bring us to the day when we may see constant troll edit wars on our wiki , just like Wikipedia .
About GNAA : GNAA ( GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA ) is the first organization which gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being GAY NIGGERS .
Are you GAY [ klerck.org ] ?
Are you a NIGGER [ mugshots.org ] ?
Are you a GAY NIGGER [ gay-sex-access.com ] ?
If you answered " Yes " to all of the above questions , then GNAA ( GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA ) might be exactly what you 've been looking for !
Join GNAA ( GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA ) today , and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member .
GNAA ( GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA ) is the fastest-growing GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America and the World !
You , too , can be a part of GNAA if you join today !
Why not ?
It 's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps !
First , you have to obtain a copy of GAYNIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE [ imdb.com ] and watch it .
You can download the movie [ idge.net ] ( ~ 130mb ) using BitTorrent.Second , you need to succeed in posting a GNAA First Post [ wikipedia.org ] on slashdot.org [ slashdot.org ] , a popular " news for trolls " website.Third , you need to join the official GNAA irc channel # GNAA on irc.gnaa.eu , and apply fo</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sunday, March 14, 2010GNAA unveils new wiki-based corporate websiteToday GNAA President weev shampooed his neckbeard, put on a greasy Linux t-shirt and left the warm glow of his spamcave to unveil the new GNAA corporate website in a keynote speech.
"Inspired by the success of wikis like Wikipedia as platforms for spreading misinformation and infuriating trolls, we decided to transition our corporate webpage to the wiki format," said weev in between gulps and disgusting chewing noises as he stuffed his face with summer sausages and snack cakes to gain the calories needed to satiate his anxiety at being confronted with other human beings.
"Jimbo Wales and his team of basement dwelling pedophiles have really taken the wiki platform leaps and bounds in propagating biased, inflammatory garbage.
You can log on Wikipedia at any given moment and start or join some inane troll battle that amounts to semantics.
They even manage to present defending child molesters as an encyclopedic pursuit while making active [cydeweys.com] pedophiles [valleywag.com] who host child pornography [gawker.com] paid members of their staff.
I can't think of anything more offensive.
I'd like to take a minute to recognize Wikipedia as one of the most wildly successful troll organizations on the planet.
"Weev went on to deride the agents of Zionism on the Internet.
"Of course, we couldn't possibly go with MediaWiki.
Everybody knows that PHP is run by the Mossad.
As a consistent promoter of racial equality we couldn't let our Wiki be subverted by Zionist control.
" He went along to praise the python-based framework the site now operates on.
"We went with Trac primarily because it is written in Python.
As you all know, Python is a fascist with whitespace.
As an organization of black men, we do believe that whites need to be regulated in their spaces very carefully.
All hail the prophet Mohammed, and the messenger Malcolm X.
" At this point weev made a fist in the air before switching his comfort food to fried chicken and watermelon.
"May Allah bless us, and bring us to the day when we may see constant troll edit wars on our wiki, just like Wikipedia.
About GNAA:
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first
organization which gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one
common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.
Are you  GAY  [klerck.org]?
Are you a  NIGGER  [mugshots.org]?
Are you a  GAY NIGGER  [gay-sex-access.com]?
If you answered "Yes" to all of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER
ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy
all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member.
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing
GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of
America and the World!
You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join
today!
Why not?
It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!
First, you have to obtain a copy of  GAYNIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE  [imdb.com] and watch it.
You can download the movie [idge.net] (~130mb) using BitTorrent.Second, you need to succeed in posting a GNAA  First Post  [wikipedia.org] on slashdot.org [slashdot.org], a popular "news for trolls" website.Third, you need to join the official GNAA irc channel #GNAA on irc.gnaa.eu, and apply fo</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565448</id>
	<title>Re:Test your /. age by reading the summary...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269263880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"If you just tried to correct the misspelling of pedant in the previous line, you are a grammar nazi."</p><p>That wouldn't be grammar... that would be a simple typo.  Not knowing the difference between they're | their | there would be grammar related.</p><p>-Reality Checker</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" If you just tried to correct the misspelling of pedant in the previous line , you are a grammar nazi .
" That would n't be grammar... that would be a simple typo .
Not knowing the difference between they 're | their | there would be grammar related.-Reality Checker</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"If you just tried to correct the misspelling of pedant in the previous line, you are a grammar nazi.
"That wouldn't be grammar... that would be a simple typo.
Not knowing the difference between they're | their | there would be grammar related.-Reality Checker</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564954</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565156</id>
	<title>Rule against both companies, in favor of authors</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269259860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Tell both Viacom and Google they have to supply equipment and training for the production of 500 original videos per day, to be copyrighted by the authors themselves exclusively. Modify copyright law so that most things produced become property of the people who actually work on it, not of the company who hired them, and in the future companies become forced to negotiate terms with actors, directors, and writers, constantly renegotiating terms of use with them and producing new things, rather than already owning all the content merely by virtue of having financed the work and written the contracts and imposed terms to their advantage.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Tell both Viacom and Google they have to supply equipment and training for the production of 500 original videos per day , to be copyrighted by the authors themselves exclusively .
Modify copyright law so that most things produced become property of the people who actually work on it , not of the company who hired them , and in the future companies become forced to negotiate terms with actors , directors , and writers , constantly renegotiating terms of use with them and producing new things , rather than already owning all the content merely by virtue of having financed the work and written the contracts and imposed terms to their advantage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tell both Viacom and Google they have to supply equipment and training for the production of 500 original videos per day, to be copyrighted by the authors themselves exclusively.
Modify copyright law so that most things produced become property of the people who actually work on it, not of the company who hired them, and in the future companies become forced to negotiate terms with actors, directors, and writers, constantly renegotiating terms of use with them and producing new things, rather than already owning all the content merely by virtue of having financed the work and written the contracts and imposed terms to their advantage.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565146</id>
	<title>Re:Its not about the content.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269259740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, let me get this straight -</p><p>Viacom invests money in creating things like the daily show and other programs you like to watch.</p><p>A major or THE major chunk of youtube revenues comes from the ads that youtube shows on infringing clips from the time they are uploaded to the time they are taken down.  Viacom, the creator of the material, gets none of the money.</p><p>And yet, in your view, Viacom is the 'leech'.</p><p>So, remind me again, when you part with somebody over there in bizarro world, do you say "bad bye" or "hello"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , let me get this straight -Viacom invests money in creating things like the daily show and other programs you like to watch.A major or THE major chunk of youtube revenues comes from the ads that youtube shows on infringing clips from the time they are uploaded to the time they are taken down .
Viacom , the creator of the material , gets none of the money.And yet , in your view , Viacom is the 'leech'.So , remind me again , when you part with somebody over there in bizarro world , do you say " bad bye " or " hello " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, let me get this straight -Viacom invests money in creating things like the daily show and other programs you like to watch.A major or THE major chunk of youtube revenues comes from the ads that youtube shows on infringing clips from the time they are uploaded to the time they are taken down.
Viacom, the creator of the material, gets none of the money.And yet, in your view, Viacom is the 'leech'.So, remind me again, when you part with somebody over there in bizarro world, do you say "bad bye" or "hello"?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564834</id>
	<title>Where is godzilla when we need him?</title>
	<author>voodoo cheesecake</author>
	<datestamp>1269254640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is so damn ridiculous.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is so damn ridiculous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is so damn ridiculous.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564954</id>
	<title>Test your /. age by reading the summary...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269256560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>After reading the summary (seriously, do this first or this won't work at all), gauge your reaction to the article that you won't be reading to determine how long and for what purposes you read<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.</p><p>If you are surprised by any of the summary, you must be new here.</p><p>If you aren't angered by the summary, you have been here too long.</p><p>If you mentally insert else statements between each of these lines, you are sleep deprived DBA. Go take a nap.</p><p>If you question Eric Goldman's credentials, but haven't done any research to to discredit him, you are a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. troll.</p><p>If you just went to research Eric Goldman's credentials so that you could respond with research to discredit him, you are a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. pedent.</p><p>If you just tried to correct the misspelling of pedant in the previous line, you are a grammar nazi.</p><p>If you instead thought that discrediting Eric Goldman wouldn't take much effort but that doing so isn't pedantic, you have a valid point, and thus, would be modded down for pointing it out.</p><p>If you just thought to yourself 'who is Eric Goldman?,' try reading the summary next time.</p><p>If you can remember another<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. article that pointed out that a company ended up suing themselves (and losing), so do I.</p><p>If you read the heading of this post and thought ' this is stupid, you can gauge someone's<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. age by the number of digits in the UID, its probably a valid point, but makes this entire post worthless, so keep that to yourself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>After reading the summary ( seriously , do this first or this wo n't work at all ) , gauge your reaction to the article that you wo n't be reading to determine how long and for what purposes you read /.If you are surprised by any of the summary , you must be new here.If you are n't angered by the summary , you have been here too long.If you mentally insert else statements between each of these lines , you are sleep deprived DBA .
Go take a nap.If you question Eric Goldman 's credentials , but have n't done any research to to discredit him , you are a / .
troll.If you just went to research Eric Goldman 's credentials so that you could respond with research to discredit him , you are a / .
pedent.If you just tried to correct the misspelling of pedant in the previous line , you are a grammar nazi.If you instead thought that discrediting Eric Goldman would n't take much effort but that doing so is n't pedantic , you have a valid point , and thus , would be modded down for pointing it out.If you just thought to yourself 'who is Eric Goldman ? , ' try reading the summary next time.If you can remember another / .
article that pointed out that a company ended up suing themselves ( and losing ) , so do I.If you read the heading of this post and thought ' this is stupid , you can gauge someone 's / .
age by the number of digits in the UID , its probably a valid point , but makes this entire post worthless , so keep that to yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After reading the summary (seriously, do this first or this won't work at all), gauge your reaction to the article that you won't be reading to determine how long and for what purposes you read /.If you are surprised by any of the summary, you must be new here.If you aren't angered by the summary, you have been here too long.If you mentally insert else statements between each of these lines, you are sleep deprived DBA.
Go take a nap.If you question Eric Goldman's credentials, but haven't done any research to to discredit him, you are a /.
troll.If you just went to research Eric Goldman's credentials so that you could respond with research to discredit him, you are a /.
pedent.If you just tried to correct the misspelling of pedant in the previous line, you are a grammar nazi.If you instead thought that discrediting Eric Goldman wouldn't take much effort but that doing so isn't pedantic, you have a valid point, and thus, would be modded down for pointing it out.If you just thought to yourself 'who is Eric Goldman?,' try reading the summary next time.If you can remember another /.
article that pointed out that a company ended up suing themselves (and losing), so do I.If you read the heading of this post and thought ' this is stupid, you can gauge someone's /.
age by the number of digits in the UID, its probably a valid point, but makes this entire post worthless, so keep that to yourself.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31570490</id>
	<title>Re:infringing content</title>
	<author>lavardo</author>
	<datestamp>1269278700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And chop off the cat's claws.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And chop off the cat 's claws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And chop off the cat's claws.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31566236</id>
	<title>Re:GNAA unveils new wiki-based corporate website</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269267240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Freedom of speech. I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it. Censorship, no matter how small, is wrong.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Freedom of speech .
I may not agree with what you say , but I 'll defend to the death your right to say it .
Censorship , no matter how small , is wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Freedom of speech.
I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
Censorship, no matter how small, is wrong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565172</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565410</id>
	<title>Bad google</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269263460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>some 0.016\% of all YouTube accounts have been deleted for infringement</p></div><p>Yes, under DMCA you have to post content frequently enough for the content holder to request an account takedown, as a result this is not even remotely indicative of the level of copyright violations on YT.</p><p>Anyway the issue isn't really about users posting copyrighted material (nor about content owners shrapnel approach to DMCA notices ignoring fairuse), it is about the fact Google has crowned itself guardian of all the worlds content and is basically saying to publishers "we will pay you what we want not what you think your content is worth but only if you tell us too, otherwise we will simply assume you permit us to make use of your content free". There are 5 major cases lined up behind the Viacom one waiting to see what happens, if two or three of these are found in favour of the content owners the cost to Google will be astronomical (in to the tens of billions is entirely possible).</p><p>Google should have never started with the attitude "We will use others content and seek their permission later", not only is it a disgusting attitude to take but it may ultimate set back useful IP reform decades.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>some 0.016 \ % of all YouTube accounts have been deleted for infringementYes , under DMCA you have to post content frequently enough for the content holder to request an account takedown , as a result this is not even remotely indicative of the level of copyright violations on YT.Anyway the issue is n't really about users posting copyrighted material ( nor about content owners shrapnel approach to DMCA notices ignoring fairuse ) , it is about the fact Google has crowned itself guardian of all the worlds content and is basically saying to publishers " we will pay you what we want not what you think your content is worth but only if you tell us too , otherwise we will simply assume you permit us to make use of your content free " .
There are 5 major cases lined up behind the Viacom one waiting to see what happens , if two or three of these are found in favour of the content owners the cost to Google will be astronomical ( in to the tens of billions is entirely possible ) .Google should have never started with the attitude " We will use others content and seek their permission later " , not only is it a disgusting attitude to take but it may ultimate set back useful IP reform decades .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>some 0.016\% of all YouTube accounts have been deleted for infringementYes, under DMCA you have to post content frequently enough for the content holder to request an account takedown, as a result this is not even remotely indicative of the level of copyright violations on YT.Anyway the issue isn't really about users posting copyrighted material (nor about content owners shrapnel approach to DMCA notices ignoring fairuse), it is about the fact Google has crowned itself guardian of all the worlds content and is basically saying to publishers "we will pay you what we want not what you think your content is worth but only if you tell us too, otherwise we will simply assume you permit us to make use of your content free".
There are 5 major cases lined up behind the Viacom one waiting to see what happens, if two or three of these are found in favour of the content owners the cost to Google will be astronomical (in to the tens of billions is entirely possible).Google should have never started with the attitude "We will use others content and seek their permission later", not only is it a disgusting attitude to take but it may ultimate set back useful IP reform decades.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565396</id>
	<title>Re:Test your /. age by reading the summary...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269263040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I move that this style of post be refined and made available in a form similar to the 'your plan to block e-mail spam will fail because' form.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I move that this style of post be refined and made available in a form similar to the 'your plan to block e-mail spam will fail because ' form .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I move that this style of post be refined and made available in a form similar to the 'your plan to block e-mail spam will fail because' form.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564954</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565078</id>
	<title>Re:Test your /. age by reading the summary...</title>
	<author>Jedi Alec</author>
	<datestamp>1269258780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>If you aren't angered by the summary, you have been here too long.</i></p><p>Either that, or you've simply worked in a larger company for a while and realized that schizophrenia is pretty much the ground state of being.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are n't angered by the summary , you have been here too long.Either that , or you 've simply worked in a larger company for a while and realized that schizophrenia is pretty much the ground state of being .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you aren't angered by the summary, you have been here too long.Either that, or you've simply worked in a larger company for a while and realized that schizophrenia is pretty much the ground state of being.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564954</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565222</id>
	<title>Apropos Goldman's credentials</title>
	<author>Rogerborg</author>
	<datestamp>1269260700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Any "law professor" who says "attorney general<b>s</b>" instead of "attorney<b>s</b> general" might want to consider going taking a course in Law 101 rather than teaching it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Any " law professor " who says " attorney generals " instead of " attorneys general " might want to consider going taking a course in Law 101 rather than teaching it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any "law professor" who says "attorney generals" instead of "attorneys general" might want to consider going taking a course in Law 101 rather than teaching it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564954</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31568868</id>
	<title>You ins3Nsitive clod.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269273960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">Won't be sho0ting his clash with</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wo n't be sho0ting his clash with [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Won't be sho0ting his clash with [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565016</id>
	<title>Hypocrites</title>
	<author>zero.kalvin</author>
	<datestamp>1269257880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>They (Viacom) look like a bunch of hypocrites, they want their cake and eat it as well. I am not saying Youtube is innocent. But I hope viacom get slapped, and get slapped hard.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They ( Viacom ) look like a bunch of hypocrites , they want their cake and eat it as well .
I am not saying Youtube is innocent .
But I hope viacom get slapped , and get slapped hard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They (Viacom) look like a bunch of hypocrites, they want their cake and eat it as well.
I am not saying Youtube is innocent.
But I hope viacom get slapped, and get slapped hard.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565356</id>
	<title>Re:GNAA unveils new wiki-based corporate website</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269262380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Why hasn't slashdot implemented a filter that eliminates GNAA asshats? I don't think it would be all that complicated."</p><p>because GNAA was here before you had internet you fucker.. show some respect..</p><p>slashdot already lost my support.. dont wish for others trolls to go too...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Why has n't slashdot implemented a filter that eliminates GNAA asshats ?
I do n't think it would be all that complicated .
" because GNAA was here before you had internet you fucker.. show some respect..slashdot already lost my support.. dont wish for others trolls to go too.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Why hasn't slashdot implemented a filter that eliminates GNAA asshats?
I don't think it would be all that complicated.
"because GNAA was here before you had internet you fucker.. show some respect..slashdot already lost my support.. dont wish for others trolls to go too...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565172</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564892</id>
	<title>When juggernauts try their hands at new ideas</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269255540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Viacom learned that this "viral marketing" thing is kinda good PR, and cheap too! 'cause people don't like marketing and ads when they see them, especially when it comes to music and anything targeted at teenagers, who by default despise everything their parents (or any person over 30) think is a good idea. So they thought it would be spiffy to put up some of those videos in some sort of "clandestine" operation, probably with some astroturfing going along, and hey, I'm pretty sure it even worked!</p><p>"But those damn kids should buy our crap, not listen to it for free!", decried some other department, probably the beancounters this time, who, by their very nature, don't really talk that much with the loonies from PR. So put up takedown notices.</p><p>Watch a company battle itself. It's actually pretty entertaining.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Viacom learned that this " viral marketing " thing is kinda good PR , and cheap too !
'cause people do n't like marketing and ads when they see them , especially when it comes to music and anything targeted at teenagers , who by default despise everything their parents ( or any person over 30 ) think is a good idea .
So they thought it would be spiffy to put up some of those videos in some sort of " clandestine " operation , probably with some astroturfing going along , and hey , I 'm pretty sure it even worked !
" But those damn kids should buy our crap , not listen to it for free !
" , decried some other department , probably the beancounters this time , who , by their very nature , do n't really talk that much with the loonies from PR .
So put up takedown notices.Watch a company battle itself .
It 's actually pretty entertaining .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Viacom learned that this "viral marketing" thing is kinda good PR, and cheap too!
'cause people don't like marketing and ads when they see them, especially when it comes to music and anything targeted at teenagers, who by default despise everything their parents (or any person over 30) think is a good idea.
So they thought it would be spiffy to put up some of those videos in some sort of "clandestine" operation, probably with some astroturfing going along, and hey, I'm pretty sure it even worked!
"But those damn kids should buy our crap, not listen to it for free!
", decried some other department, probably the beancounters this time, who, by their very nature, don't really talk that much with the loonies from PR.
So put up takedown notices.Watch a company battle itself.
It's actually pretty entertaining.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564914</id>
	<title>infringing content</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269255780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>hey, your kitten walking on the piano keyboard was playing a song owned by SonyWarnerEMI. We'll sue the whiskers off him!</htmltext>
<tokenext>hey , your kitten walking on the piano keyboard was playing a song owned by SonyWarnerEMI .
We 'll sue the whiskers off him !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>hey, your kitten walking on the piano keyboard was playing a song owned by SonyWarnerEMI.
We'll sue the whiskers off him!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31577344</id>
	<title>Re:Rule against both companies, in favor of author</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269261360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1. Copyright laws are already written as you suggest above.</p><p>2. Read up on the history of trying to bring the WKRP tv series to DVD and you will see how keeping rights with the original authors creates a tangled legal mess that would likely PREVENT reissues of most multi-author media.</p><p>OR for that matter, look at the film credits of a major motion picture or even a video game like Grand Theft Auto. We're talking hundreds and hundreds of people creating media for the game or movie. You want it such that if they ever ported the game or re-released the movie 10 years down the road, that they would have to track down hundreds of rights holders and negotiated hundreds of contracts? In this scenario even ONE person can hold up or even prevent such a possibility.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
Copyright laws are already written as you suggest above.2 .
Read up on the history of trying to bring the WKRP tv series to DVD and you will see how keeping rights with the original authors creates a tangled legal mess that would likely PREVENT reissues of most multi-author media.OR for that matter , look at the film credits of a major motion picture or even a video game like Grand Theft Auto .
We 're talking hundreds and hundreds of people creating media for the game or movie .
You want it such that if they ever ported the game or re-released the movie 10 years down the road , that they would have to track down hundreds of rights holders and negotiated hundreds of contracts ?
In this scenario even ONE person can hold up or even prevent such a possibility .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
Copyright laws are already written as you suggest above.2.
Read up on the history of trying to bring the WKRP tv series to DVD and you will see how keeping rights with the original authors creates a tangled legal mess that would likely PREVENT reissues of most multi-author media.OR for that matter, look at the film credits of a major motion picture or even a video game like Grand Theft Auto.
We're talking hundreds and hundreds of people creating media for the game or movie.
You want it such that if they ever ported the game or re-released the movie 10 years down the road, that they would have to track down hundreds of rights holders and negotiated hundreds of contracts?
In this scenario even ONE person can hold up or even prevent such a possibility.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565156</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31568432</id>
	<title>Re:Its not about the content.</title>
	<author>magus\_melchior</author>
	<datestamp>1269272940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's also about controlling the entire chain of production, from studio to screen. That's why Viacom tried to buy Youtube, and why they have this convoluted scheme of suing infringing uploads while uploading illicitly themselves, apparently designed solely to undermine Youtube legally. You control the entire chain, you get to dictate the terms to every link. It's that simple.</p><p>Youtube is the final link between the studio and the viewer, and Viacom wanted to be the first to control it. But Google made a better offer, and Viacom is now in "if I can't have it, NO ONE CAN!!" tantrum mode.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's also about controlling the entire chain of production , from studio to screen .
That 's why Viacom tried to buy Youtube , and why they have this convoluted scheme of suing infringing uploads while uploading illicitly themselves , apparently designed solely to undermine Youtube legally .
You control the entire chain , you get to dictate the terms to every link .
It 's that simple.Youtube is the final link between the studio and the viewer , and Viacom wanted to be the first to control it .
But Google made a better offer , and Viacom is now in " if I ca n't have it , NO ONE CAN ! !
" tantrum mode .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's also about controlling the entire chain of production, from studio to screen.
That's why Viacom tried to buy Youtube, and why they have this convoluted scheme of suing infringing uploads while uploading illicitly themselves, apparently designed solely to undermine Youtube legally.
You control the entire chain, you get to dictate the terms to every link.
It's that simple.Youtube is the final link between the studio and the viewer, and Viacom wanted to be the first to control it.
But Google made a better offer, and Viacom is now in "if I can't have it, NO ONE CAN!!
" tantrum mode.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31566926</id>
	<title>always amusing</title>
	<author>TheCarp</author>
	<datestamp>1269269040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I always find these legal battles so amusing. Not to bad mouth youtube/google but, the percentage of accounts that have uploaded "infringing content" is such a laughable statistic. I wonder what percentage of accounts have uploaded anything? More than 1 vidoe? More than 2?</p><p>My guess is, most accounts would fall into one of a couple of catagories:<br>1. People who made an account to post a comment, and never used it again<br>2. People who made an account to upload some stupid video from their phone, and never used it again after one or two such videos.<br>3. People who wanted to see a video that was only accessible to people who made an account because it had some "mature content"<br>4. People who would fall into catagory 1-3, but found they liked commenting or having personal playlists<br>5. Old accounts tied to old email addresses of people who currently are in 1-4.\</p><p>If those categories don't account for 70\% or more of all accounts, I would be shocked.</p><p>-Steve</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I always find these legal battles so amusing .
Not to bad mouth youtube/google but , the percentage of accounts that have uploaded " infringing content " is such a laughable statistic .
I wonder what percentage of accounts have uploaded anything ?
More than 1 vidoe ?
More than 2 ? My guess is , most accounts would fall into one of a couple of catagories : 1 .
People who made an account to post a comment , and never used it again2 .
People who made an account to upload some stupid video from their phone , and never used it again after one or two such videos.3 .
People who wanted to see a video that was only accessible to people who made an account because it had some " mature content " 4 .
People who would fall into catagory 1-3 , but found they liked commenting or having personal playlists5 .
Old accounts tied to old email addresses of people who currently are in 1-4. \ If those categories do n't account for 70 \ % or more of all accounts , I would be shocked.-Steve</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always find these legal battles so amusing.
Not to bad mouth youtube/google but, the percentage of accounts that have uploaded "infringing content" is such a laughable statistic.
I wonder what percentage of accounts have uploaded anything?
More than 1 vidoe?
More than 2?My guess is, most accounts would fall into one of a couple of catagories:1.
People who made an account to post a comment, and never used it again2.
People who made an account to upload some stupid video from their phone, and never used it again after one or two such videos.3.
People who wanted to see a video that was only accessible to people who made an account because it had some "mature content"4.
People who would fall into catagory 1-3, but found they liked commenting or having personal playlists5.
Old accounts tied to old email addresses of people who currently are in 1-4.\If those categories don't account for 70\% or more of all accounts, I would be shocked.-Steve</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31572296</id>
	<title>NOT including (all) the campaign videos</title>
	<author>aegl</author>
	<datestamp>1269284160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I seem to remember that some candidates used copyrighted music as the soundtrack for their campaign videos without permission of the rights holder. Holding them up as a shining example of all that is good and right about non-infringing use of You-Tube clearly does not match with recent history.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I seem to remember that some candidates used copyrighted music as the soundtrack for their campaign videos without permission of the rights holder .
Holding them up as a shining example of all that is good and right about non-infringing use of You-Tube clearly does not match with recent history .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I seem to remember that some candidates used copyrighted music as the soundtrack for their campaign videos without permission of the rights holder.
Holding them up as a shining example of all that is good and right about non-infringing use of You-Tube clearly does not match with recent history.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31569542</id>
	<title>Re:Where is godzilla when we need him?</title>
	<author>keithpreston</author>
	<datestamp>1269275940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well godzilla (Godzilla, King of the Monsters) was on youtube, until viacom sent a DMCA notice to take it down.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well godzilla ( Godzilla , King of the Monsters ) was on youtube , until viacom sent a DMCA notice to take it down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well godzilla (Godzilla, King of the Monsters) was on youtube, until viacom sent a DMCA notice to take it down.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564834</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565092</id>
	<title>Wonder where microsoft is</title>
	<author>bl8n8r</author>
	<datestamp>1269259020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anytime you need litigation or potty-mouth chair-throwing, Microsoft will be there for you.</p><p><a href="http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/17-02/ff\_killgoogle" title="wired.com">http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/17-02/ff\_killgoogle</a> [wired.com]<br><a href="http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513\_22-139743.html" title="zdnet.com">http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513\_22-139743.html</a> [zdnet.com]<br><a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09/05/chair\_chucking/" title="theregister.co.uk">http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09/05/chair\_chucking/</a> [theregister.co.uk]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anytime you need litigation or potty-mouth chair-throwing , Microsoft will be there for you.http : //www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/17-02/ff \ _killgoogle [ wired.com ] http : //news.zdnet.com/2100-3513 \ _22-139743.html [ zdnet.com ] http : //www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09/05/chair \ _chucking/ [ theregister.co.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anytime you need litigation or potty-mouth chair-throwing, Microsoft will be there for you.http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/17-02/ff\_killgoogle [wired.com]http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513\_22-139743.html [zdnet.com]http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09/05/chair\_chucking/ [theregister.co.uk]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565172</id>
	<title>Re:GNAA unveils new wiki-based corporate website</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269260040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why hasn't slashdot implemented a filter that eliminates GNAA asshats? I don't think it would be all that complicated.</p><p>now mod me offtopic</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why has n't slashdot implemented a filter that eliminates GNAA asshats ?
I do n't think it would be all that complicated.now mod me offtopic</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why hasn't slashdot implemented a filter that eliminates GNAA asshats?
I don't think it would be all that complicated.now mod me offtopic</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564780</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564880</id>
	<title>Its not about the content.</title>
	<author>miffo.swe</author>
	<datestamp>1269255300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is about being the gatekeeper to media content. It has nothing at all to do with piracy per see. Youtube is the place to be if you want content to spread, like traliers, new bands etc.</p><p>If Youtube becomes the place to be for content Viacom and the rest of the leeches gets taken out of the equation as distributors. Its the same fight the RIAA is making. Its not about piracy, its about deciding what you watch, listens to and buys.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is about being the gatekeeper to media content .
It has nothing at all to do with piracy per see .
Youtube is the place to be if you want content to spread , like traliers , new bands etc.If Youtube becomes the place to be for content Viacom and the rest of the leeches gets taken out of the equation as distributors .
Its the same fight the RIAA is making .
Its not about piracy , its about deciding what you watch , listens to and buys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is about being the gatekeeper to media content.
It has nothing at all to do with piracy per see.
Youtube is the place to be if you want content to spread, like traliers, new bands etc.If Youtube becomes the place to be for content Viacom and the rest of the leeches gets taken out of the equation as distributors.
Its the same fight the RIAA is making.
Its not about piracy, its about deciding what you watch, listens to and buys.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31570186</id>
	<title>Re:Test your /. age by reading the summary...</title>
	<author>InfinityWpi</author>
	<datestamp>1269277800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you read the heading of this post and thought ' this is stupid, you can gauge someone's<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. age by the number of digits in the UID, its probably a valid point, but makes this entire post worthless, so keep that to yourself.</p></div><p>Damn kid. Get off my lawn.</p><p>Everything else posted is pretty much 100\% correct...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you read the heading of this post and thought ' this is stupid , you can gauge someone 's / .
age by the number of digits in the UID , its probably a valid point , but makes this entire post worthless , so keep that to yourself.Damn kid .
Get off my lawn.Everything else posted is pretty much 100 \ % correct.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you read the heading of this post and thought ' this is stupid, you can gauge someone's /.
age by the number of digits in the UID, its probably a valid point, but makes this entire post worthless, so keep that to yourself.Damn kid.
Get off my lawn.Everything else posted is pretty much 100\% correct...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564954</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31570820</id>
	<title>Re:infringing content</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1269279840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Youtube/Google has brought in hundreds of millions of dollars for itself in advertising revenue due largely to the draw of infringing content. Sure, they take it down eventually once somebody goes through the DCMA hoops, but just as quickly the process starts again as another uploader sends the same content.</p></div><p>DMCA was put in place for a reason. And, as far as I recall, it was vigorously supported, and the need for it defended, by those very same companies that now whine about how Google "makes money off stolen content" while abiding to DMCA to the letter.</p><p>No sympathy whatsoever from here, sorry (and I am generally pro-copyright, unlike many on Slashdot). What they are essentially asking for is to place burden of determining legitimacy of posted copyrighted material on service providers, which is unfeasible and unreasonable for obvious reasons.</p><p>Make no mistake - Google is no different from your ISP here, and if they succeed in suing Google, your ISP will be next on the line, for letting you upload those nasty pirated bytes to YouTube over their pipes.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Youtube/Google has brought in hundreds of millions of dollars for itself in advertising revenue due largely to the draw of infringing content .
Sure , they take it down eventually once somebody goes through the DCMA hoops , but just as quickly the process starts again as another uploader sends the same content.DMCA was put in place for a reason .
And , as far as I recall , it was vigorously supported , and the need for it defended , by those very same companies that now whine about how Google " makes money off stolen content " while abiding to DMCA to the letter.No sympathy whatsoever from here , sorry ( and I am generally pro-copyright , unlike many on Slashdot ) .
What they are essentially asking for is to place burden of determining legitimacy of posted copyrighted material on service providers , which is unfeasible and unreasonable for obvious reasons.Make no mistake - Google is no different from your ISP here , and if they succeed in suing Google , your ISP will be next on the line , for letting you upload those nasty pirated bytes to YouTube over their pipes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Youtube/Google has brought in hundreds of millions of dollars for itself in advertising revenue due largely to the draw of infringing content.
Sure, they take it down eventually once somebody goes through the DCMA hoops, but just as quickly the process starts again as another uploader sends the same content.DMCA was put in place for a reason.
And, as far as I recall, it was vigorously supported, and the need for it defended, by those very same companies that now whine about how Google "makes money off stolen content" while abiding to DMCA to the letter.No sympathy whatsoever from here, sorry (and I am generally pro-copyright, unlike many on Slashdot).
What they are essentially asking for is to place burden of determining legitimacy of posted copyrighted material on service providers, which is unfeasible and unreasonable for obvious reasons.Make no mistake - Google is no different from your ISP here, and if they succeed in suing Google, your ISP will be next on the line, for letting you upload those nasty pirated bytes to YouTube over their pipes.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565180</id>
	<title>Re:infringing content</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269260160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Youtube/Google has brought in hundreds of millions of dollars for itself in advertising revenue due largely to the draw of infringing content.  Sure, they take it down eventually once somebody goes through the DCMA hoops, but just as quickly the process starts again as another uploader sends the same content.  The actual creators / rightsholders are uncompensated while google makes off like a bandit for this sleight of hand.  Your kitten analogy, however 'funny' just serves to muddle further this issue.  Yes, I like the fact that I can watch, say, some clip from the daily show on youtube.  i'd like it more if the creator of the clip was actually compensated fairly for it, perhaps after a negotiation with youtube. at the very least, youtube should have a policy of paying the advertising monies collected on infringing clips to the rightsholders, but, well, of course you'll have to go through a lot of lawyers before that will ever happen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Youtube/Google has brought in hundreds of millions of dollars for itself in advertising revenue due largely to the draw of infringing content .
Sure , they take it down eventually once somebody goes through the DCMA hoops , but just as quickly the process starts again as another uploader sends the same content .
The actual creators / rightsholders are uncompensated while google makes off like a bandit for this sleight of hand .
Your kitten analogy , however 'funny ' just serves to muddle further this issue .
Yes , I like the fact that I can watch , say , some clip from the daily show on youtube .
i 'd like it more if the creator of the clip was actually compensated fairly for it , perhaps after a negotiation with youtube .
at the very least , youtube should have a policy of paying the advertising monies collected on infringing clips to the rightsholders , but , well , of course you 'll have to go through a lot of lawyers before that will ever happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Youtube/Google has brought in hundreds of millions of dollars for itself in advertising revenue due largely to the draw of infringing content.
Sure, they take it down eventually once somebody goes through the DCMA hoops, but just as quickly the process starts again as another uploader sends the same content.
The actual creators / rightsholders are uncompensated while google makes off like a bandit for this sleight of hand.
Your kitten analogy, however 'funny' just serves to muddle further this issue.
Yes, I like the fact that I can watch, say, some clip from the daily show on youtube.
i'd like it more if the creator of the clip was actually compensated fairly for it, perhaps after a negotiation with youtube.
at the very least, youtube should have a policy of paying the advertising monies collected on infringing clips to the rightsholders, but, well, of course you'll have to go through a lot of lawyers before that will ever happen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31568956</id>
	<title>Re:Rule against both companies, in favor of author</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1269274200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In which case the firms employing them can start charging the artists fees for the usage of their studios.</p><p>I agree with "work for hire" on principle since you are still getting a paycheck and are using the company's resources.</p><p>However, I think the answer here is education.</p><p>Make sure people know about work for hire.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In which case the firms employing them can start charging the artists fees for the usage of their studios.I agree with " work for hire " on principle since you are still getting a paycheck and are using the company 's resources.However , I think the answer here is education.Make sure people know about work for hire .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In which case the firms employing them can start charging the artists fees for the usage of their studios.I agree with "work for hire" on principle since you are still getting a paycheck and are using the company's resources.However, I think the answer here is education.Make sure people know about work for hire.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565156</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_081200_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565172
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_081200_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31566030
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_081200_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_081200_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31569542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_081200_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31568432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_081200_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564954
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_081200_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31570820
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_081200_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31579470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_081200_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564954
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_081200_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565078
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564954
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_081200_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31566236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565172
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_081200_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31570490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_081200_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565448
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564954
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_081200_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31570186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564954
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_081200_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31577344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_081200_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31568956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_081200.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564780
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565172
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565356
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31566236
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_081200.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31570490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565180
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31570820
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_081200.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565206
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_081200.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564986
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_081200.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565016
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_081200.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564892
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_081200.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564880
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565146
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31579470
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31568432
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_081200.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564954
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565448
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565222
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31570186
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565078
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565396
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_081200.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31572296
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_081200.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31565156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31568956
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31577344
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_081200.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31564834
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31566030
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_081200.31569542
</commentlist>
</conversation>
